No used cars

[Nattefrost]

ok, so the NSX had a wet track, then got a dry one. What tells me the Viper got a dry track? nothing, though it's 7 seconds slower than A fordGT. a car which, in the big three American mag's the Viper's always within 1.5 seconds...And it has beaten it in some too... I'd bet it was wet, but I just don't care anymore, I never said the NSX-R sucked, you've said it for me, I never said power is everything, again, you've said it for me, and I'm not wasting anymore time arguing with someone who has nothing better than putting words in my mouth, if you were smarter, you could do better. Have fun though

P.S. A Viper will beat an NSX-R
I could do it myself, given the car....oh well

You just can't let it go right?

Why do you even argue? You already have your mind made up that a NSX-R doesn't stand a chance against a Viper. While others have proven enough that it's a close call, and NSX-R has won on certain occasions, you simply refuse to accept that NSX-R stands a chance. And you will continue to do so, so much is clear. If you don't even want to listen to what other people have to say, why even bother coming to a forum?

 

[Famine]

ok, so the NSX had a wet track, then got a dry one. What tells me the Viper got a dry track? nothing

Watch the show. They do it on television for you to see.

And whatever you do, don't look up the power rating of the top two road cars at the Nurburgring, or the fourth place car (or 17th, 21st and 24th place ones - all ahead of the Viper SRT-10) on the Top Gear track.

 

[Dave A]

Second place, the first place car has less power than 2nd and 3rd. The fastest road legal car ever tested at the ring has less power by almost half again.

ok, so the NSX had a wet track, then got a dry one. What tells me the Viper got a dry track? nothing, though it's 7 seconds slower than A fordGT. a car which, in the big three American mag's the Viper's always within 1.5 seconds...And it has beaten it in some too... I'd bet it was wet, but I just don't care anymore, I never said the NSX-R sucked, you've said it for me, I never said power is everything, again, you've said it for me, and I'm not wasting anymore time arguing with someone who has nothing better than putting words in my mouth, if you were smarter, you could do better. Have fun though

P.S. A Viper will beat an NSX-R
I could do it myself, given the car....oh well

Disturbed, I was debating this point trying to make sure I didn't slate the Viper while I've been posting, it's not the Vipers fault it's got you trying to stick up for it I'm suprised this is how you've responded to one of the few people actually trying to give the Viper some credit despite your lack of knowledge or ability to listen and learn beyond what you want to hear. The bottom line is the Viper cannot keep up with a Ford GT never has in a fair test, the NSX-R can keep up with a Viper. The 350bhp TVR T350C has beaten the Viper SRT-10 in every test they've ever been compared in barring the 1/4 sprint, so tell me, how is it so impossible that a car with only 20bhp less than the T350C cannot keep up with the car the T350C can beat, with ease. The bottom line is, it's not. The 400bhp Corvette C6 cabriolet has beaten the Viper in every test barring the 1/4 sprint too, the 400bhp TVR Sagaris hammers the Viper in every test in EVER category, including the 1/4 sprint. Then you have the Westfield FW400 a car that hammers everything mentioned, yet also has the least power. The Viper isn't a totally crap car, although Jason Plato seem to think so, it does have some appeal but it's no performance god, it's not a benchamark setter, not close.

 

[McLaren]

Second place, the first place car has less power than 2nd and 3rd. The fastest road legal car ever tested at the ring has less power by almost half again.



Disturbed, I was debating this point trying to make sure I didn't slate the Viper while I've been posting, it's not the Vipers fault it's got you trying to stick up for it I'm suprised this is how you've responded to one of the few people actually trying to give the Viper some credit despite your lack of knowledge or ability to listen and learn beyond what you want to hear. The bottom line is the Viper cannot keep up with a Ford GT never has in a fair test, the NSX-R can keep up with a Viper. The 350bhp TVR T350C has beaten the Viper SRT-10 in every test they've ever been compared in barring the 1/4 sprint, so tell me, how is it so impossible that a car with only 20bhp less than the T350C cannot keep up with the car the T350C can beat, with ease. The bottom line is, it's not. The 400bhp Corvette C6 cabriolet has beaten the Viper in every test barring the 1/4 sprint too, the 400bhp TVR Sagaris hammers the Viper in every test in EVER category, including the 1/4 sprint. Then you have the Westfield FW400 a car that hammers everything mentioned, yet also has the least power. The Viper isn't a totally crap car, although Jason Plato seem to think so, it does have some appeal but it's no performance god, it's not a benchamark setter, not close.

I'm assuming we're talking about the SRT-10 Conv. and not the SRT-10 Coupe, right?

 

[Hokage Dante]

I don't want to have to pick from used cars that are mostly Japanese and are usually worn down, have high milage, and bad oil. Just give me $20,000 and I will be happy, for I can get a decent starter car with that for once.

I think used car section in the game is good because sometimes you can find old cars that you want.

Why most of the cars are Japanese?
-That's because most of the used cars you can find all around the world are Japanese.

-Yes, they do have high milage because no one is going to buy car and drive it with low milage and you can always change the oil.

I like that section in the game and I think they should incould it in GT5.

 

[Dave A]

I'm assuming we're talking about the SRT-10 Conv. and not the SRT-10 Coupe, right?

Yeah, the Coupe's not over here yet. I don't have anything lap time wise on the Coupe.

 

[McLaren]

Yeah, the Coupe's not over here yet. I don't have anything lap time wise on the Coupe.

Ah alright cause I was thinking, "What? R&T just a 3 way test with Viper, Z06 and GT and they were all pretty much equal."

I'd have to find it to get the times though.

EDIT:
Automobile -
Gingerman Raceway:
Corvette C6 Z06 - 1:32.75
Dodge Viper SRT-10 Coupe - 1:33.95
Ford GT - 1:32.45

 

[Disturbed07]

not just R&T, also Motor Trend, and Car & Driver, all 3 had tests, and in one, the Viper beat the Ford GT, hence why I said it did, and this is also why I say I know when I say something, since I seem to be the only one who knows this.

Where's this test where the NSX beat it? I fail to remember, though, on one, the NSX was close, with one source, one time.

The fact that you think a regular C6 beats it on every test?....whatever..(yes even the convertible) though you'd be surprised at how hard it is to find actual numbers on these websites, or maybe you wouldnt, and that's why you didnt post any numbers whatsoever while making that ludacris statement about the Viper and C6 cabriolet....

by the way, live4speed, that response was mainly directed at McLaren, not you, but whatever makes you happy

so somebody again, tell me where the NSX beat it
you'd be surprised

 

[Max_DC]

not just R&T, also Motor Trend, and Car & Driver, all 3 had tests, and in one, the Viper beat the Ford GT, hence why I said it did, and this is also why I say I know when I say something, since I seem to be the only one who knows this.

Where's this test where the NSX beat it? I fail to remember, though, on one, the NSX was close, with one source, one time.

The fact that you think a regular C6 beats it on every test?....whatever..(yes even the convertible) though you'd be surprised at how hard it is to find actual numbers on these websites, or maybe you wouldnt, and that's why you didnt post any numbers whatsoever while making that ludacris statement about the Viper and C6 cabriolet....

by the way, live4speed, that response was mainly directed at McLaren, not you, but whatever makes you happy

so somebody again, tell me where the NSX beat it
you'd be surprised

disturbed07 you always make my day.... whatever thread you are in, you start right off with prooving that we are all wrong, but oh Lord, messiah07 is here to free us from our ingonrance.... cheers, happy - relaxed - new year to you and everybody ... Go on, you bring in some more action into gtp....

Ok... concerning NSX-R...as stated above... beats the Dodge Viper SRT-10 on the Nordschleife... just go into the next gas station and buy a copy of some random SportAuto... NSX-R : 8.09 min, SRT-10 : 8.13 min , Chrysler Viper GTS : 8.10 min, Corvette C6 : 8.15 #
💡

 

[McLaren]

not just R&T, also Motor Trend, and Car & Driver, all 3 had tests, and in one, the Viper beat the Ford GT, hence why I said it did, and this is also why I say I know when I say something, since I seem to be the only one who knows this.

Where's this test where the NSX beat it? I fail to remember, though, on one, the NSX was close, with one source, one time.

The fact that you think a regular C6 beats it on every test?....whatever..(yes even the convertible) though you'd be surprised at how hard it is to find actual numbers on these websites, or maybe you wouldnt, and that's why you didnt post any numbers whatsoever while making that ludacris statement about the Viper and C6 cabriolet....

by the way, live4speed, that response was mainly directed at McLaren, not you, but whatever makes you happy

so somebody again, tell me where the NSX beat it
you'd be surprised

In ONE? Is that all?
How about none.

The Motor Trend one is of the SRT-10 Convertible and in which both cars had an equal 1/4th mile time.

Road & Track only compared the Z06 and the Viper. Equal, but the Z06 came out on top due to its price.

Car and Driver only did a Z06 and Viper run as well. Once again, the Z06 came out on top because of sheer price.

Automobile has been the only one that has done a full 3 car test and the Viper lost to the GT and Z06 in technical terms though the times were close enough to prove the cars are all nearly equal.



Where's the test? We've given you 2 sources. Hell 3 actually.
But I see were once again, stupidity is your strong point.

You want proof of the 'Ring times b/c the Viper lost, but no, any times of a Viper beating a NSX-R are perfectly agit.

Hmm, should I even link to an old Car And Driver test of the Viper RT-10 and NSX?
Yes, I will.

1998 Viper RT/10 -
0-60 - 4.2
1/4th - 12.3

1998 Acura NSX -
0-60 - 4.8
1/4th - 12.9

Technical win for the Viper, but not that great. Less than 1 second away from each other.

Standard NSX Awards
Road & Track's "Ten Best Cars in the World"
Automobile - "Automobile of the Year and Design of the Year"
Motor Trend - "Top Ten Performance Cars" list and touted it as "the best sports car ever built."


But it seems now you're just being an ass.
Not only did we get times from other sites, but times from a TV Show, and now times from Car Magazines.

BTW, other cars from the Hockeniem Test
~1:14.6 --- 125.469 km/h - Porsche 911 Turbo (sport auto 06/00)
~1:14.7 --- 125.301 km/h - Ferrari 575M Maranello (sport auto 12/02) (515Hp)
~1:14.8 --- 125.133 km/h - Aston Martin V8 Vantage, 385 PS/1636 kg (sport auto 10/05)
~1:14.8 --- 125.133 km/h - Chevrolet Corvette C6, 404 PS/1492 kg (sport auto 06/2005)
~1:14.8 --- 125.133 km/h - Lotus Exige S1 (sport auto 11/00)
~1:14.9 --- 124.966 km/h - Corvette Z06 (385 hp)
~1:14.9 --- 124.966 km/h - Dodge Viper SRT-10 (sport auto 10/04)
~1:14.9 --- 124.966 km/h - Porsche 911 GT3 (sport auto 08/99)
~1:14.9 --- 124.966 km/h - TVR Tuscan S
~1:15.0 --- 124.800 km/h - Callaway C12 Coupé (sport auto 04/99)
~1:15.1 --- 124.634 km/h - Ferrari 360 Modena (sport auto 10/99)
~1:15.1 --- 124.634 km/h - Porsche 996 Turbo, PSM off
~1:15.2 --- 124.468 km/h - Porsche 911 Turbo Cabrio
~1:15.3 --- 124.302 km/h - Ferrari F355 (sport auto 06/97)
~1:15.3 --- 124.302 km/h - Lotus Esprit Sport 350 (sport auto 05/99)
~1:15.4 --- 124.125 km/h - Lotus Exige 240R, 247 PS/941 kg (sport auto 11/05)
~1:15.5 --- 123.974 km/h - Porsche 996 Turbo, PSM on
~1:15.5 --- 123.974 km/h - Porsche Cayman S, 295 PS/ 1410 kg (sport auto 01/06)
~1:15.6 --- 123.809 km/h - Porsche 996 Carrera S
~1:15.6 --- 123.809 km/h - Mercedes-Benz SL 65 AMG, 612hp/2049 kg (sport auto 01/05)
~1:15.9 --- 123.320 km/h - Chevrolet Corvette C5 (Euro spec) commemorative editino (sport auto 09/03)
~1:15.9 --- 123.320 km/h - Chrysler Viper GTS (sport auto 10/97)
~1:15.9 --- 123.320 km/h - Mercedes SL 55 AMG (sport auto 04/02)
~1.15.9 --- 123.320 km/h - Porsche 996 Carrera (sport auto 01/98)

I'll stop here and save you the embarrasement of saying 300Hp can't beat 500Hp cars.
And not to mention, I didn't include the TUNER cars' times.
Be glad I didn't go down farther b/c there's ANOTHER SRT-10 time in the 1:16s recorded as well as other cars rumbling over 500Hp.


Your Viper has been beaten.

 

[Disturbed07]

In ONE? Is that all?
How about none. I never said it was faster or could beat a GT on a track, I simply said it wasnt a 7 second difference, and you proved me right, thank you, by the way.

The Motor Trend one is of the SRT-10 Convertible and in which both cars had an equal 1/4th mile time. Huh? read that, tell me if it makes sense. I'll assume you mean the convert. and coupe got the same time. Which would make my statement of them being equal, true. You're the one who said they're so different.

Road & Track only compared the Z06 and the Viper. Equal, but the Z06 came out on top due to its price. not at all true

Car and Driver only did a Z06 and Viper run as well. Once again, the Z06 came out on top because of sheer price. again, not at all true

Automobile has been the only one that has done a full 3 car test and the Viper lost to the GT and Z06 in technical terms though the times were close enough to prove the cars are all nearly equal.
do I need to say?, still not true, clearly you missed the other ones, sorry



Where's the test? We've given you 2 sources. Hell 3 actually.
But I see were once again, stupidity is your strong point.
like I said, I can't find them, does that mean they don't exist?
They were only on shelves a month or so ago, maybe they'll be online soon? we'll see

You want proof of the 'Ring times b/c the Viper lost, but no, any times of a Viper beating a NSX-R are perfectly agit. And it's fairly well known that the Viper's time there is crap. case in point? the older, slower, worse handling, worse braking Viper beat it's time. can you argue that? I don't want proof of the Viper's time there, I want a good driver to take it to the limit and see what it's time really is.

Hmm, should I even link to an old Car And Driver test of the Viper RT-10 and NSX?
Yes, I will.

Technical win for the Viper, but not that great. Less than 1 second away from each other. oh, you meant the old one, yeah, the Viper won.

Standard NSX Awards
Road & Track's "Ten Best Cars in the World"
Automobile - "Automobile of the Year and Design of the Year"
Motor Trend - "Top Ten Performance Cars" list and touted it as "the best sports car ever built."
Maybe back then, not now though

But it seems now you're just being an ass.
Not only did we get times from other sites, but times from a TV Show, and now times from Car Magazines.
And I gave you a link to a Corvette beating the NSX, but you never commented
BTW, other cars from the Hockeniem Test
~1:14.6 --- 125.469 km/h - Porsche 911 Turbo (sport auto 06/00)
~1:14.7 --- 125.301 km/h - Ferrari 575M Maranello (sport auto 12/02) (515Hp)
~1:14.8 --- 125.133 km/h - Aston Martin V8 Vantage, 385 PS/1636 kg (sport auto 10/05)
~1:14.8 --- 125.133 km/h - Chevrolet Corvette C6, 404 PS/1492 kg (sport auto 06/2005)
~1:14.8 --- 125.133 km/h - Lotus Exige S1 (sport auto 11/00)
~1:14.9 --- 124.966 km/h - Corvette Z06 (385 hp)
~1:14.9 --- 124.966 km/h - Dodge Viper SRT-10 (sport auto 10/04)
~1:14.9 --- 124.966 km/h - Porsche 911 GT3 (sport auto 08/99)
~1:14.9 --- 124.966 km/h - TVR Tuscan S
~1:15.0 --- 124.800 km/h - Callaway C12 Coupé (sport auto 04/99)
~1:15.1 --- 124.634 km/h - Ferrari 360 Modena (sport auto 10/99)
~1:15.1 --- 124.634 km/h - Porsche 996 Turbo, PSM off
~1:15.2 --- 124.468 km/h - Porsche 911 Turbo Cabrio
~1:15.3 --- 124.302 km/h - Ferrari F355 (sport auto 06/97)
~1:15.3 --- 124.302 km/h - Lotus Esprit Sport 350 (sport auto 05/99)
~1:15.4 --- 124.125 km/h - Lotus Exige 240R, 247 PS/941 kg (sport auto 11/05)
~1:15.5 --- 123.974 km/h - Porsche 996 Turbo, PSM on
~1:15.5 --- 123.974 km/h - Porsche Cayman S, 295 PS/ 1410 kg (sport auto 01/06)
~1:15.6 --- 123.809 km/h - Porsche 996 Carrera S
~1:15.6 --- 123.809 km/h - Mercedes-Benz SL 65 AMG, 612hp/2049 kg (sport auto 01/05)
~1:15.9 --- 123.320 km/h - Chevrolet Corvette C5 (Euro spec) commemorative editino (sport auto 09/03)
~1:15.9 --- 123.320 km/h - Chrysler Viper GTS (sport auto 10/97)
~1:15.9 --- 123.320 km/h - Mercedes SL 55 AMG (sport auto 04/02)
~1.15.9 --- 123.320 km/h - Porsche 996 Carrera (sport auto 01/98)
Should I mention the C6 beat a C5 Z06 there? and should I say anybody who runs a car twice, and improves the time by 2 seconds, Is not a good enough driver to really compare cars?
I'll stop here and save you the embarrasement of saying 300Hp can't beat 500Hp cars. The only 300HP cars I see are Lotus', where's your NSX-R?
And not to mention, I didn't include the TUNER cars' times. and why would you?
Be glad I didn't go down farther b/c there's ANOTHER SRT-10 time in the 1:16s recorded as well as other cars rumbling over 500Hp.
Why would I?

Your Viper has been beaten.

By what exactly? Porsches? Lotus'? a Vette? no NSX there, it beat the Tuscan, a Ferrari, and numurous others... so what were you thinking?
So 12.3 to 12.9 close? that's over half a second! you genious! that's ONLY at least 3 cars... yeah, it's close good point.
Note the new Vipers run at least 11.7 @ 123 - R&T
why didnt you include a speed for those cars? was the old Viper going, say, 118? the NSX going say, 109? I guess it's ONLY 9 miles per hour, and now a new one would only be going 14 mph faster, you're right, it's a technical win

 

[McLaren]

the Viper beat the Ford GT

Wrong, you did.

Huh? read that, tell me if it makes sense. I'll assume you mean the convert. and coupe got the same time. Which would make my statement of them being equal, true. You're the one who said they're so different.

No, the SRT-10 Conv. and the Ford GT.

not at all true

Uh, yes that is true. The Z06 was chosen as the winner due its price.
You may even ask BlazinXtreme why the Z06 has been preferred over the SRT-10 Coupe in every test.

like I said, I can't find them, does that mean they don't exist?
They were only on shelves a month or so ago, maybe they'll be online soon? we'll see

I gave you the video, but you complained those were "numdnuts"
I posted the times of the Hockenheim trial.
l4s posted the Top Gear times, and you were all fine and dandy about that until the it was brought up the NSX-R had seconds taken off the time.

oh, you meant the old one, yeah, the Viper won.

My point proven that you don't care about the source if the Viper wins.
BTW, hardly a win. That's .6 seconds, and I'd bet you if the cars had equal 0-60s. we'd be looking at equal times.

And also, I think that's more of a win for the NSX considering it came 2nd under a second and had 150 less horsepower. Shows how much better the Viper is.

Maybe back then, not now though

At least it made some of these awards.
Show me where the Viper won a "Design of the Year" award.

Should I mention the C6 beat a C5 Z06 there? and should I say anybody who runs a car twice, and improves the time by 2 seconds, Is not a good enough driver to really compare cars?

So I guess Schumacher driving his F1 and not improving his times on laps make him not a good enough driver right? I mean, because everyone who drives a car a 2nd time will always improve his lap time.

There were no comparisons being done at the time of these tests. They were simply running a car there. If you knew anything, you'd know that manufacturers always strive to make the next year of a model a little bit better.

The only 300HP cars I see are Lotus', where's your NSX-R?

Apparently, we are also forgetful.

BTW Disturbed07.

Here's some Hockenheim Times
~Dodge Viper SRT-10 - 1:14.9 (Sport Auto 10/04)
~Honda NSX-R - 1:14.6 (Sport Auto 08/02)
~Dodge Viper SRT-10 - 1:14.3 (Sport Auto 7/2005)

Hmm...looks to me like it took the Viper another year to beat it after it failed to the 1st time.

1:14.6 was the NSX-R's time.

Note the new Vipers run at least 11.7 @ 123 - R&T

Ah, yes, because it would be completely fair to compare a 1998 NSX to a 2005 Dodge Viper.

why didnt you include a speed for those cars? was the old Viper going, say, 118? the NSX going say, 109? I guess it's ONLY 9 miles per hour, and now a new one would only be going 14 mph faster, you're right, it's a technical win

I did not have the speeds from my source.

And if the '98 NSX was going 109Mph and achieved that, that's even sadder for the Viper that a car 150Hp less can make a 1/4th mile time just as good.

The last Acura NSX model did not do as well because it still ran at 276hp while the Viper got a good 50 more horses.

But you know what's sadder?

2002 Acura NSX - 13.4@ 106Mph.
200 Horses less. 18Mph less. 1 second more on the 0-60...YET, the base model NSX still manages to keep within 3 seconds.

The BASE model.

I was comparing the '98 RT-10 against the '98 Acura NSX, 2 cars better suited for a comparison than a Viper that's 7 years newer.

And before this, I was comparing the SRT-10 Conv. to the NSX-R. You're right. Shows how much more advanced the NSX-R is when a BASE model NSX can keep within 3 seconds of the SRT-10.

The way you're going, your points are going to start helping the NSX-R and putting down the Viper.

And for future reference, don't judge anybody's linked sources when you yourself have given none to the debate. I do not count your Corvette link as I do not see one at all. That was not even in the original discussion of the Viper Vs. NSX-R. That was between you and live4speed over the Corvette C6. The only Corvette you've brought into the debate with me is the older Z06 model, and which in my resource, it was BEAT by the NSX-R. So, your C6 Corvette beating the older Z06 does nothing to help you because the NSX-R beat the C5 Z06 as well.

 

[VeilsideR33sub]

Sheesh ! Are there any used Vipers in GT ?
I like an rt/10 2nd hand ( the hand that holds GT1 ) , 7 gears , bright orange racing mod , no turb , killer on the test .
Ahhh GT1. . . when brakes were stoppage and wheelspin did'nt .

 

[Disturbed07]

Wrong, you did.


No, the SRT-10 Conv. and the Ford GT.

Uh, yes that is true. The Z06 was chosen as the winner due its price.
You may even ask BlazinXtreme why the Z06 has been preferred over the SRT-10 Coupe in every test. I was talking about the part where you said the Mags didnt do tests on all 3 at once. so go ask blazin, since he is God, I know the ZO6 is cheaper, and I think it is a better performer. period. happ now?



I gave you the video, but you complained those were "numdnuts"
I posted the times of the Hockenheim trial.
l4s posted the Top Gear times, and you were all fine and dandy about that until the it was brought up the NSX-R had seconds taken off the time. you don't count mine either, ass, and didnt you think it was great when the Viper only beat an NSX-R on it's second run?
P.S. the Viper still ran faster. Period.

My point proven that you don't care about the source if the Viper wins.
BTW, hardly a win. That's .6 seconds, and I'd bet you if the cars had equal 0-60s. we'd be looking at equal times. You are an idiot, a better 0-60 time would help, but a launch won't increase speed reached in the 1/4 by more than 2-3 mph. period. learn more about drag racing before you go there.

And also, I think that's more of a win for the NSX considering it came 2nd under a second and had 150 less horsepower. Shows how much better the Viper is.
it got it's ass kicked, by all means of the word here.


At least it made some of these awards.
Show me where the Viper won a "Design of the Year" award.
I don't follow awards, and I never said the NSX wasnt a great car, especially for its time.


So I guess Schumacher driving his F1 and not improving his times on laps make him not a good enough driver right? I mean, because everyone who drives a car a 2nd time will always improve his lap time.
He'll never improve by 2 seconds, unless he's never driven the track before, or, has adjustments made to his car. period.

There were no comparisons being done at the time of these tests. They were simply running a car there. If you knew anything, you'd know that manufacturers always strive to make the next year of a model a little bit better.
they didnt make improvements to the Viper that year, unless you can say what they are? rather than relying on speculation for this argument.


Apparently, we are also forgetful.



1:14.6 was the NSX-R's time.
great,

Ah, yes, because it would be completely fair to compare a 1998 NSX to a 2005 Dodge Viper. has the NSX been made any better since then?
P.S. the Viper that ran 11.7@123 was an 03 - not an 05
oh wait, they havent updated for real in the last 15 years, which is a great testament to it's advanced technoligy for its time, but it's still outdated now, no?


I did not have the speeds from my source. -

And if the '98 NSX was going 109Mph and achieved that, that's even sadder for the Viper that a car 150Hp less can make a 1/4th mile time just as good. How was it as good? it was over half a second slower, going almost 10mph short.... not close, learn more about drag racing and you'll learn more about speed differences

The last Acura NSX model did not do as well because it still ran at 276hp while the Viper got a good 50 more horses.
Maybe Honda/Acura shouldnt be so cheap, and update, since they're charging 96,000$ for a car that could easily be under 70,000$

But you know what's sadder?

2002 Acura NSX - 13.4@ 106Mph.
Why is this time so much slower?

200 Horses less. 18Mph less. 1 second more on the 0-60...YET, the base model NSX still manages to keep within 3 seconds.
within 3 seconds where?

The BASE model.

I was comparing the '98 RT-10 against the '98 Acura NSX, 2 cars better suited for a comparison than a Viper that's 7 years newer.
But the NSX is not really any faster now, actually, by your times, it's half a second slower, see? this is why I've called you an ass.

And before this, I was comparing the SRT-10 Conv. to the NSX-R. You're right. Shows how much more advanced the NSX-R is when a BASE model NSX can keep within 3 seconds of the SRT-10.
If the Viper coupe is so much better, why don't you compare that? ass. and you complain about unfair.

The way you're going, your points are going to start helping the NSX-R and putting down the Viper.
to an ass

And for future reference, don't judge anybody's linked sources when you yourself have given none to the debate. I do not count your Corvette link as I do not see one at all. That was not even in the original discussion of the Viper Vs. NSX-R. That was between you and live4speed over the Corvette C6. The only Corvette you've brought into the debate with me is the older Z06 model, and which in my resource, it was BEAT by the NSX-R. So, your C6 Corvette beating the older Z06 does nothing to help you because the NSX-R beat the C5 Z06 as well.

My link was comparing an NSX to a C5-Z06, ass
it had nothing to do with a C6

just let it go, all you do is misunderstand, or try to twist what I say, and I'll always catch it, so it won't work, not now, not ever.

It's fantasic that you don't believe that MT and C&D compared a GT, Z06, and Viper, but what does it matter really? your reference was good enough for you, to prove me right that the Viper's close to a GT, much closer than 7 seconds, no?

Note that now that I've realized the Viper ran 1:14.3
THE VIPER BEAT ALL THOSE CARS LISTED!
ALL THOSE PORSCHES, FERRARI'S, NSX, EVERYTHING LISTED!!!!!!!!!!
how cool it that? thank you - you've made my day now.

 

[McLaren]

Oh man, it's not even worth arguing with you anymore. You truley are one of the stupidest people on this site.

Oh man, you're as blind as a bat.


I'll wait to give you a serious reply after I stop laughing so hard at your stupidity. Really, how dumb can you be?

Oh man, I can't wait to see how l4s replies to this.

BTW, your sig sums your attitude perfectly.

 

[Disturbed07]

upset the viper beat em all eh? Hell, I was thinking it ran a 14.9, and lost to some, so thank you for correcting me.
Like the sig says, I dont mind being wrong, especially on that.

my sig does match my personality doesnt it? - thanks for noticing

 

[McLaren]

upset the viper beat em all eh? Hell, I was thinking it ran a 14.9, and lost to some, so thank you for correcting me.
Like the sig says, I dont mind being wrong, especially on that.

my sig does match my personality doesnt it? - thanks for noticing

Upset? Hardly, I'm just laughing at the fact that despite all the sources posted, you still think the NSX-R can be beaten by a Viper anywhere. You always have an excuse if I've given you a source of the NSX-R beating the Viper or other faster cars, but when I post links of a Viper winning, their 100% true.

And its still sad a 300Hp less base model NSX can stay with 3 seconds of the Viper's 1/4th mile time despite the fact the NSX's top speed was slower.

And it was a 2003? Really!? Good since that was a 2002 NSX time. Makes it a better comparison.

If you really wanna get me back in this silly discussion, you're gonna have to do some research on both cars, and not that "100% sure" knowledge of your's.

BTW, that wasn't a compliment.

 

[VeilsideR33sub]

This guy is a fontsize migraine !

 

[Emohawk]

Quite true.

Sheesh ! Are there any used Vipers in GT ?
I like an rt/10 2nd hand ( the hand that holds GT1 ) , 7 gears , bright orange racing mod , no turb , killer on the test .
Ahhh GT1. . . when brakes were stoppage and wheelspin did'nt .

Not GT4. Or three, but there wasn't used anything in that. Except oil, and you had to make that yourself.
7 speed?

 

[Disturbed07]

Upset? Hardly, I'm just laughing at the fact that despite all the sources posted, you still think the NSX-R can be beaten by a Viper anywhere. You always have an excuse if I've given you a source of the NSX-R beating the Viper or other faster cars, but when I post links of a Viper winning, their 100% true.
The only thing here with the NSX-R having a better time is the Nurburgring. the ONLY thing. funny how that's also the only track where cars arent generally competitively compared, huh? if you wanna call it "always having an excuse" even though it's once having a legitimate point, that's fine, we'll let it rest as me "not believing every car is professionaly raced in stock form at the 'Ring"

And its still sad a 300Hp less base model NSX can stay with 3 seconds of the Viper's 1/4th mile time despite the fact the NSX's top speed was slower. Withen 3 seconds? it's 1.7, less than 2, you should know that, since you'd like the NSX to be the ultimate supercar in the world.
It's not uncommon for 300hp cars to run in the 13's, MANY do. How about a 325hp Camaro SS '02 running a 12.989 at Englishtown? (New Jersey) how's that? the point isnt American cars are better, it's 300hp cars easily run 13's and sometimes even high 12's. 500hp cars SHOULD run 11's, definetly not 10's, but mid-high 11's, with some heavier, slower ones in the low 12's, like the Mercedes E55 AMG. 1.7 seconds on a drag strip is domination, this is why I call you an ass, right here

And it was a 2003? Really!? Good since that was a 2002 NSX time. Makes it a better comparison. I'm glad you're happy with it now, the Viper still won.

If you really wanna get me back in this silly discussion, you're gonna have to do some research on both cars, and not that "100% sure" knowledge of your's. How about you get some general knowledge of all forms of racing? clearly you know nothing of drag racing, as you think 300hp should NOT be within 3 seconds of 500hp, you do need to read.

BTW, that wasn't a compliment.

BTW, a compliment from you is an insult.
I'd much rather you try to insult me.


While I'm glad you are still clinging to a Nurburgring track time, I have this to say, and this is all.
While racetracks in general are not always in favor of any car, some cars take a liking to some tracks. I've seen quite a few MT, or R&T comparison's where one cars was clearly the faster one, but due to specific track layouts, it would either have to shift right after a turn, or mid-turn, or take a higher gear, due to specific speeds, also, some cars have to shift towards the end of the Straight, also slowing their lap time. And while nothing's perfect, the Nurburgring removes these problems, as it has all speeds covered. However, due to the size, and popularity, and the fact that they let normal people drive on this track, it is extremly uncommon for any testers, (be it Mags or car cmpanies) to actually get recorded hot laps on this track, and therefore, not all times found for it are the best that car can be expected to get.
And what that means is, the only times I'll give credit to, are times like the Porsche Carrera GT, the C6 ZO6, and such cars. Either have an extremely experianced driver run the car through the course, preferablythe known "God of the Nurburgring", or, have the company send a race driver, or their best, to drive the car, round the course, while it's closed off. Dodge did not do this, ever with the Viper. Maybe Honda did, I do not know. I do know that the Honda time sounds much more like a good, satisfactory time, than the Viper's, and anybody who argues that, is being a jackass. Especially when you consider that the older Viper's clocked a better time than the newer, superior Viper's. If you don't believe the new Viper's are faster, you're back to the jackass part.
- Thank You and have a nice day.

P.S. you said a car with 300HP less...500-276=224 Not 300. What happened to talking about the 330HP NSX-R? you really wanna compare a regular NSX to the Viper? I know the regular NSX was the original car talked about, but you were hasty in bringing in the "R", so why leave it out now?
BTW- 500-330=170 also, not 300hp less

Math, learn it this is STILL why I call you an ass

 

[Disturbed07]

Once on the track, though, we found the Viper to be as friendly as a yellow Lab—obedient, eager to please—and it would do what you told it to, without fail. "Surprisingly easy to drive around the track and very forgivable as the rear end rotates," flip-flopped the guy who had said the Viper made him nervous.

That comment was a huge compliment, considering Grattan's track is far from smooth. There are lots of undulations, small hard-to-see rises, lots of elevation changes, and a couple of spots where a car can almost get airborne. If any track can illustrate a car's handling weaknesses, Grattan is it.

Our only gripe about the Viper's handling is that in some turns it tends to understeer more than we like. Otherwise, no portion of Grattan flummoxed the suspension. We're not pro drivers, but we were all comfortably pushing the Viper, enjoying the g-forces and appreciating that we had an ally in speed. Sure, the Viper's 1:27.50 lap time was 1.50 seconds slower than the Vette's, but given the choice between the two of them on the track, all of us preferred the Viper. We scored the Viper's handling a 10 out of 10 and gave the Z06 a 6.

So, this is where I say grip matters more than the common man's definition of handling. They all liked the Viper better as far as handling, but it didnt corner any faster. How do I know? well, it's the logical denominator. The Vette won by 1.5 seconds on the road course. The Vette is faster, but not a drastic amount, .3 sec's in the 1/4, and 20.1 to 17.9 in the 0-150. (try that in your NSX) Anyway, they liked the handling of the Viper, they claimed it better, but it still lost by 1.5 seconds on the road course.
Do you get it yet? Just because some magazine guys like your car better, doesnt mean it actually goes through the turn faster, it simply means they were comfortable. this also applies to your NSX-R, it's easy to drive on the limit. which IS a great thing, and for most people, they would probly turn much faster in one, however, that doesnt mean the Viper, (or Vette) CAN"T. It means you need skill to do so.

 

[McLaren]

How about you get some general knowledge of all forms of racing? clearly you know nothing of drag racing, as you think 300hp should NOT be within 3 seconds of 500hp, you do need to read.

I never said that. You did.

don't speak about 300 hp cars keeping up with 500hp cars

I find it so godd*mn funny you try and retrack your statements.

"Doh, I never said that 300Hp cars couldn't keep up with 500Hp cars."

2003 Dodge Viper SRT-10 = 11.7 @ 123Mph
2002 Acura NSX = 2002 Acura NSX - 13.4@ 106Mph.

I'm still laughing at the fact that that particular NSX kept up with it in a straightline.

Obviously, 300Hp cars can keep up with 500Hp, straight line or not.
I already knew it that, why the hell do you think I posted all those links.

If I had actually thought this.
"as you think 300hp should NOT be within 3 seconds of 500hp"
I wouldn't have started this argument and proved to you they do.

God, you're a dumbass.

"Trying to put words in my mouth." I love how you did it to me then.
BTW within 2 Seconds IS the same as Within 3 secs. Maybe you should KNOW that. But your stupidity must stop you.


You know. Others on this site are right about you. You just can't admit you're wrong I've seen the discussion you've had over the 240SX...and even there, you can't admit you're wrong.

And 1 more thing....you SUCK at quoting.
Like I said, if you wanna continue, you're gonna have to do your research.

~300Hp cars can beat 500Hp (Case in point, an NSX-R can beat a Viper. Stop making excuses)
~It is sad the new Vipers suck compared to the old.
~It's even sadder a base model NSX can keep within TWO seconds of a Viper SRT-10 Conv. even though its 200Hp less. 👎
~My source compared a C5 Z06 to a NSX too, NSX won. So your link doesn't mean squat.
~And last, any Viper win does not justify that the Viper will win every race though you seem to think so.

All your points have been proven wrong. We all know you can't accept defeat and must question every non-Viper win.

The reason I'm stopping this argument is because you think 1 Viper win justifies everything from then on.
But tell me this.

If a Ford GT beat a Viper in 1 test, I guess that means the Ford GT will always win since you seem to think that with the Viper and the NSX that 1 test determines the winner.

It's called multiple sources. Only using 1 source does not help you.

Like I said. Do some more research before you debate things. In this thread AND in the 240SX thread (In which thread, I'm laughing at how you can't admit you're wrong there either).

And in that little exert you posted, I guess in your logic, the Z06 DID win though the times showed they were perfectly equal.

BTW, the whole point of this debate was to show you that the NSX-R CAN keep up with the Viper. You just turned it into a "Viper always win" argument.
No surpise though from you.

End of discussion. You're next post will most likely show your stupidity even more.

 

[Disturbed07]

I never said that. You did.
??????????????????????????????


I find it so godd*mn funny you try and retrack your statements.

"Doh, I never said that 300Hp cars couldn't keep up with 500Hp cars."
I never said you said they couldnt, you said they CAN
2003 Dodge Viper SRT-10 = 11.7 @ 123Mph
2002 Acura NSX = 2002 Acura NSX - 13.4@ 106Mph.
NOT KEEPING UP, YOU IDIOT

I'm still laughing at the fact that that particular NSX kept up with it in a straightline.
WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU???????
Obviously, 300Hp cars can keep up with 500Hp, straight line or not.
I already knew it that, why the hell do you think I posted all those links. SAME WORDS, AGAIN

If I had actually thought this.
"as you think 300hp should NOT be within 3 seconds of 500hp"
I wouldn't have started this argument and proved to you they do.
I was talking about a road course, you jackhole
God, you're a dumbass.

"Trying to put words in my mouth." I love how you did it to me then.
BTW within 2 Seconds IS the same as Within 3 secs. Maybe you should KNOW that. But your stupidity must stop you.
wouldnt 2 seconds not only sound better, but be more specific? or is that to advanced for you? I'm simply trying to teach you how to argue a point, that's all. Sorry, it won't happen again, sir.


You know. Others on this site are right about you. You just can't admit you're wrong I've seen the discussion you've had over the 240SX...and even there, you can't admit you're wrong.
don't get me started, if you knew anything about that thread, you'd know the original car in question was actually said to be a 180SX, just as this thread was originally a regular NSX. it seems there's more than one of your kind.

And 1 more thing....you SUCK at quoting. Come on, at least have an example??????????
Like I said, if you wanna continue, you're gonna have to do your research.
and what do I need to research? At least tell me what needs researched????? please? or don't you know?
~300Hp cars can beat 500Hp (Case in point, an NSX-R can beat a Viper. Stop making excuses) the only thing you've got is the Nurburgring, Nothing else, and if you were smarter, you'd know the 'Ring isnt the all telling race track it could be. But we can leave that go, since you seem stuck thinking every time gotten there is the best a car can do.
~It is sad the new Vipers suck compared to the old. If you think that, your proving my point that your an ass, as you ARE the only person I've spoken to who thinks they'll keep up.
~It's even sadder a base model NSX can keep within TWO seconds of a Viper SRT-10 Conv. even though its 200Hp less. 👎 apparently you didnt even read that last post, and if you knew ANYTHING about drag racing, you'd know that NSX is getting it's ass handed to it on a silver platter P.S. 224HP - is that so hard to get?!?!?!? I know normally, 200 would be a fine generalization, but since I did the math for you, (when you thought it was 300) you should be able to get it by now.

~My source compared a C5 Z06 to a NSX too, NSX won. So your link doesn't mean squat. But the VIPER beat the NSX, you ass
~And last, any Viper win does not justify that the Viper will win every race though you seem to think so. Like I said before, all we can go on is what we have, and since Honda refuses to try to sell it in America, it'll be that much harder. Yur not going to convince me the Viper can't do better on the 'Ring, even that thread starter thinks it'll do better with a race driver, ass

All your points have been proven wrong. We all know you can't accept defeat and must question every non-Viper win. You sound like Young Warrior now, claiming all has been proven when you yourself have shown contradicting facts

The reason I'm stopping this argument is because you think 1 Viper win justifies everything from then on.
But tell me this.
I thought you stopped it?
If a Ford GT beat a Viper in 1 test, I guess that means the Ford GT will always win since you seem to think that with the Viper and the NSX that 1 test determines the winner. first, like I've said before, the Viper won 1, I saw the GT win 2, and yes, I do think the GT will generally beat the Viper, I said this much before, just not by 7 seconds. YOU are the one who brought up it only winning by 1 second or so, in that comparison, so deal with it now

It's called multiple sources. Only using 1 source does not help you.
You're using one (the 'Ring) source as you info that the NSX can beat a Viper, and ALSO claiming it as more than one, no need to tell me, hell, you could just read your own old posts and consider them my replies.

Like I said. Do some more research before you debate things. In this thread AND in the 240SX thread (In which thread, I'm laughing at how you can't admit you're wrong there either). It's good to know, but, if you're so knowledgable with that, why don't you state you're knowledge there?

And in that little exert you posted, I guess in your logic, the Z06 DID win though the times showed they were perfectly equal.
The Z06 ran 1.5 seconds faster, you freakin idiot, how stupid will you get?
End of discussion. You're next post will most likely show your stupidity even more.

Is this actually the end? or will you post again, just like the last 10 times you said you were done, and claimed to be "to smart for this?"
this is how you do it: I'm done here, goodbye

 

[Iceman]

Did you have to quote that whole thing just to say that?

 

[VeilsideR33sub]

When it goes to the Head , how many Yards do you think it takes ?

 

[Max_DC]

Ok... concerning NSX-R...as stated above... beats the Dodge Viper SRT-10 on the Nordschleife... just go into the next gas station and buy a copy of some random SportAuto...

NORDSCHLEIFE :

NSX-R : 8.09 min,
SRT-10 : 8.13 min ,
Chrysler Viper GTS : 8.10 min,
Corvette C6 : 8.15



💡

ALL these runs were driven by the same person, Horst von Saurma, head of SportAuto magazine for 20 years or so. He drove the SRT-10 two years later than the NSX-R, so he should have gained even more experience, but he's a pro driver anyway and he is certainly a so called ringmeister.

Give it up already disturbed07, the Viper isn't the better car, face it, it's starting to get ridiculous....

 

[Disturbed07]

7'56 - Chevrolet Corvette Z05 C5 – 2003
7'56.- Honda NSX-R - 2002
7'59 - Chevrolet Corbette C6 - 2005
So would it be "ridiculous" to say that, since the best time found for an NSX-R is 13 seconds better than his, and his best time is 16 seconds short of somebody else's for the C6 Vette, maybe he's not such a "ringmeister"? -- I got these from the thread YOU genious' linked me to, though I'd already been there.
How about that?

P.S. For you jackasses who continue calling it "Chrysler Viper GTS" shut the hell up, it's a Damn Dodge, you a-holes. Where did anybody get the idea to call it a Chrysler? was it a pre-production car? or are these people that damn stupid?

So how about I don't get SportAuto, there's better mags out there, plus, I've never seen it, do they even sell it in America? again, with the a-holes remark

 

[Max_DC]

7'56 - Chevrolet Corvette Z05 C5 – 2003
7'56.- Honda NSX-R - 2002
7'59 - Chevrolet Corbette C6 - 2005
So would it be "ridiculous" to say that, since the best time found for an NSX-R is 13 seconds better than his, and his best time is 16 seconds short of somebody else's for the C6 Vette, maybe he's not such a "ringmeister"? -- I got these from the thread YOU genious' linked me to, though I'd already been there.
How about that?

That is a point of course, but still... where is the Viper? Did it go below 8 min ? Anything official? Sure Horst v. Saurma is not the world's best driver and he works for a magazine. Who drove the time for the Corvette and the NSX? pro race drivers, who maybe even developed the car ? You point out an important thing : can times be compared? Well, that also applies to American cars however. Perhaps the guy who drove the Corvette c6 in your example was one of the best drivers on the planet who was born next to the Nürburgring and the driver of NSX-R just was a great driver... or it was the other way round. There is no solution obviously... All we can do is suming up the facts and do some interpretation. And I'd say in 9 out of 10 times the NSX-R was par or faster than the Viper... btw did you know the NSX was developed with the masive support of Ayerton Senna ? Do you call this man a pro driver? I do....

P.S. For you jackasses who continue calling it "Chrysler Viper GTS" shut the hell up, it's a Damn Dodge, you a-holes. Where did anybody get the idea to call it a Chrysler? was it a pre-production car? or are these people that damn stupid?

Actually, I'm not sure, but I think it might have been a Chrysler Viper in the beginning, no it's called Dodge Viper. Maybe I'm wrong, but it doesn't matter, since
Dodge is a DaimlerChrysler company. We surely have some US Viper experts around here who will bring light into the dark

So how about I don't get SportAuto, there's better mags out there, plus, I've never seen it, do they even sell it in America? again, with the a-holes remark

I thought you lived in Frankfurt, Germany, so...

Also, please change the tone of your posts...why being rude? Smart people like you should be sovereign enough to avoid that kind of childish behavior....

 

[Disturbed07]

If you like you can read all the posts, I never ONCE asi the NSX-R was not a great car, and I never once said it wasnt extremly capable, I simply said a Viper could beat it. Have I proved that? No. Has anybody proven the NSX-R faster? Even less.
2 sources had the Viper run faster, 1 source, in a less reliable circumstance, had the NSX-R win. The Nurburgring is a far more difficult track to drive, and even if the same driver drove them, he could clearly stand improvement, though all magazine drivers could.
I've said before, how about race drivers or company assigned drivers run them, as they did for all the top cars? until then, I won't count it as reliable, and I don't think you should either, but that's up to you. either way, it won't make me an asshole for not accepting it.

I am the expert, it was never a Chrysler Viper. ever. It's always been the Dodge Viper, since 1992 when it debuted. Maybe they called a prototype that, or the pre-production versions that (89-92) I don't know, but they're Dodge's, just as we don't call it an AUDI Murcielago, it's a Lamborghini. Period.

You egged me on, saying I made it more fun, no? I only get rude when people ahem (McLaren) repeatedly put words in my mouth, make no sense, or, tell me 1.7 sec and 17 mph isnt a whopping. that is one of the stupidist thing I've yet to hear.

I was in Frankfurt, before that, Berlin. I visited Germany for about 2 1/2 months, and was on my relatives computers there, that is why my location said there.
Not to start more, or be argumentitive, but I don't consider "rude" childish, rather, less civilized, however, it sometimes works, in getting people to listen, rather than skim my words, and respond with things I never said, because they went over it to fast, and it gets quite old, repeating myself. ahem (McLaren)

 

[Famine]

I am the expert, it was never a Chrysler Viper. ever. It's always been the Dodge Viper, since 1992 when it debuted. Maybe they called a prototype that, or the pre-production versions that (89-92) I don't know, but they're Dodge's

I'm feeling good.

Never? Anywhere? Ever? Want to put some money on this statement, expert?