NSX VS Supra
12-26-2003, 07:39 PM
#1
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
NSX VS Supra
just wondered if there has been any media or any facts of some real fast high HP NSX's you guys have seen. Or any Supra VS NSX.
12-27-2003, 02:39 AM
#3
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ca, usa
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NSX VS Supra (Ponyboy)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Ponyboy »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I heard of a high hp NSX at "Race Wars" a few months ago. I think the owner's name was Johnny Tran? 
</TD></TR></TABLE>
yeah, hes got over 100 grand in that car. But hes a scammer, He owes me a 10 sec car.
(oops, what a waste of my 1000 post)
</TD></TR></TABLE>yeah, hes got over 100 grand in that car. But hes a scammer, He owes me a 10 sec car.
(oops, what a waste of my 1000 post)
12-27-2003, 07:32 PM
#4
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Arlington, VA, USA
Posts: 552
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NSX VS Supra (HEAD)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by HEAD »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">just wondered if there has been any media or any facts of some real fast high HP NSX's you guys have seen. Or any Supra VS NSX.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Come on HEAD, you know the NSX guys don't have the aftermarket support the Supra does
I know of 1 turbo NSX in the Nova area but it never seemed to run right. Anymore out there or on this board? I think HEAD would like to see some heads up racing, right???
Come on HEAD, you know the NSX guys don't have the aftermarket support the Supra does
I know of 1 turbo NSX in the Nova area but it never seemed to run right. Anymore out there or on this board? I think HEAD would like to see some heads up racing, right???
12-28-2003, 06:51 PM
#5
Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NSX VS Supra (HEAD)
Are we talking 1/4 here or track times? Stock, a 3.2 NSX should beat the Supra in 1/4 times as well as track times... but watch out for supras with BPU mods.
12-29-2003, 08:11 AM
#7
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NSX VS Supra (HEAD)
Some Turbo NSXs:
Performance AutoWorx
Factor X
Cybernation (scroll down to the yellow NSX)
Some SC NSXs:
Basch Boost (BBSC)
Payne Technologies' BBSC
Comptech SC
There's a ton of information on NSX Prime's FI forum, including high boost versions of the BBSC and CTSC. Also, take a look in the NSX Prime FAQ under Performance : Turbo & SC and Media : Magazines.
If you want to know how the NSX compares with a Supra... Well, it's been "discussed" here.
Performance AutoWorx
Factor X
Cybernation (scroll down to the yellow NSX)
Some SC NSXs:
Basch Boost (BBSC)
Payne Technologies' BBSC
Comptech SC
There's a ton of information on NSX Prime's FI forum, including high boost versions of the BBSC and CTSC. Also, take a look in the NSX Prime FAQ under Performance : Turbo & SC and Media : Magazines.
If you want to know how the NSX compares with a Supra... Well, it's been "discussed" here.
Trending Topics
12-29-2003, 10:56 AM
#8
El Chico
Re: NSX VS Supra (ojas)
*shakes head*
Supra 0wnz j00!
Assuming for a second that this was a serious question, the 3.2 NSX should be faster stock for stock than a Supra. The 3.0 litre variant(pre '97) is not however in either venue.
You can campaign either succesfully in circuit/auto cross events. It should be noted that it is pretty expensive and not adviseable to try drag racing an NSX. It's a waste of the car anyway. Automagic Supra's as well as 6spd's take just as well to drag strips as road courses though.
When it comes to modifying, there really is no comparison. The Supra has just garnered more aftermarket support. As such, there has been very little competition for NSX parts suplliers, therefor, prices remain high for NSX go fast parts.
Overall, it boils down to personal preference and/or budget. Buy what you like and like what you buy. You have to make the payments and you have to look at it every morning.
Supra 0wnz j00!
Assuming for a second that this was a serious question, the 3.2 NSX should be faster stock for stock than a Supra. The 3.0 litre variant(pre '97) is not however in either venue.
You can campaign either succesfully in circuit/auto cross events. It should be noted that it is pretty expensive and not adviseable to try drag racing an NSX. It's a waste of the car anyway. Automagic Supra's as well as 6spd's take just as well to drag strips as road courses though.
When it comes to modifying, there really is no comparison. The Supra has just garnered more aftermarket support. As such, there has been very little competition for NSX parts suplliers, therefor, prices remain high for NSX go fast parts.
Overall, it boils down to personal preference and/or budget. Buy what you like and like what you buy. You have to make the payments and you have to look at it every morning.
12-30-2003, 10:26 AM
#9
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: too close to Oklahoma
Posts: 2,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NSX VS Supra (Knightsport)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knightsport »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">*shakes head*
Overall, it boils down to personal preference and/or budget. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Precisely.
Personally, I prefer the Supra for its inline 6. There are three kinds of cars I refuse to own in this world: cars with MacPherson strut suspension, cars with automatic transmissions and cars powered by V6 motors.
Both cars could stand to lose a few hundred pounds, however the Supra's porky *** makes the NSX seem light.
Overall, it boils down to personal preference and/or budget. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Precisely.
Personally, I prefer the Supra for its inline 6. There are three kinds of cars I refuse to own in this world: cars with MacPherson strut suspension, cars with automatic transmissions and cars powered by V6 motors.
Both cars could stand to lose a few hundred pounds, however the Supra's porky *** makes the NSX seem light.
12-30-2003, 11:40 AM
#10
Painting Masterpieces
Re: NSX VS Supra (doosu)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by doosu »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">...There are three kinds of cars I refuse to own in this world: cars with MacPherson strut suspension, cars with automatic transmissions and cars powered by V6 motors.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Ahem...don't all of the 911 models (993,996, bleh bleh) use MacPherson struts? Who wouldn't want to own one of those? And you better get use to auto trannys 'cuz the SMG type trannys are here to stay.
Why wouldn't you own a V6 car?
Ahem...don't all of the 911 models (993,996, bleh bleh) use MacPherson struts? Who wouldn't want to own one of those? And you better get use to auto trannys 'cuz the SMG type trannys are here to stay.
Why wouldn't you own a V6 car?
12-30-2003, 12:02 PM
#11
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: too close to Oklahoma
Posts: 2,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NSX VS Supra (Ponyboy)
Yep, they do, and I wouldn't own one even though I'll use them as an example of excellent space efficiency in a sporting automobile.
SMGs are a slightly different animal, but I still prefer to select my gears with a proper shifter. SMGs are a better option for ultimate performance on a track, but IMO not everything is about ultimate performance. Driving pleasure is what I'm after and I still find a great deal of pleasure in a traditional manual gearbox.
I wouldn't own a car with a V6 because from an engineering standpoint it's a lousy configuration. They suffer from both first and second order vibration, end-to-end crankshaft vibration, and every one of them requires the use of a balance shaft to keep from shaking to pieces. In addition, most 60 degree V6s and all 90 degree V6s use staggered journals on the crankshafts in order to put the piston at TDC at the proper time for firing, otherwise the engine would not fire evenly. Staggered cranks are weaker than normal ones. Then there's the four main bearings as opposed to five for I4s and V8s, or seven for I6s.
In short, the V6 is the only common engine configurations that uses almost every engineering band-aid in the box, and I am a snob who wants better than that. For the record, a properly engineered inline or opposed six requires none of that nonsense. They're perfectly balanced to begin with. Thus inline and opposed sixes, given the same displacement, cam specs and combustion chamber design, will always make more power, more smoothly, than a V6.
Modified by doosu at 3:13 PM 12/30/2003
SMGs are a slightly different animal, but I still prefer to select my gears with a proper shifter. SMGs are a better option for ultimate performance on a track, but IMO not everything is about ultimate performance. Driving pleasure is what I'm after and I still find a great deal of pleasure in a traditional manual gearbox.
I wouldn't own a car with a V6 because from an engineering standpoint it's a lousy configuration. They suffer from both first and second order vibration, end-to-end crankshaft vibration, and every one of them requires the use of a balance shaft to keep from shaking to pieces. In addition, most 60 degree V6s and all 90 degree V6s use staggered journals on the crankshafts in order to put the piston at TDC at the proper time for firing, otherwise the engine would not fire evenly. Staggered cranks are weaker than normal ones. Then there's the four main bearings as opposed to five for I4s and V8s, or seven for I6s.
In short, the V6 is the only common engine configurations that uses almost every engineering band-aid in the box, and I am a snob who wants better than that. For the record, a properly engineered inline or opposed six requires none of that nonsense. They're perfectly balanced to begin with. Thus inline and opposed sixes, given the same displacement, cam specs and combustion chamber design, will always make more power, more smoothly, than a V6.
Modified by doosu at 3:13 PM 12/30/2003
12-30-2003, 12:26 PM
#12
Painting Masterpieces
Re: NSX VS Supra (doosu)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by doosu »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Yep, they do, and I wouldn't own one even though I'll use them as an example of excellent space efficiency in a sporting automobile.</TD></TR></TABLE>
You crazy!
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by doosu »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">SMGs are a slightly different animal, but I still prefer to select my gears with a proper shifter. SMGs are a better option for ultimate performance on a track, but IMO not everything is about ultimate performance. Driving pleasure is what I'm after and I still find a great deal of pleasure in a traditional manual gearbox.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Concur, sorta. Though I haven't driven an SMG type tran yet, I'm fairly certain when it happens I'll be a convert.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by doosu »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I wouldn't own a car with a V6 because from an engineering standpoint it's a lousy configuration. They suffer from both first and second order vibration, end-to-end crankshaft vibration, and every one of them requires the use of a balance shaft to keep from shaking to pieces. In addition, most 60 degree V6s and all 90 degree V6s use staggered journals on the crankshafts in order to put the piston at TDC at the proper time for firing, otherwise the engine would not fire evenly. Staggered cranks are weaker than normal ones. Then there's the four main bearings as opposed to five for I4s and V8s, or seven for I6s.
In short, the V6 is the only common engine configurations that uses almost every engineering band-aid in the box, and I am a snob who wants better than that. For the record, a properly engineered inline or opposed six requires none of that nonsense. They're perfectly balanced to begin with. Thus inline and opposed sixes, given the same displacement, cam specs and combustion chamber design, will always make more power, more smoothly, than a V6.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Great explanation. Though great automotive engineering feats are paved with doing more with less. The 911 with the engine in back is a good example. ITR's with the drive wheels up front is another. Though who doesn't want the best of everything, right?
You crazy!
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by doosu »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">SMGs are a slightly different animal, but I still prefer to select my gears with a proper shifter. SMGs are a better option for ultimate performance on a track, but IMO not everything is about ultimate performance. Driving pleasure is what I'm after and I still find a great deal of pleasure in a traditional manual gearbox.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Concur, sorta. Though I haven't driven an SMG type tran yet, I'm fairly certain when it happens I'll be a convert.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by doosu »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I wouldn't own a car with a V6 because from an engineering standpoint it's a lousy configuration. They suffer from both first and second order vibration, end-to-end crankshaft vibration, and every one of them requires the use of a balance shaft to keep from shaking to pieces. In addition, most 60 degree V6s and all 90 degree V6s use staggered journals on the crankshafts in order to put the piston at TDC at the proper time for firing, otherwise the engine would not fire evenly. Staggered cranks are weaker than normal ones. Then there's the four main bearings as opposed to five for I4s and V8s, or seven for I6s.
In short, the V6 is the only common engine configurations that uses almost every engineering band-aid in the box, and I am a snob who wants better than that. For the record, a properly engineered inline or opposed six requires none of that nonsense. They're perfectly balanced to begin with. Thus inline and opposed sixes, given the same displacement, cam specs and combustion chamber design, will always make more power, more smoothly, than a V6.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Great explanation. Though great automotive engineering feats are paved with doing more with less. The 911 with the engine in back is a good example. ITR's with the drive wheels up front is another. Though who doesn't want the best of everything, right?
12-30-2003, 12:39 PM
#13
El Chico
Re: NSX VS Supra (Ponyboy)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Ponyboy »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
You crazy!
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I was with him until he opted to NOT own a Porsche. There is no logic that he could spew to explain that away.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Concur, sorta. Though I haven't driven an SMG type tran yet, I'm fairly certain when it happens I'll be a convert.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I've driven both an SMG E46 and an F1 360. The SMG E46 is butter. It is all the versatility of a manual without all the clutch work. As far as the F1 360? I couldn't stop grinning from the lovely engine note long enough to care about anything else. Even turn 1.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Great explanation. Though great automotive engineering feats are paved with doing more with less. The 911 with the engine in back is a good example. ITR's with the drive wheels up front is another. Though who doesn't want the best of everything, right? </TD></TR></TABLE>
Lotus Elise/Exige, 'nough said.
You crazy!
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I was with him until he opted to NOT own a Porsche. There is no logic that he could spew to explain that away.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Concur, sorta. Though I haven't driven an SMG type tran yet, I'm fairly certain when it happens I'll be a convert.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I've driven both an SMG E46 and an F1 360. The SMG E46 is butter. It is all the versatility of a manual without all the clutch work. As far as the F1 360? I couldn't stop grinning from the lovely engine note long enough to care about anything else. Even turn 1.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Great explanation. Though great automotive engineering feats are paved with doing more with less. The 911 with the engine in back is a good example. ITR's with the drive wheels up front is another. Though who doesn't want the best of everything, right?
</TD></TR></TABLE>Lotus Elise/Exige, 'nough said.
12-30-2003, 01:28 PM
#14
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: too close to Oklahoma
Posts: 2,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NSX VS Supra (Ponyboy)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Ponyboy »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Though great automotive engineering feats are paved with doing more with less. The 911 with the engine in back is a good example. ITR's with the drive wheels up front is another. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Very, very true.
Like I said, I'm a bit of a snob when it comes to these things. The way I see it, if I'm going to spend $50,000 or more on a car I want it to have the best basic configurations for the engine and suspension. To me, that translates to an inline or opposed six and double wishbone suspension at all four corners. In addition, I'd like it to weigh in at 3,000 or fewer lbs. Sadly, the only car currently in production that meets all of those standards is the TVR Tuscan Speed-Six, which is not available here.
I never said I wouldn't own a Porsche. I'd take a 356 coupe in a heartbeat.
Though great automotive engineering feats are paved with doing more with less. The 911 with the engine in back is a good example. ITR's with the drive wheels up front is another. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Very, very true.
Like I said, I'm a bit of a snob when it comes to these things. The way I see it, if I'm going to spend $50,000 or more on a car I want it to have the best basic configurations for the engine and suspension. To me, that translates to an inline or opposed six and double wishbone suspension at all four corners. In addition, I'd like it to weigh in at 3,000 or fewer lbs. Sadly, the only car currently in production that meets all of those standards is the TVR Tuscan Speed-Six, which is not available here.
I never said I wouldn't own a Porsche. I'd take a 356 coupe in a heartbeat.
12-30-2003, 03:11 PM
#16
H-T Order of Merit
Re: NSX VS Supra (Ponyboy)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Ponyboy »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Concur, sorta. Though I haven't driven an SMG type tran yet, I'm fairly certain when it happens I'll be a convert.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I agree.
Which just goes to show you, that the sarcastic and condescending can agree with the psycho, at least once in a while.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knightsport »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I was with him until he opted to NOT own a Porsche. There is no logic that he could spew to explain that away.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I can, I can!
<u>Top Ten Reasons Why I Would Never Own a Porsche</u>:
10. Pedals whose distance from the driver varies by more than the car's wheelbase.
9. Notchy shifter.
8. First gear should be in the same place that you start reading on a page, at the top and to the left. Putting reverse there makes no sense.
7. A standard equipment list, with options such as HID lights and sunroof and most colors of metallic paint, that is inexcusable on a $70K+ car. (Related to number 4 below.) It's quite common for options to add as much as $20K or more to the price of the car.
6. The number of track events where I have seen a Porsche dump oil on the track is at least twice the number of bullet points on this list.
5. Hieroglyphics for labeling on interior controls. Tell me again why there are two different buttons that have a snowflake on them.
4. Options prices that would make even a board trader embarrassed. (Related to number 7 above.)
3. Pedals that hinge from the bottom.
2. Lack of responsiveness in the steering.
1. Looks that could only be loved by a princess looking to turn an amphibian into a prince.
I agree.
Which just goes to show you, that the sarcastic and condescending can agree with the psycho, at least once in a while.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knightsport »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I was with him until he opted to NOT own a Porsche. There is no logic that he could spew to explain that away.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I can, I can!
<u>Top Ten Reasons Why I Would Never Own a Porsche</u>:
10. Pedals whose distance from the driver varies by more than the car's wheelbase.
9. Notchy shifter.
8. First gear should be in the same place that you start reading on a page, at the top and to the left. Putting reverse there makes no sense.
7. A standard equipment list, with options such as HID lights and sunroof and most colors of metallic paint, that is inexcusable on a $70K+ car. (Related to number 4 below.) It's quite common for options to add as much as $20K or more to the price of the car.
6. The number of track events where I have seen a Porsche dump oil on the track is at least twice the number of bullet points on this list.
5. Hieroglyphics for labeling on interior controls. Tell me again why there are two different buttons that have a snowflake on them.
4. Options prices that would make even a board trader embarrassed. (Related to number 7 above.)
3. Pedals that hinge from the bottom.
2. Lack of responsiveness in the steering.
1. Looks that could only be loved by a princess looking to turn an amphibian into a prince.
12-30-2003, 03:42 PM
#17
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Escapading on my Zepplin, CA
Posts: 766
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NSX VS Supra (nsxtasy)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nsxtasy »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
8. First gear should be in the same place that you start reading on a page, at the top and to the left. Putting reverse there makes no sense.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
if i recall correctly, some ferraris were the same way
8. First gear should be in the same place that you start reading on a page, at the top and to the left. Putting reverse there makes no sense.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
if i recall correctly, some ferraris were the same way
12-30-2003, 04:08 PM
#18
H-T Order of Merit
Re: NSX VS Supra (JUN EK9)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JUN EK9 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">if i recall correctly, some ferraris were the same way</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yes, but that was on a [italian accent]Ferraaaaari...[/italian accent]
Yes, but that was on a [italian accent]Ferraaaaari...[/italian accent]
12-30-2003, 05:37 PM
#19
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: too close to Oklahoma
Posts: 2,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NSX VS Supra (nsxtasy)
Porsche puts 1st where it should be, but reverse is farther out to the left. There's usually a lockout, but I agree it's not the best arrangement.
The old Ferrari shifters were an entirely different affair. Reverse was placed where 1st usually is, and 1st is where 2nd usually is. And there was a reason for it. They arranged the gates that way because in racing it is very common to shift between 2nd and 3rd. With this kind of setup there is no dogleg going between 2nd and 3rd. Since it is rare to downshift all the way to first, the placement of 1st gear was not considered as important. It's actually quite a functional design, but the advent of 6-speed transmissions has relegated it to an interesting historical footnote.
The old Ferrari shifters were an entirely different affair. Reverse was placed where 1st usually is, and 1st is where 2nd usually is. And there was a reason for it. They arranged the gates that way because in racing it is very common to shift between 2nd and 3rd. With this kind of setup there is no dogleg going between 2nd and 3rd. Since it is rare to downshift all the way to first, the placement of 1st gear was not considered as important. It's actually quite a functional design, but the advent of 6-speed transmissions has relegated it to an interesting historical footnote.
12-31-2003, 10:14 AM
#20
El Chico
Re: NSX VS Supra (nsxtasy)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nsxtasy »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I agree.
Which just goes to show you, that the sarcastic and condescending can agree with the psycho, at least once in a while.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Wait a minute. Do you have split personalities?
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
1. Looks that could only be loved by a princess looking to turn an amphibian into a prince.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
So you don't think the GT3, GT2 or even the Carrera GT are good looking cars??
I agree.
Which just goes to show you, that the sarcastic and condescending can agree with the psycho, at least once in a while.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Wait a minute. Do you have split personalities?
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
1. Looks that could only be loved by a princess looking to turn an amphibian into a prince.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
So you don't think the GT3, GT2 or even the Carrera GT are good looking cars??
12-31-2003, 12:04 PM
#21
H-T Order of Merit
Re: NSX VS Supra (Knightsport)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knightsport »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Wait a minute. Do you have split personalities?</TD></TR></TABLE>
No, neither one of us does.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knightsport »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">So you don't think the GT3, GT2 or even the Carrera GT are good looking cars??</TD></TR></TABLE>
The GT3 and GT2? No. Absolutely not. They offer great performance, though.
The GT is not quite as fugly as the other 911 models though... (And, oh yeah, it offers great performance too.)
No, neither one of us does.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Knightsport »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">So you don't think the GT3, GT2 or even the Carrera GT are good looking cars??</TD></TR></TABLE>
The GT3 and GT2? No. Absolutely not. They offer great performance, though.
The GT is not quite as fugly as the other 911 models though... (And, oh yeah, it offers great performance too.)
01-01-2004, 12:19 PM
#23
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ca, usa
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NSX VS Supra (neonorific20)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by neonorific20 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">^^^heathen!!!!
Porsche makes some of the best looking cars ever, and that is not an opinion, but a fact.
ben</TD></TR></TABLE>
(in a yoda voice) the force is strong with this newbie. hhhmm
Porsche makes some of the best looking cars ever, and that is not an opinion, but a fact.
ben</TD></TR></TABLE>
(in a yoda voice) the force is strong with this newbie. hhhmm
01-01-2004, 12:38 PM
#24
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: too close to Oklahoma
Posts: 2,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NSX VS Supra (neonorific20)
Eh, styling is subjective.
I think the 993s looked far better than any of the 996 variants. For some reason the 996s look cheapened to me. I love the looks of the Carrera GT, though. Very clean and simple, which is unusual for a car in its class.
I think the 993s looked far better than any of the 996 variants. For some reason the 996s look cheapened to me. I love the looks of the Carrera GT, though. Very clean and simple, which is unusual for a car in its class.
01-02-2004, 11:22 AM
#25
El Chico
Re: NSX VS Supra (doosu)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by doosu »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Eh, styling is subjective.
I think the 993s looked far better than any of the 996 variants. For some reason the 996s look cheapened to me. I love the looks of the Carrera GT, though. Very clean and simple, which is unusual for a car in its class. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Absolutely.
I love the look of a 993 Turbo S.
Don't get me wrong, I like the look of a Gemballa GT2 also though.
When it comes to car styling, nothing does it for me like Pinnafarina.
I think the 993s looked far better than any of the 996 variants. For some reason the 996s look cheapened to me. I love the looks of the Carrera GT, though. Very clean and simple, which is unusual for a car in its class. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Absolutely.
I love the look of a 993 Turbo S.
Don't get me wrong, I like the look of a Gemballa GT2 also though.
When it comes to car styling, nothing does it for me like Pinnafarina.
