i think this is right mag but had extensive write up on this super hot car, that ive been reading on the boards as the best performing 4cyl, front wheel drive car..hmmmmmmmmmmmm in the 1/4 mile it ran a smoking 15.2 sec maybe i should post this on RSX board...but then i didnt want to deflate their bubble...still waiting to catch up with one on deserted stretch of hwy.....

 

1/4 mile isn't everything

chassis stiffness, suspension, blah blah, that's also better no?

-AoiB0t, who still loves his 11:3:4 ratio GSR

 

sorry it was road and track...and i do own a type r tks...so i dont think you pass on to much to me that i havent experienced yet...but thks anyway....

 

i think you were refering to r/t i was reading the same one just today at school did you get the specs on breaking in the car? i think it was 60-0 in 142 feet? i think that is bad? isnt it?.

 

I think people take magazine articles too seriously, just because it was written in a mag doesnt mean you wont encounter one that can run faster than that......dont forget they had the old ITRs running 15s, and 0-60 in 7 flat.
Its driver, and condition of the car.....just because it was written doesnt mean it's written in stone.

 

The brakes seem to be a weak point on the RSX in all magazine reviews I've read. But I think the engine, transmission and chassis are all better the the ITR. ITR's suspension setting seem to be more neutral.

 

Thats not what this issue of motor trend said. 14.8 1/4 mile and 6.2 0-60

 

No. Suspension has been compromized for it to meet saftey regulations. Struts suck.

 

Yep, that sucks as well. We do it in 115 feet.

 

Since it's a Type-S, that is equivalent to the GSR right?

I would think the new ITR in JDM land structually is better (less flex?) than the current one? I would hope the Type S sus is better than the stock GSR. but you're right, Struts.

ALthough Porsche uses struts t00, then again, it's all on how the engineers put the package right?

-AOib0t, who thinks he is understanding what's up with the Type S peeps. Are they thinking they are better than ITR's? *shrugs*. It's all in the driver


[Modified by AoiGSR, 4:46 PM 9/27/2001]

 

hahaha!

My sentiments exactly!

 

struts can be good. if it's on a bmw and the car is "RWD". So the rsx peeps can say all they want about how the m3's use struts they just forget about how different a RWD car handles then a FWD car.

 

hey who said the RSX type S is the best front wheel car? I havent heard that
i kinda doubt that
anyway r people with rsx type Ss acting like punks about their cars?
if they are hell yeah...the Type R could punk down a rsx type S..it only has like 5 more hp than a type R?
again the RSX-type S was made to appeal to a wider variety of people it seems (as in not everyone is going to take their RSX to the track or mod it up)...not just us enthusiasts
seems like some people feel threatend by the type S
but why is everyone trying to talk down each others cars...i mean don't we all have pretty cool cars in some way or another?

 

I like the RSX type S, it feels like a better car than the GSR, but not comparable to the TypeR, my uncles just got a typeS, i test drove it....it feels soo smooth and torquey....much better than the GSR, handles nicer...but if i had to race someone i'd take my gsr over the typeS.

the gsr feels more agressive as in mean! rsx is pretty quiet compared.
its not a bad car at all...its still going to have as much potential or more as the older Bseries engines....just wait, u'll see...honda is trying to break more sales records...making engines more suitable for the everyday person

 

This belongs in the RSX forum.

 

if struts suck, why does M-B, BMW, VW, Audi, Porche use them?

 

All these cars except BMWs and Porsches drive like shiat. BMWs and Porsches are RWD, making front suspension less critical (like torque steer etc.....).
BTW: I think M-B uses double wishbones and they still ride like shiat...

 

Sport compact claimed they only acheived a 15.6 @90.6 in the RSX and they where the ones that could do 14.5@96 in the R. They said that the other magazines claimed a 14.8 in the RSX but that there times where corrected for temp and altitude. Sport compact did there test @1000ft and 90 degrees.

 

Ricehorney is spot on with his comment.

Probably best to illustrate with this:
http://www.nrma.com.au/Page/Public?PageId=mot_rt517

0-100km/hr (0-60miles n hour) in 8.5 seconds..

Nuff said eh? Anyone know of a figure worse than this in an official review of this car?

 

 

Crash safty, more engine room, cheaper.

 

Yeah, and at it only cost $39,000. Either they're retarded, or they got ripped off!