My friend was tellin me in school today that 94-97 GSR's are only supposed to run 0-60 in 7.6s and the newer GSR's (98-01) run to 60 is 7.1. Is this true, I didn't believe it at all, but i thought i would ask here just to be sure. And by the way, what is the 0-60 time for a 95 GSR supposed to be.

 

Well, as far as I know, there were no mechanical changes from 94-01, so it seems to me that your friend is wrong. But of course, I can't be absolutly sure about this. Someone else provide some info.


[Modified by Stu, 9:12 PM 1/16/2002]

 

Actually the 95 is the fasest year or GSR. Each year after that they get slower by .1 second.

 

so the 2001 GSRs actually run slower than the integra LS or civic si. gotcha

 

I meant from 96-up I think. 95' GSR run like a 15.2, 96' 15.5, 97' 15.6, 97' 15.7 or something like that.
http://www.car-stats.com

 

Damn, I gotta get me a '93 GSR. According to that site it does a 6.4 0-60, that's just a little off what a type r can do. I have to wonder who's dreaming up these numbers.

 

The source of data is listed.
But the dates/test conditions/driver are probably different so those numbers are not really comparable to one another.

 

if you check a search, people (like me) have written prolificly on this subject. Of course, all of my conclusions are based on nothing other than "reflective reasoning" - and lots of magazine reading.

Believe it or not, a 1992 Oct issue of car and driver had the 92' GSR running 0-60 in 6.5sec. -- just as a little side note.

As for the fastest year of the integra, believe me, and its not cuz i have one. stock vs. stock a 94-95 gsr is the FASTEST STOCK years - however, i think something fishy might have gone on in 2001, its a quick year too. (makes no sense to me)
now, this doesn't mean that once you start modding the car this will make a huge difference, but it might. Some people with OBDII cars have probs and don't get good gains, others with OBDII have no probs whatsoever. I can tell you though that fewer OBDI have probs realizing gains after mods.

and type-R's AREN'T that fast...at least not as fast as people make them out to be.(i'll let you search where I wrote about this a little more)

-drizo

 

0-60 in 6.5 Are you serious?
Were they doing those tests on a perfectly even ground? I suspect they were doing it down hill. j/k

 

I love it when people "magazine race'
ALL GSR's are created equal....
Every year there are some strong and some weak engines. Some people seem to think that OBD 2 makes less power just because some bastard with a weak OBD 2 went to dyno his car and it only made 135 whp, so the rumors got started. There are OBD 2 GSR's making over 145 whp STOCK.
Also, magazines are not consistent. Driver skill, or lack of, also plays a huge part.

 

You can get heavily flamed for this. "Since ITRs are lighter, it's got to be hella faster" This was in comparison to a heavier Cobra I believe. I read that somewhere here. Just hoping that person won't see this thread.

 

I have a 95 GSR and I always spank my friends with a 2000 and 2001 and the only difference is that i have headers but I pull away alot on them. And i have heard that OBD 1 is better for hp gains and worse for emissions from many different magazines and message boards. When I first got my car most magazines listed my zero to 60 as 7.0. I dont know if its true cause i have never done dynos or raced at the track. but that is just my 2cents.


[Modified by PhatAssAcura, 11:35 PM 1/16/2002]

 

Here's more heresay and speculation for ya...

The later models have more safety provisions, thus are heavier.

The early models used to be faster, but now that they're carrying high miles on them, they're slower than they were stock.

The early models are now faster because the tops of the pistons have accumulated carbon deposits, effectively increasing their compression ratio.


Don't take any of this too seriously...

 

The 94-01 engines are the same, with the possible exception of 94-95 (I know there was a minor change to b18b1, but I'm not sure about c1 or c5). Times from car-stats.com aren't always real accurate. They weren't run on the same track, same temp, etc.