I've settled on my next car....Acura RSX..NEED inputs from RSX owners please.

[CTrain]

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: CTrain

Originally posted by: Theguynextdoor
What is your spending budget? I would invest the extra $1-2k and get the nicer ones (in a better color unless you like white) for $15-14.

Definately $15K and under.

ugh, in this case, maybe consider an 03 accord 5MT I4 coupe before a base RSX. Cheaper to insure, mid to high 15s with manual. Stock handling crappy, but easily fixed with sway bars.

Nah, I really like the RSX coupe/hatchback design.
Extra cargo space when I need it.

You know at the RSX forum, there are a few base owners with a I/H/E setup that runs in the 14s.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: CTrain

Originally posted by: OS
base RSX/02-05 SIs are slow as f*ck. manual is mid 16 sec car at best, auto is into 17s.

If you are seriously considering an RSX-S, get the new civic SI. vtec.net has dynos already and they dyno more HP at the axles than the 05 RSX-S. MSRP is expected to be very close to 20K even, and comes with an LSD stock which the RSX-S does not. Seems like Honda is willing to cannibalize RSX sales to recover mindshare for the civic/SI.

Trust me, I'm lusting over the new Si.
In fact the BLACK Si from the site is my wall paper.

If you read my reasoning, I'll have to wait a while for the Si and I think the price will be at a premium.
I wouldn't even mind spending the $20K but I can wait.

My thought process is to own a RSX for a couple of yrs, sell it(won't be too much of a loss) and then buy a Si...a used one prefereably.

lol, yeah I've thought about getting a new SI also.

I think 6 months will be enough to avoid dealer markups if you can sit on your current car that long. I remember it took less than that for the scion TC to go from marked up to sticker.

 

[CTrain]

Originally posted by: Theguynextdoor

Originally posted by: CTrain

Originally posted by: Theguynextdoor
Too bad you're not in my area: http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?c...nced=&start_year=1981&isp=y&cardist=53

For a ricer, I think it's pretty tastefully done.

Thats not a good listing.
Its a base and its the same price as the example....just 15K miles less.

You apparently don't really care about mileage then. The owner strikes me as one who takes care of his car. The fact that he went out of his way to detail the outside and INSIDE of his car then takes multiple pictures of his car shows this.

Well if you look at my BASE example...that car is in great shape too.
That owner has sent me more pictures.
You're looking at a 18K miles difference and $2000 more.
18K miles is a year worth of driving for me and $2000 more....probably not worth it.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: CTrain

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: CTrain

Originally posted by: Theguynextdoor
What is your spending budget? I would invest the extra $1-2k and get the nicer ones (in a better color unless you like white) for $15-14.

Definately $15K and under.

ugh, in this case, maybe consider an 03 accord 5MT I4 coupe before a base RSX. Cheaper to insure, mid to high 15s with manual. Stock handling crappy, but easily fixed with sway bars.

Nah, I really like the RSX coupe/hatchback design.
Extra cargo space when I need it.

You know at the RSX forum, there are a few base owners with a I/H/E setup that runs in the 14s.

I doubt that, atleast not without hondata ECU+raised redline and light track prep.

Either way, one guy on accordtuner runs 14.9@95 on his h/i/e K24 5MT accord. The trap speed in particular is pretty nuts for what the car is supposed to be.

 

[TuffGuy]

Originally posted by: OS
base RSX/02-05 SIs are slow as f*ck. manual is mid 16 sec car at best, auto is into 17s.

If you are seriously considering an RSX-S, get the new civic SI. vtec.net has dynos already and they dyno more HP at the axles than the 05 RSX-S. MSRP is expected to be very close to 20K even, and comes with an LSD stock which the RSX-S does not. Seems like Honda is willing to cannibalize RSX sales to recover mindshare for the civic/SI.

Are axles the same as the wheels?

Also, can you link us to the dynoes? The only one I've seen is the one supplied by Honda:

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Ph...vesfirstarticle&make=honda&model=civic
http://sohc.vtec.net//article_files/396999/civic_si_hp_torque.jpg

They need to get their story straight:

Edmunds:

Honda says it'll accelerate to 60 mph in 6.7 seconds

The Car Connection

Honda says the performance numbers are 60 mph in 7.5 seconds

 

[PHiuR]

TYPE - S FTW

 

[Theguynextdoor]

Originally posted by: CTrain

Originally posted by: Theguynextdoor

Originally posted by: CTrain

Originally posted by: Theguynextdoor
Too bad you're not in my area: http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?c...nced=&start_year=1981&isp=y&cardist=53

For a ricer, I think it's pretty tastefully done.

Thats not a good listing.
Its a base and its the same price as the example....just 15K miles less.

You apparently don't really care about mileage then. The owner strikes me as one who takes care of his car. The fact that he went out of his way to detail the outside and INSIDE of his car then takes multiple pictures of his car shows this.

Well if you look at my BASE example...that car is in great shape too.
That owner has sent me more pictures.
You're looking at a 18K miles difference and $2000 more.
18K miles is a year worth of driving for me and $2000 more....probably not worth it.

Sorry, I did not know that the original owner sent you additonal pics, the one pic that he did post did not strike that to me. However low mi. means less beatings early in life.

But hey. Good luck in your purchase. They look like nice cars.

 

[TuffGuy]

Originally posted by: OS
Either way, one guy on accordtuner runs 14.9@95 on his h/i/e K24 5MT accord. The trap speed in particular is pretty nuts for what the car is supposed to be.

H/I/E are pretty expensive, aren't they? Doesn't it cost ~$1500+ for the bunch?

 

[CTrain]

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: CTrain

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: CTrain

Originally posted by: Theguynextdoor
What is your spending budget? I would invest the extra $1-2k and get the nicer ones (in a better color unless you like white) for $15-14.

Definately $15K and under.

ugh, in this case, maybe consider an 03 accord 5MT I4 coupe before a base RSX. Cheaper to insure, mid to high 15s with manual. Stock handling crappy, but easily fixed with sway bars.

Nah, I really like the RSX coupe/hatchback design.
Extra cargo space when I need it.

You know at the RSX forum, there are a few base owners with a I/H/E setup that runs in the 14s.

I doubt that, atleast not without hondata ECU+raised redline and light track prep.

Either way, one guy on accordtuner runs 14.9@95 on his h/i/e K24 5MT accord. The trap speed in particular is pretty nuts for what the car is supposed to be.

No its true. G0 to that forum and do some reading.
From what I've been reading Hondata does not help a base as soppose to the Type S.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

Originally posted by: OS
base RSX/02-05 SIs are slow as f*ck. manual is mid 16 sec car at best, auto is into 17s.

If you are seriously considering an RSX-S, get the new civic SI. vtec.net has dynos already and they dyno more HP at the axles than the 05 RSX-S. MSRP is expected to be very close to 20K even, and comes with an LSD stock which the RSX-S does not. Seems like Honda is willing to cannibalize RSX sales to recover mindshare for the civic/SI.

Are axles the same as the wheels?

Also, can you link us to the dynoes? The only one I've seen is the one supplied by Honda:

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Ph...vesfirstarticle&make=honda&model=civic

They need to get their story straight:

Edmunds:

Honda says it'll accelerate to 60 mph in 6.7 seconds

The Car Connection

Honda says the performance numbers are 60 mph in 7.5 seconds

link

Axle HP not the same as WHP, wheels have rotational mass/inertia. I think the claim is ~10HP loss also for wheels.

The 0-60 numbers in the news is probably a conservative qoute from Honda, AFAIK no one has actually run the car yet.

 

[TuffGuy]

Originally posted by: CTrain

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: CTrain

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: CTrain

Originally posted by: Theguynextdoor
What is your spending budget? I would invest the extra $1-2k and get the nicer ones (in a better color unless you like white) for $15-14.

Definately $15K and under.

ugh, in this case, maybe consider an 03 accord 5MT I4 coupe before a base RSX. Cheaper to insure, mid to high 15s with manual. Stock handling crappy, but easily fixed with sway bars.

Nah, I really like the RSX coupe/hatchback design.
Extra cargo space when I need it.

You know at the RSX forum, there are a few base owners with a I/H/E setup that runs in the 14s.

I doubt that, atleast not without hondata ECU+raised redline and light track prep.

Either way, one guy on accordtuner runs 14.9@95 on his h/i/e K24 5MT accord. The trap speed in particular is pretty nuts for what the car is supposed to be.

No its true. G0 to that forum and do some reading.
From what I've been reading Hondata does not help a base as soppose to the Type S.

Doubtful.

Type-S has a weight to power of 14.1lb/hp and it runs low 15s to high 14s.

Base has a weight to power of 17.6lb/hp. It would need to gain ~40hp to have the same power to weight as the RSX-S, and I seriously doubt that I/E/H will give you 40+hp.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

Originally posted by: OS
Either way, one guy on accordtuner runs 14.9@95 on his h/i/e K24 5MT accord. The trap speed in particular is pretty nuts for what the car is supposed to be.

H/I/E are pretty expensive, aren't they? Doesn't it cost ~$1500+ for the bunch?

Depends what brand, for header, DC is the main vendor for K24 accords, ~$300, other junk brands have serious quality/build/design problems. Intake ~$200, exhaust doesn't matter so much so whatever brand ~$300. DC charges ~$500 for theirs. ~$1K if you do all DC stuff, less if you use generic for exhaust.

 

[TuffGuy]

Originally posted by: OS
link

Axle HP not the same as WHP, wheels have rotational mass/inertia. I think the claim is ~10HP loss also for wheels.

The 0-60 numbers in the news is probably a conservative qoute from Honda, AFAIK no one has actually run the car yet.

K, now that I've looked into it a bit more. Hub hp is measured on a Dynapack after removing the wheels and bolting it onto the hubs. According to the article, they got 197.9 hub hp and 204 hub hp.

What correction factor are they using, how much drivetrain loss (percentage) are they taking into calculation, what gear were they in, and how close is that gear to 1:1?

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

Originally posted by: OS
link

Axle HP not the same as WHP, wheels have rotational mass/inertia. I think the claim is ~10HP loss also for wheels.

The 0-60 numbers in the news is probably a conservative qoute from Honda, AFAIK no one has actually run the car yet.

They're all corrected "hub hp". I would love to see an uncorrected whp dyno. If someone who knows more about cars than I do can explain what "corrected hub hp" is, I would greatly appreciate it.
...

Take a look at the dyno results.

The lowest curve, 197.9 hub hp, was recorded in completely stock trim after a few runs. We think this is more representative of what our car will do. The next run, 204 hub hp, was recorded with a little cool down. Note that the biggest difference occurs from 7500 rpm on up. The final run of 209 hp was recorded with the airbox cover off (note the bottom end losses). While the car gets much noisier and loses the refined growl of the stock intake system, the 5+ hp gain indicates that an intake system will probably be able to pick up some noticeable power (do not drive with the cover off, with the hood closed, you'll kill power by ingesting hot air from the engine bay).

HP at the hub/axle means basically the same thing. There are two main types of dynos, dynapacks and dynojets. Dynojet is the traditional roller/drum where the car just drives up on it like a treadmill. Dynapack the operator must take off the wheels and then bolt the dyno shaft assembly to each side of the axle/hub.

 

[TuffGuy]

Yeah, I did a little research and educated myself a little. I updated my prior post.

I'm gonna call shenanigans though... If you take into account 15% drivetrain loss, a 200hp car will dyno at ~170hp at the wheels on a Dynojet.

There is no way that it'll dyno at ~200hp at the hub, which is essentially the wheels. That would mean that you lose ~30hp by bolting on your tires.

Right?

 

[RbSX]

Originally posted by: TuffGuy
Yeah, I did a little research and educated myself a little. I updated my prior post.

I'm gonna call shenanigans though... If you take into account 15% drivetrain loss, a 200hp car will dyno at ~170hp at the wheels on a Dynojet.

There is no way that it'll dyno at ~200hp at the hub, which is essentially the wheels. That would mean that you lose ~30hp by bolting on your tires.

Right?

You're about right, I've never seen a stock RSX-S dyno at about 190.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: TuffGuy
Yeah, I did a little research and educated myself a little. I updated my prior post.

I'm gonna call shenanigans though... If you take into account 15% drivetrain loss, a 200hp car will dyno at ~170hp at the wheels on a Dynojet.

There is no way that it'll dyno at ~200hp at the hub, which is essentially the wheels. That would mean that you lose ~30hp by bolting on your tires.

Right?

Well that's the news, the civic SI maybe underrated. The claim is 210 HP rated, 05 RSX-S dyno 190 HP at the axles on that same dyno.

Same thing happened with the SRT-4, depending on year/rating, some dyno more at the wheels than the engine is rated for.

The website is reputable anyways, I've personally seen their dynojet numbers reproduceable at dyno meets I've attended on a couple of the models they've reviewed. No guarantee, but I'd say more likely than not at this point.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: RyanSengara

Originally posted by: TuffGuy
Yeah, I did a little research and educated myself a little. I updated my prior post.

I'm gonna call shenanigans though... If you take into account 15% drivetrain loss, a 200hp car will dyno at ~170hp at the wheels on a Dynojet.

There is no way that it'll dyno at ~200hp at the hub, which is essentially the wheels. That would mean that you lose ~30hp by bolting on your tires.

Right?

You're about right, I've never seen a stock RSX-S dyno at about 190.

#1) this is an axle dyno, not a wheel dyno, so it will read a couple percent higher
#2) the 05 RSX-S has increased power, rated 210 HP

 

[TuffGuy]

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: TuffGuy
Yeah, I did a little research and educated myself a little. I updated my prior post.

I'm gonna call shenanigans though... If you take into account 15% drivetrain loss, a 200hp car will dyno at ~170hp at the wheels on a Dynojet.

There is no way that it'll dyno at ~200hp at the hub, which is essentially the wheels. That would mean that you lose ~30hp by bolting on your tires.
Right?

Well that's the news, the civic SI maybe underrated. The claim is 210 HP rated, 05 RSX-S dyno 190 HP at the axles on that same dyno.

Same thing happened with the SRT-4, depending on year/rating, some dyno more at the wheels than the engine is rated for.

The website is reputable anyways, I've personally seen their dynojet numbers reproduceable at dyno meets I've attended on a couple of the models they've reviewed. No guarantee, but I'd say more likely than not at this point.

I disagree. If you take into consideration 15% drivetrain loss, 198whp translates into 233hp at the crank.

New cars are tested using the new SAE NET standard, so the 197 hp at 7,800 rpm is accurate. Which is "coincidentally" what the dyno was "at the hub," after the drivetrain loss. I don't know where you're getting that it's rated at 210hp.

 

[Xylitol]

Type-S

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: TuffGuy
Yeah, I did a little research and educated myself a little. I updated my prior post.

I'm gonna call shenanigans though... If you take into account 15% drivetrain loss, a 200hp car will dyno at ~170hp at the wheels on a Dynojet.

There is no way that it'll dyno at ~200hp at the hub, which is essentially the wheels. That would mean that you lose ~30hp by bolting on your tires.
Right?

Well that's the news, the civic SI maybe underrated. The claim is 210 HP rated, 05 RSX-S dyno 190 HP at the axles on that same dyno.

Same thing happened with the SRT-4, depending on year/rating, some dyno more at the wheels than the engine is rated for.

The website is reputable anyways, I've personally seen their dynojet numbers reproduceable at dyno meets I've attended on a couple of the models they've reviewed. No guarantee, but I'd say more likely than not at this point.

I disagree. If you take into consideration 15% drivetrain loss, 198whp translates into 233hp at the crank.

New cars are tested using the new SAE NET standard, so the 197 hp at 7,800 rpm is accurate. Which is "coincidentally" what the dyno was "at the hub," after the drivetrain loss. I don't know where you're getting that it's rated at 210hp.

What i was saying is the 05 RSX-S is rated 210 HP.

 

[OS]

all that article is saying is that the new civic SI makes more power on the same dyno, than the 05 RSX-S (which is rated 210 HP). You can make your own conclusions from there on.

 

[TuffGuy]

Originally posted by: OS
all that article is saying is that the new civic SI makes more power on the same dyno, than the 05 RSX-S (which is rated 210 HP). You can make your own conclusions from there on.

It means that the '05 RSX-S was overrated (210hp), that the new '06 RSX-S is properly rated (201hp), and that it wasn't an actual "dyno". Using whatever correction factors it used, it calculated the crank hp.

06 vs 05 RSX-S

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

Originally posted by: OS
all that article is saying is that the new civic SI makes more power on the same dyno, than the 05 RSX-S (which is rated 210 HP). You can make your own conclusions from there on.

It means that the '05 RSX-S was overrated (210hp), that the new '06 RSX-S is properly rated (201hp), and that it wasn't an actual "dyno". Using whatever correction factors it used, it calculated the crank hp.

06 vs 05 RSX-S

If you're truly interested in an explanation of the correction factor, you can read all the comments, two guys "jeff" and "notyper" run the site. Glancing at something and holding a belief won't make it true.

 

[TuffGuy]

Man, you're an engineer, use your brain. The new revision to J1349 is what's causing the revised horsepower ratings. To achieve the certification, ratings must be repeatable to within 1% of the advertised numbers.

An even 200 was the planned horsepower rating, but the new SAE ratings system cut that number back to 197 hp at 7,800 rpm.

Don't you find it suspect that a car that just just had its numbers adjusted under the new system, which states that they must be repeatable to within 1%, dynoes at 197 "hub hp", which would put the actual crank hp at around 230hp?

Last time I checked, 230hp is not within 1% of 197hp.