...asking how to become one of their test drivers. In their latest issue they compare the RSX Type-S to the ITR stating that the ITR gave a 1/4 mile time of 15.2 at 93. I'm sure many of us have bested the 15.2 with a stock ITR. What gives with that rag, I mean mag? Thats the slowest I've seen in any magazine. Cancel my subscription...

 

No ***** those guy's must be launching the thing at like 2000 rpm. Out here in Utah the best a stock ITR has run is 15.4 I believe but that is all altitude related

 

15.2 is crazy. The Type-R did 14.7 with a professional driver and I personally have done a 14.8 on my last R (stock) in Arizona. No elevation issues there either and it was decently warm outside.

However, this could be fun, because now we will have all these punk kids in their new RSX Type-S's trying to race us and when they do we can blow them away. Then we can say "Yeah, your car is probably broken, better go back and complain to the dealer, and tell them your car is slow at street racing"

 

they gave the RSX-S a 6.1 & 14.8

How about that.

 

Hmm, I dunno, I have never driven the RSX Type-S so I can't really say, but I do think Car and Drivers measurements have always been a little off. I wouldn't trust them for accurate results.

I just checked Sport Compact Car and they gave the RSX Type-S a 7.1 for 0-60. So obviously there is something wrong here with one of the measurements.


[Modified by onyx00, 6:39 AM 7/5/2001]

 

SCC was a seat of the pants with a stop watch ...... now there's a rag for you ......

C&D was a real road test with instrumentation. But yeah, they can't drive FWD cars that well.

I have no doubt we will see some stock Type S's run low 14's with full interior and totally stock with decent drivers.

Can't wait to see what a decent driver would do with the new R!! Of course I can't wait to see if we ever even get it ....

 

C/D is typically first rate, especially when compared to Motor Trend. They even still do top speed tests, which can't be said for several other mags. You gotta remember that time was for that specific car -- they make two runs, average them, and correct for atmospheric conditions. I'm pretty sure the time for the ITR they tested back in 97 was better (don't have my back issues at work), and C/D usually has some of the lower numbers out there. I drove a Type S the other day and it didn't feel all that quick to me.

 

Maybe they accidentally switched the numbers around.