1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis
Car: 1992 Camaro RS
Engine: '78 L82 bored .30 over
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.23
1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
Was cruising home from work last evening when I approached an nsx on the interstate exit ramp. We had a bit of fun cutting traffic and such trading off on eachother's tails. Frustrating thing is that eventually every car on the street decided to be a prius and go 25 in a 40 and kept us from catching a light. Just curious how you guy could see it turning out.
Bit about the camaro...'92 rs with rebuilt '78 L82 bored .30 over with 700r4 behind it. Believe my gears to be 3.23. Have 600cfm edelbrock carb, pretty decent comp cam and 10:1 compression. Would've definitely been manually shifting with shift points at 4400, 4350, and third to fourth at 4250 at wot. Pretty sure I'd have been beat in a 1/4 by a couple car lengths. Would've been a blast tho!
Bit about the camaro...'92 rs with rebuilt '78 L82 bored .30 over with 700r4 behind it. Believe my gears to be 3.23. Have 600cfm edelbrock carb, pretty decent comp cam and 10:1 compression. Would've definitely been manually shifting with shift points at 4400, 4350, and third to fourth at 4250 at wot. Pretty sure I'd have been beat in a 1/4 by a couple car lengths. Would've been a blast tho!
Last edited by Jesse Boggess; Oct 11, 2012 at 12:21 PM.
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,536
Likes: 204
From: NYC / Jersey
Car: 1990 Trans Am GTA
Engine: Turbo 305 w/MS2
Transmission: 700R4
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
If you caught him by the light? If your running a stock stall converter, that definitely won't help you, so I would more than likely side with the NSX. From a roll he will eat you up...
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis
Car: 1992 Camaro RS
Engine: '78 L82 bored .30 over
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.23
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
It was fun, but I wish we could have let it rip. Maybe we'll meet again...
Supreme Member




Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,528
Likes: 240
From: Henrietta NY
Car: 1984 Trans Am L69
Engine: Sniper EFI Powered 355
Transmission: WC T5 w/ Steel Support Plate
Axle/Gears: 3.42 10 Bolt Posi
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
Depends a lot on the NSX the auto NSXs have about 50 less HP than the manual version. I would still put my money on the NSX but they were never designed to go fast in a straight line they are track cars. Factory they only put down about 240 WHP I think 290 crank.
3.0 NSX from 1990 ~ 0-60 in 5.7 seconds, 1/4 mile in 14.0 seconds.
3.2 NSX (excludes jap special editions) 0-60 in 5.0 seconds, 1/4 mile in 13.5 seconds.
Some people claim lower for stock these are just rough numbers. I have seen Type T and other special edition NSXs run 12s stock.
They are super well balanced and with mid engine and RWD they just love tracks.
This may help a bit
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Technica...rmancenums.htm
They respond super well to modding many people get them into 11s with a SC
3.0 NSX from 1990 ~ 0-60 in 5.7 seconds, 1/4 mile in 14.0 seconds.
3.2 NSX (excludes jap special editions) 0-60 in 5.0 seconds, 1/4 mile in 13.5 seconds.
Some people claim lower for stock these are just rough numbers. I have seen Type T and other special edition NSXs run 12s stock.
They are super well balanced and with mid engine and RWD they just love tracks.
This may help a bit
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Technica...rmancenums.htm
They respond super well to modding many people get them into 11s with a SC
Supreme Member

Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 2,756
Likes: 10
From: Ahead of you...
Car: 1984 LG4 Camaro
Engine: 350 Roller Motor
Transmission: Level 10 700R4
Axle/Gears: Strange 12 bolt 3.42
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
A mild 350 like yours shifting at 4500 isn't even a race for an NSX, auto or not...
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis
Car: 1992 Camaro RS
Engine: '78 L82 bored .30 over
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.23
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
Yeah I believed the 3.2 to do 0-60 in 4.7 so I wasn't expecting to win if we did go at it. In the moment...I probably would've gone to the highest shoftpoint that was still pulling but I'm really not sure which are appropriate for my setup. Wish I knew technically how much power I have....torque is outstanding but doesn't speak numbers.
Trending Topics
Supreme Member




Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,528
Likes: 240
From: Henrietta NY
Car: 1984 Trans Am L69
Engine: Sniper EFI Powered 355
Transmission: WC T5 w/ Steel Support Plate
Axle/Gears: 3.42 10 Bolt Posi
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
Yeah I believed the 3.2 to do 0-60 in 4.7 so I wasn't expecting to win if we did go at it. In the moment...I probably would've gone to the highest shoftpoint that was still pulling but I'm really not sure which are appropriate for my setup. Wish I knew technically how much power I have....torque is outstanding but doesn't speak numbers.
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis
Car: 1992 Camaro RS
Engine: '78 L82 bored .30 over
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.23
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
Stock heads with 3 angle valve job and z28 valve springs..Comp cam xe262.
Supreme Member




Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,528
Likes: 240
From: Henrietta NY
Car: 1984 Trans Am L69
Engine: Sniper EFI Powered 355
Transmission: WC T5 w/ Steel Support Plate
Axle/Gears: 3.42 10 Bolt Posi
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis
Car: 1992 Camaro RS
Engine: '78 L82 bored .30 over
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.23
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
Not sure exactly which heads came stock on the '78 L82. They are just the stock "smog" ones I'm sure.
Supreme Member




Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,528
Likes: 240
From: Henrietta NY
Car: 1984 Trans Am L69
Engine: Sniper EFI Powered 355
Transmission: WC T5 w/ Steel Support Plate
Axle/Gears: 3.42 10 Bolt Posi
Member
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis
Car: 1992 Camaro RS
Engine: 1978 L82 355
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
The heads are the 882's. I am unaware if they have been ported or milled...but with the compression being 10:1...that may give you a hint. -Jesse
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 6,499
Likes: 31
From: Macon, GA
Car: 1992 Camaro RS
Engine: Vortec headed 355, xe262
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 9-bolt 3.70
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
882 heads are awful. Factory stock L98 083 heads are far, far better, and those are at the bottom of the list for good performance factory heads. Aftermarket heads will shame the top end factory heads like you wouldn't believe, so you can extrapolate where the 882's are in relation.
http://forums.chevyhiperformance.com...ine/882-heads/
http://forums.chevyhiperformance.com...ine/882-heads/
Member
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis
Car: 1992 Camaro RS
Engine: 1978 L82 355
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
Yeah I'm kinda bummed that better heads weren't included with the motor when I purchased it...but glad everything else has been taken care of. Definitely going to invest in a new set soon.
Supreme Member




Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,528
Likes: 240
From: Henrietta NY
Car: 1984 Trans Am L69
Engine: Sniper EFI Powered 355
Transmission: WC T5 w/ Steel Support Plate
Axle/Gears: 3.42 10 Bolt Posi
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
882 Heads are not the worst heads out there they flow OK for smog heads and have larger valves. They are like getting kicked in the ***** with slippers and not work boots. Before I got my car the guy who had it before me claimed he made a 13.9 with the 882 heads.
Here are the huge chambers on 882 heads
Last edited by midias; Oct 15, 2012 at 08:40 AM.
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 6,499
Likes: 31
From: Macon, GA
Car: 1992 Camaro RS
Engine: Vortec headed 355, xe262
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 9-bolt 3.70
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
He needs to verify his piston height and whether tehy are flat tops or domes or dished pistons before he buys heads anyway. I doubt they're really at 10:1, but it's possible I guess.
Supreme Member




Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,528
Likes: 240
From: Henrietta NY
Car: 1984 Trans Am L69
Engine: Sniper EFI Powered 355
Transmission: WC T5 w/ Steel Support Plate
Axle/Gears: 3.42 10 Bolt Posi
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
Yea everyone should verify their pistons before buying heads but I was saying 10:1 on 76CC heads is a strong indication that something has been changed usually 76cc heads yield about 8.8 to 1.
Member
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis
Car: 1992 Camaro RS
Engine: 1978 L82 355
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23
Re: 1992 camaro rs vs 1999 Acura nsx
I have not been able to pull the heads off yet. I'll have to find a new dd before I give an effort to that. I hope the rebuilder's word is correct on 10:1. Are there any deats I can do to find out for a fact that they are? The advice is greatly appreciated! And to keep this thread on topic...
Came up to a stop along with a 2004 impala ss and a early 2000 jetta gli.....smoked them up to 60...then out of nowhere the jetta blew right past me. I'm really hurting to get a 5-6 speed tranny ha.
Came up to a stop along with a 2004 impala ss and a early 2000 jetta gli.....smoked them up to 60...then out of nowhere the jetta blew right past me. I'm really hurting to get a 5-6 speed tranny ha.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
92camaroJoe
Tech / General Engine
6
Aug 13, 2015 06:07 AM






