|
|
|
|
|
This image has expired.
Final Stats:
| Total Votes |
91 |
| Average Score |
3.88 |
| Verdict |
Not Rice
|
|
Picture
Information
|
| URL:
http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=35077 |
|
| Comments: 40 (Read/Post) Favorites: 0 (View) |
Submitted
on: 08-30-2004
|
 View Stats |
Category:
Car |
|
|
Description:
give ya 3 guesses on what this car accually is... |
Showing page: 1 of 2
[ 1 2 ]
 |
| #1 |
8-30-2004 @ 04:36:50 PM |
| Posted By : 91TSI |
Reply | Edit | Del |
3000gt
[Edited by 91TSI on 8-30-2004 @ 04:37:07 PM]
|
|
| #2 |
8-30-2004 @ 04:47:08 PM |
| Posted By : MxCx |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Fiero?
MR2?
C1v1c?
[Edited by MxCx on 8-30-2004 @ 04:47:33 PM]
|
|
| #5 |
8-30-2004 @ 04:58:17 PM |
| Posted By : 91TSI |
Reply | Edit | Del |
the roof line looks like one plus it has a similar stance.
|
|
| #7 |
8-30-2004 @ 06:01:38 PM |
| Posted By : MxCx |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I must say that is some good bodywork
|
|
| #9 |
8-30-2004 @ 06:21:43 PM |
| Posted By : DA_MAISTA |
Reply | Edit | Del |
A NSX? Cool! Now you can put a turbo setup into it and you have a Kitkar thats better than the original!
|
|
| #11 |
8-30-2004 @ 09:56:58 PM |
| Posted By : ImRaptor |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#9, Whaa????
Don't think a turbo would make this better than an F50.
[Edited by ImRaptor on 8-30-2004 @ 09:57:42 PM]
|
|
| #12 |
8-30-2004 @ 10:02:20 PM |
| Posted By : DA_MAISTA |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#11, I am not too familliar on how Turbos work on the NSX-Engine, but I assume that around 500hp are quite possible, which is somewhat the Ferrari-performance. Additionally, the NSX is a very good handling car, probably not quite as good as an F50, but reasonably good. So, in the end...
...ah well... ist a stupid idea after all. NSX stays NSX...
|
|
| #13 |
8-30-2004 @ 10:07:10 PM |
| Posted By : 1990sr20det |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#12, as with any car that doesnt come from factory with turbo, lowered compression is need to run any more then 8 lbs of boost max ... someone once told me 5hp for 1lb of boost.. so take the nsx engine with the most they come stock 290 add 8lbs of boost and you get 330 and thats prolly a good 6,000 dollar kit bringing the total up to around 86 ... im not going to even go into how much lowering the compression, re doing the fuel and computer systems ect it would cost to get to 500 hp .. and then even then i doubt it would be streetable.. the ferrari is still perfectly streetable at 500 hp .. and the most your paying to get that is the price of the car ( way more then i could ever afford ) plus the cost of a tank of premium ( 1.90 a gal where i live ) and to get the same amount of performance as a ferrari you still need to work on the suspension which costs alot when done right
[Edited by 1990sr20det on 8-30-2004 @ 10:08:04 PM]
|
|
| #15 |
8-30-2004 @ 10:20:04 PM |
| Posted By : 1990sr20det |
Reply | Edit | Del |
But with the nsx youll get one of the two things .. youll either get a good handling car or a fast 500 hp car.. its going to be hard to get a 500 hp nsx that will handle too .. and if you manage it ... the nsx will probably break down faster then the f50 .. plus by the time you do engine work and suspension work plus the cost of the orignal nsx around 80k plus another 80 k in engine and suspension .. plus how ever much it cost to do the body like this ... im sure you could probably get a ferrari
|
|
| #16 |
8-30-2004 @ 10:23:14 PM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#13, "someone once told me 5hp for 1lb of boost.."
What? It's sensitive to engine displacement. Ambient air pressure is 14 psi. 7 lbs. of boost means that you're pulling in 50% more air than you'd be able to naturally aspirated, and thus will burn 50% more fuel to reach stoich, and have the ability ot make slightly less than 50% more power, assuming that parasitic losses are minimal.
I'm really oversimplifying here, but there is no way in Hell you would need 8 lbs of boost to get 330 bhp out of an NSX, especially if you are using turbochargers (which are highly efficient when sized correctly) and you've done a good job of choosing compressor size.
edit: and if you don't believe me, feel free to look at dyno plots for centrifugal superchargers on various engines. 7 psi, Procharged, on an engine like mine, yields a ~40% gain. LordFlux stuck a Procharger on an LS1 and should be seeing 500rwhp (well over 600 bhp) at 11 psi or so, once he gets some tuning and belt-slip issues sorted out.
[Edited by Lemming on 8-30-2004 @ 10:25:52 PM]
|
|
| #17 |
8-30-2004 @ 10:25:54 PM |
| Posted By : DA_MAISTA |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#15, Don´t get me wrong, I´d rather see the NSX as it was and all that Fiberglass used for something useful, but I am actually amazed that the base of this Kitcar is a real sportscar, not to mention a rather expensive one, not a fiero or an Mr2. Its ...strange somehow.
|
|
| #18 |
8-30-2004 @ 10:31:21 PM |
| Posted By : 1990sr20det |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#16, sorry my error .. and not trying to argue.. but doesnt the amount of power in the size of boost change with turbo to supercharger... like supercharging gives more power out of less boost ( sorry if im wrong just trying to clear up some things i have been told )
|
|
| #19 |
8-30-2004 @ 10:37:04 PM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#18, Roots superchargers (generally) have terrible thermal efficiency and heat the air up pretty badly at any level of boost, but tend to give the engine a very flat torque curve.
Turbochargers are extremely efficient compressors, and (when sized properly) will often give the largest horsepower gains at any level of boost. This is especially true when dealing with extreme levels of boost; you can move a lot of air if you're willing to step up to a large compressor wheel, although it'll take a while to spool up.
Centrifugal superchargers are basically belt-driven turbos. Instead of having an impeller section and thus getting energy from the exhaust, they exert some direct parasitic loss on the engine to turn a pulley, and the pulley (usually through some gearing) turns the compressor wheel. With a properly-sized compressor, this is nearly as efficient as turbocharging, but not quite.
|
|
| #20 |
8-30-2004 @ 10:37:31 PM |
| Posted By : DA_MAISTA |
Reply | Edit | Del |
(dangerous half-knowledge) I always thought that turbos were producing more hp, especially in the high revs, while superchargers produced the power earlier at lower revs and lost some of it further up. (dangerous half-knowledge)
#18 Hey, and what about the electric turbos? Dem´ B Dope, Y00! They make da ph@t 20hp apiece! An you can stack ´em!
[Edited by DA_MAISTA on 8-30-2004 @ 10:41:02 PM]
|
Showing page: 1 of 2
[ 1 2 ]
Login to leave a comment
|
|
|
|
|
