Grand-Am Cup Racing

Daytona Qualifying (ST-Class)

Acura RSX-S: 2:12.692
Mazda RX-8: 2:13.906

http://www.grandamerican.com/r....html


Daytona Race (ST-Class)

1. Acura RSX-S
6. Mazda RX-8

http://www.grandamerican.com/r....html

 

Cool. Welcome to honda-tech.

 

The results prove that the rotary engine (Renesis) is a POS.



Modified by JGTCNSX at 4:44 AM 2/1/2004

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JGTCNSX &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The results prove that the roatry engine is a POS.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Pretty harsh, Its just not as much of a performer as the RSX I guess.

Thats some good track info..I wonder what the mods were to each vehicle?

 

 

In what way?

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JGTCNSX &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The results prove that the rotary engine (Renesis) is a POS.

Modified by JGTCNSX at 4:44 AM 2/1/2004</TD></TR></TABLE>

 

that doesnt necessarily mean the RX-8 is a slower car
but hell yea RSX

 

Probably a better driver in the RSX.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by HXMan &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Probably a better driver in the RSX.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Its all about the driver

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Darryl Musashi &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Its all about the driver </TD></TR></TABLE>

Yup, Yup. sure is...But it helps if he has a great chassis and engine

 

Car came out 13th overall wow thats good and the rest where way faster cars like porshes

 

haha did you see #31 FnF SRT4. Did that SRT4 have a double decker alum wing sponsored by APC?

I'm guessing something happened w/ rx-8 team. Cause you also see that the M3 and NSX team are down there too. yea RSX &gt; NSX...suuuure

 

Also did anyone notice that it placed better in both qualifying and race than the Integra R!!! Better lap times in both instances, well obviously in qualifying, but in race trim it was +2 and +4 seconds faster than the 2 Integras. So damn Honda and using the McPherson front strut setup, it can not compete with the all dominating double wishbone type setup in race trim. Can you taste my SARCASM?
And these are not even DC5R's in race setup.

Chris

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DC5RK20A &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Also did anyone notice that it placed better in both qualifying and race than the Integra R!!! Better lap times in both instances, well obviously in qualifying, but in race trim it was +2 and +4 seconds faster than the 2 Integras. So damn Honda and using the McPherson front strut setup, it can not compete with the all dominating double wishbone type setup in race trim. Can you taste my SARCASM?
And these are not even DC5R's in race setup.

Chris</TD></TR></TABLE>

I'm still not buying into how McPherson is better than double-wishbone. My DC2R handles like a go-kart (stock suspension) compared to my DC5 with the tein ss and reinforced chassis bars. I keep asking myself as to why Acura opted to go with double-wishbone on the TL and TSX instead of McPhersons like on the RSX

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Darryl Musashi &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I'm still not buying into how McPherson is better than double-wishbone. My DC2R handles like a go-kart (stock suspension) compared to my DC5 with the tein ss and reinforced chassis bars. I keep asking myself as to why Acura opted to go with double-wishbone on the TL and TSX instead of McPhersons like on the RSX </TD></TR></TABLE>

I'm not saying it is better. Just saying that it is funny that on the track the car was 2 and 4 seconds a lap faster than the DC2s. And it isn't even the Type R version DC5. People may bitch at the setup, but Honda did their homework on the inferior suspension setup. Honda said it didn't have the room for the double-wishbone suspension on this chassis, the Accord(TSX) and TL are on a different platform. This platform allows them to use the wishbone. Do I wish Honda used the double wishbone, really I don't care, my car handles like a dream in stock form, just wish it was about 25-35mm lower in stance.

 

The DC5R was faster than the DC2R on the same track stock for stock when Honda tested the DC5R. Anything can be made to handle better and go faster with aftermarket mods, but stock for stock the DC5R was faster than the DC2R on the same track. I dont mean that they raced head to head, but i remember seeing the best lap times of both cars a while back and the DC5R came out faster.
I always let the numbers speak for themselves.
-Jalal

 

Jalal,

The DC2 owners response is that the DC5 has 20ps more, that's why and about 14ft-lbs of torque. I will kind of agree that a properly tuned double wishbone should handle better, but that doesn't mean that a properly tuned McPher setup can't be made to handle well also. Honda's bread and butter has always been its handling, they would of not spent as much on R&D as they did with the DC5 to make it a mediocre handling car and go against everything they are known for. Would the car of handled even better with a double wishbone, we can only imagine. The 118% higher rigidity of the chassis makes up for the deficiency of the suspension. People fail to realize this and just want to bitch and moan about the McPherson setup.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JGTCNSX &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
</TD></TR></TABLE>

congrats, but that is one hideous car ^^^^^^.

 

whoah big USED car sticker.

wonder if you'll see that thing on ebay after they're done w/ it at the races hehe.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JGTCNSX &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The results prove that the rotary engine (Renesis) is a POS.
Modified by JGTCNSX at 4:44 AM 2/1/2004</TD></TR></TABLE>

Your post proves your ignorance of motorsport. For one, that was the RX-8's maiden voyage and in the world of racing it usually takes a little bit of time before a platform is well developed enough to win. The fact that it finished second means its well on its way. Second, the governing body's rules can determine whether or not any car can be competitive. They could put the RX-8 in at an uncompetitive weight and make it lose, and that would have nothing to do with the design of the car.

Now if you were talking about the poor gas mileage and the typically poor emissions that rotaries have then you'd have a point. But in race trim the rotary provides significant weight and packaging advantages as well asa high degree of reliability (as long as it doesn't overheat).

 

the rsx finished well but why the HELL is the NSX so far down???

 

If you guys see the new best motoring video where the main car of the video is the RX-8. They test drove it and compared it to the skyline coupe, wrx, s2000, DC5R, miata. It did not do very well at all. In the race they were trying to match the RX8 to the skyline coupe and s2000. In the end the r8x went against the dc5r and lost.
They placed :
1. s2000
2. skyline coupe
3. wrx
4. DC5R
5. RX8
6. Miata

It's a decent car, but with all the exagerations mazda has made with the car I was expecting a lot more.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DC5RK20A &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Also did anyone notice that it placed better in both qualifying and race than the Integra R!!! Better lap times in both instances, well obviously in qualifying, but in race trim it was +2 and +4 seconds faster than the 2 Integras. So damn Honda and using the McPherson front strut setup, it can not compete with the all dominating double wishbone type setup in race trim. Can you taste my SARCASM?
And these are not even DC5R's in race setup.

Chris</TD></TR></TABLE>


being a ex-DC5 owner myself i would have to say the wishbone is superior to the mac struts setup. stock for stock, the DC5R fairs well against its predecessor in terms of handling (not to mention power deliery). but once you go aftermarket and shorten the front suspension travel you will run into all sorts of problem. i have the Hot Version touge/circuit battles vcds and none of the EP3R/DC5R perform well when the going gets bumpy. for example, the Phase CL7 Euro R was quicker than the Spoon EP3R despite carrying 200kg weight deficit down the touge. tsuchiya, orido and taniguchi had nothing but complaints against the suspension on the Spoon EP3R. don't get me wrong, the EP3R wasn't the only one to get bashed on because the K-One DC5R got owned in the same aspect as well. on the other hand they had nothing but praise for the suspension setup/geometry on the Phase CL7 and monsterous JUN BB1. whats even more funny is that the Spoon hatch managed to snap the tie rods on a seperate test and it had to sit out (it was suppose to against the Amuse S2000, Phase CL1 and Esprit EK9 in the "2L VTEC battle"). this all goes to prove that the Macpherson setup is nothing but trouble compared to the Wishbone. if you think i'm harsh i think you should go drive a DC2R and try it out for yourself as well.

 

My vote also is for double wishbones, simple but effective. The DC5 mac strut setup is superior to other mac strut setups though. BTW, the 2nd place point leader in GrandAm STI class is another DC5, picture below is dark but the car basically a Type S with DC Sports CAI and cat-back.

http://www.raw-footage.com/Rol....html