Acura NSX Kill
We both floor it at the green light, he spins a lot I beat him really bad to about 60 mph, at the next light we do it again, heart pounding 100 ppm, engine going fast, NSX didn't spin!, E55 has better reaction, NSX starts falling behind, E55 shifts into second, NSX keeps falling behind, E55 reaches 100 mph, NSX is about 2 cars behind
, we reach our destination so I have to stop playing
, NSX doesn't even say good bye
, my friend is like holding himself with all his ten nails, he hadn't been to my car, so he is totally amazed I pulled away from that car and happy he is getting off my car, lol.
We thought about getting an NSX in 98, but we backed off when we saw the price back then, and we decided to get a Vette (long gond too)
It's all a matter of purpose, just like people arguing about being faster than a Ferrari in a modded bmw or porsche or audi or whatever. Sure, because 400bhp and 275ft-lb tq isn't all that much - straight line acceleration isn't everything.
Nevertheless, good kill. Should've expected it, though, as you have a 70bhp advantage on them.
--Dan
Great kill! NSXs are fast cars, but only in the 5/6 speeds. Is there a possibility that could have been an NSX with the auto tranny? With the auto, they are only good for mid 14s in the quarter mile. The older version NSX (sticks) runs 13.9 sec in the quarter. The newer ones (1998 and up with the 6 speeds) are at about 12.8 sec in the quarter; some are known as the Zanardi Edition. Don't mess with those.
Trending Topics
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Nice kill, Alfonso! You could have been nice and pointed to his front bumper or headlights and give him the thumbs up
One thing i noticed about all this story about Mercedes car beating other cars but i have never hear one about Mercedes got beated by other cars. Does this mean that Mercedes car never got beat by other cars? That's a B$%$% Sh%t !! I heard so much about who beat who depending which forum you go into.
I alway hear story "blah blah Blah" i beat this car and that car 0-60 or 1/4 and think that your car is all this and that. My friend, what happen when you see another NSX on the back road? Good luck and hold on to your dear life. Good performance cars does not base on how fast it can go in a straight line. If you just want to race in a straight line, trying picking on the new NSX. Take the M5 for example, it faster then the old M3 but why didn't BMW used the M5 for their "GT" racing? Get my point.
One thing i noticed about all this story about Mercedes car beating other cars but i have never hear one about Mercedes got beated by other cars. Does this mean that Mercedes car never got beat by other cars? That's a B$%$% Sh%t !! I heard so much about who beat who depending which forum you go into.
You must realize that you are in the "Kill stories" forum, do you? I am sure you also like reading most of the stories otherwise you wouldn't be here. There are stories in here that Mercs were killed by other performers, like the story of the famous C230K sedan got killed by a Supra NA (mine). I have been to many discussion boards and this one is by far the most matured kill story forum out there. Just go check out the Supra, Impreza, and Maxima forums, and you will know what I mean.
Yes, everyone knows that Merc are not the greatest cars around corners. You don't have to make of fool of yourself tell us this. I don't recall anyone posting that an E55 beating an NSX on the twisties, have you? So, what point are you trying to make? If you love reading CLK430 or SLK230 got killed by Civics or Torcels, you are in the wrong forum.
I don't have hands-on experience with the E55, but with my E430, unless I do a brake stand, it is sometimes hard for me to beat even a Jetta VR6 off the line (but, maybe I'm just a lame off-the-line driver, more into the *****-out, throttle-down at 80mph kind). So, I'm very impressed, and of course I recognize the prowess of the AMG over my clunky ride.
But, I think 4matic helps you do better in the corners. This morning I took a pretty sharp curve on the onramp to the NJ Turnpike spur at about 60 in 3rd of my E430 4matic, and it felt just about as good as it does in my dad's Porsche turbo... When I had my car in the twisties and switchbacks in Colorado, even the power loss I experienced with altitude wasn't enough to keep me from beating guys in the curves. Any thoughts? If there were an E55 4matic I would definitely buy it, but I'd have to decide what tires to ride on, especially on my winter cross-country drive...
I alway hear story "blah blah Blah" i beat this car and that car 0-60 or 1/4 and think that your car is all this and that. My friend, what happen when you see another NSX on the back road? Good luck and hold on to your dear life. Good performance cars does not base on how fast it can go in a straight line. If you just want to race in a straight line, trying picking on the new NSX. Take the M5 for example, it faster then the old M3 but why didn't BMW used the M5 for their "GT" racing? Get my point.
One thing i noticed about all this story about Mercedes car beating other cars but i have never hear one about Mercedes got beated by other cars. Does this mean that Mercedes car never got beat by other cars? That's a B$%$% Sh%t !! I heard so much about who beat who depending which forum you go into.
, it will take an excellent driver to beat me, it might take a little mistake from my side, but it will be fun and that is the most important part to me, the fun. Sorry to dissapoint you by not narrating our "got killed stories", I don't have many to share. In my whole life I've only been beaten 2 (two) times on the street, and none of them two were in the Benz, so I can't post them here, may be I'm too lucky or a good driver.
In my whole life I've only been beaten 2 (two) times on the street, and none of them two were in the Benz, so I can't post them here, may be I'm too lucky or a good driver.
You all need to get off you high horses.
AMG cars ROCK but you have to understand that driver error plays a VERY BIG role when you race.
An E55 is no match for my C32 and my C32 is no match for my 2000 NSX-T.
I have run a 12.9 at 110 in my STOCK NSX at Moroso in West Palm Beach Florida.
My best time in my C32 is 13.3 at 106.
I have NEVER seen an E55 get even close to my C32 numbers. Is it possible, I bet.
If anyone wants to play just shoot me an email and I will bring the NSX to Moroso one night and you can put up or shut up.
FYI here are Car and Drivers best numbers for NSX's
1991-1994 Best was 5.2 seconds with a 13.6 1/4
1995-1996 Best was 5.4 with a 13.7 1/4
1997 Coupe Best was 4.5 with a 12.9 1/4
2001 NSX-T best was 4.5 with a 12.9 1/4
My E55 runs just a libble bit better nubers than your C32, it is a shame I lost the timeslip, otherwise I'd post it here.
The NSX is a very fast car and I am sure the one you have is the faster version. The E55 is an automatic and his time should be much more consistant than a stick shift NSX. We have discussed the advantages and disadvantages of a stick and auto for thousands of times. In addition, I personally don't think the C32 is faster than an E55 in an acceration comparsion. Their time posted by major magazines are dead even with the E55 edging out by half of an inch.
We all understand you have an NSX, but it is possible for an E55 to out run an NSX it if the driver did not shift perfectly or had too much wheel spin.
By the way, my friend has a 800hp twin turbo Supra, and he would love to have a run with your NSX.
JR,
In addition, I personally don't think the C32 is faster than an E55 in an acceration comparsion. Their time posted by major magazines are dead even with the E55 edging out by half of an inch.
According to MB's 2002 catalog, they quote the following:
C32: 0-60 (4.9 sec)......power to weight ratio is 10.1 lb/hp
SLK32: 0-60 (4.8)......9.0 lb/hp
CLK55: 0-60 (4.9).....10.2 lb/hp
E55: 0-60 (5.4)......10.8 lb/hp
S55: 0-60 (5.7).......11.8 lb/hp
CL55: 0-60 (5.7).....11.5 lb/hp
ML55: 0-60 (6.4).....14.2 lb/hp
Your C32 is 0.6 seconds quicker to 60 than an E55.
If you believe all the "major" magazines, the CLK55 is up to .8 seconds slower than an E55....How? I don't think MB would intentionally mislead customers by printing the posted numbers...
Cars vary. I understand that. But a properly tuned car will live up to the behavior of the above figures, in general.
"Real world" vs. magazines....gives us a baseline for comparisons.
Why???
According to MB's 2002 catalog, they quote the following:
C32: 0-60 (4.9 sec)......power to weight ratio is 10.1 lb/hp
SLK32: 0-60 (4.8)......9.0 lb/hp
CLK55: 0-60 (4.9).....10.2 lb/hp
E55: 0-60 (5.4)......10.8 lb/hp
S55: 0-60 (5.7).......11.8 lb/hp
CL55: 0-60 (5.7).....11.5 lb/hp
ML55: 0-60 (6.4).....14.2 lb/hp
Your C32 is 0.6 seconds quicker to 60 than an E55.
If you believe all the "major" magazines, the CLK55 is up to .8 seconds slower than an E55....How? I don't think MB would intentionally mislead customers by printing the posted numbers...
Cars vary. I understand that. But a properly tuned car will live up to the behavior of the above figures, in general.
"Real world" vs. magazines....gives us a baseline for comparisons.
...and 1/4 mile numbers were better than the C32
What were the C32 numbers you saw?
Don't get me wrong, I like the AMG V8's...especially the E55 and CLK55...just trying to understand the line of reasoning here.
CLK55 v. E55 v. C32 v. SLK32? Too many inconsistencies in the car magazines about the performance specs.
Do we believe car mags or the factory figures (as far as trends are concerned)....the car mags will have us beleive that an E55 is quicker than a CLK55 (stock to stock), when the factory figures/testing do not support this.
I won't even go into 60-0 braking....again, tons of inconsistencies!
What gives??
Last edited by Boo2; Aug 2, 2002 at 02:39 PM.









