Ford Mustang Forum : “Good old Mustang beating a Acura NSX at the track”

WEWT!

the Acura NSX was a joke with a $90k punchline.  Even stock, the mustang would give the NSX a run for its money.

Im not sure to the extent of your knowledge on the NSX or road racing, however the acura NSX is nearly perfect for the kind of technical
track that I was racing at. Although a 0-60 time and 1/4 mile may be comparable to a mustang, I assure you that on a real road racing
track the NSX should murder most american cars. Although this is true, the most important variable in road racing is the drivers ability.

Im not sure to the extent of your knowledge on the NSX or road racing, however the acura NSX is nearly perfect for the kind of technical
track that I was racing at. Although a 0-60 time and 1/4 mile may be comparable to a mustang, I assure you that on a real road racing
track the NSX should murder most american cars. Although this is true, the most important variable in road racing is the drivers ability.

independent rear suspensions are supposed to be better for oval track, but you could spend a lifetime trying to find concrete evidence of that.  It really boils down to the driver and rubber compound at the end of the day.

on the subject of road racing, id take a solid rear axle over an independent rear for the simple fact an independent rear suspension cannot take as much torque as a solid axle configuration I have an '00 GT with the common mods including 3.73's and Ive smoked 2 NSX's on the open highway.

Although stresses on a solid axle are handled more efficiently with respect to the quality of the build, the independent rear
suspension, along with the lower center of gravity, nearly perfect 50:50 ratio, nearly perfect moment of inertia (because of the mid
engine configuration), stiffer body overall and less roll as well as more evenly distributed traction at low and high speeds (because of
downforce), with equal drivers the NSX without a doubt would murder a mustang. It may be competitive with the 2000 cobra R maybe.
The NSX was designed as a car to drive every day, then thrash it like crazy on the track, while maintaining brakes, as well as other
components of the vehicle. Road racing is not about the power (NSX has only 280 hp). Road Racing is however about (in terms of the
vehicle) balance, braking with a resistance to fade, entrance and exit speeds, and overall controllability. It's amazing how the insanely
powerful vehicles (such as the supercharged mustangs that need that stronger axle) get murdered by tiny less than 200 Hp miatas.

you do realize that the99-04 mustang is a 45/55  weight distribution (a) and that the 2003 cobra runs the exact same as the 2000 cobra r (b)?

Im not sure exactly what time your are referring to, but i do know that my 2001 mustang had a 65 45 ratio until I moved the battery to
the back, which helped a lot. I think our disagreement has to do with straight line speed versus fast times on a road racing track (Ex.
11 turns with off camber, late apex, elevation change, ext.). Another aspect is the cobra r's ability to run consistently without brake
fade and overheating. The problem with the cobra engines at the track is heat, they were not made to be constantly floored from 70 to
120, then back down to 40 for as much as an hour without stopping. However this is true, the 200 cobra R was purpose built to race,
and its obvious. They run consistently better times than the regular cobras.

the full specs for the 99-04
Dimensions
Curbweight (lbs.)
  ° V6: 3,115
  ° GT: 3,280
Weight distribution (%f/r): 55/45
Trunk space: 10.9 cu. ft.
Overall length: 183.2 in.
Overall width: 73.1 in.
Overall height: 53.1 in.
Wheelbase: 101.3 in.

you should consider getting yours lowered, killer body roll in the pic. then you can get the positive camber you want and eat rice all day.  I have eibach sportlines in mine (2" drop) and can still get around town pretty easily without scraping.

My curb weight stock is 3410 without me in it and the distribution is not 55:45 with my battery in the back. The v6 may be 55:45, but
my v8 is not even close to that. Where are you getting your information? Also, I can tell when I race the weight ratio because of the
intense understeer. If my weight ratio was 55:45, I would only have a hint of understeer.

where are you sourcing your info from? even the 2010 doesnt weigh 3400 lbs fully loaded.  the gt500 does though with the supercharger and body kit.

the weight difference between a 3.8 v6 and a 4.6 v8 is barely 100 lbs or roughly a 3% weight increase

I acquired my weight distribution from a friend that has been racing mustangs for a long time. He actually just smashed his 2005
mustang gt with about 60,000 in modification, specifically for road racing and only driven on the track. He has the equipment to
measure his distributions to get 50:50 front to rear and side to side. My weight comes from the mustang source.com I guess different
websites have different numbers, so to know for sure you would just have to go and weigh it.

ok, well from my title (mines a '00 gt premium coupe) so i have all that extra weight of cruise control bs. weighs a whole 3114 lbs vin if you want it is
1FAFP42X3YF142655

the vehicle weight is on the certificate of origination, which most states then put on the title.

good to know, however i strongly believe my friend, all he does is design and race his own mustangs.

http://www.mustangspecs.com/  i source them

where did they give you the specs for weight ratio?

you have to parse through the years http://www.mustangspecs.com/years/02.shtml on the righthand side of the page 2/3 way down

I'll have to measure for myself. Either way, the car has serious understeer.

ford mustang both v-6 or v-8 would be  10X better than  acura nsx any day or any track  fwd is no good on track  mustang has best  for the track it is made for track and street

with its massive amounts of understeer, the mustang might as well be front wheel drive, and no offense but have you ever raced on a
road course and do you actually have any credibility because most of the people i run into seem to be just hiped up on american cars for
no reason at all. Read my earlier post about weight distribution, traction, aerodynamics, ect. and by the way, NSX is a mid engined REAR
wheel drive beast on the track. DO YOUR HOMEWORK AND STOP OBSESSING WITH HEAVY AMERICAN CARS.

HAHAHA YOU FOOL IN THE LONG RUN ACURA NSX 100% JAPANSE JUNK  IT IS WORTHLESS

In the autoX world I see lots of Miatas do well. The EVO VIII was a monster. I see some vettes do well, and a couple of Elises.  Mustangs are usually not running the top of the pack.  Fastest car Ive ever seen around a track (that still looked like a street car) was a heavily modified VW Scirocco.  I wouldn't drive any of them with the exception of the EVO.  On the street and for more frequent than track day driving I would take something with a mean rumble, like a rocket from stoplight to stoplight, and American.  For the track? Id just build a Factory Five coupe or cobra.  Most of the NSX Ive seen do moderately well but still coming in at close to 3k lbs, they are just as heavy as everything else.