Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Bliggida

'00 RSX-S & '87 Mustang GT

83 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

the nsxc.com rsx wasnt modified. those were all places that tested the rsx s stock. and that site that blig gave were all guys that own the cars and have done work to them. have u had ur stock t/a times posted on a drag racing site?? i mean seriosuly just think about what you are comparing. same horsepower, rsx gets the medal in the tranny, weight to ratio, higher rpm, longer power band, acura's clean running almost perfectly tuned stock engines not a sloppy american motor. all the camaro has is a little more torque. which wont make the big heavy car go any faster on the 1/4 mile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me and Blig were talking about that last night, and we discussed how much better the V6 could handle if it had a 6 speed, stock. It COULD add another half second or slightly more to the time for the fact the gearing would be better. It would result in being able to run a slightly higher rear end, and still have the same fuel ecomonmy and better speed. Those V6 Camaros and Firebirds aren't THAT fast, but they're fairly quick for 200 horses. A 6 speed option would've been a cool option for the V6 to have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The V6 Camaro doesn't need a 6-speed tranny, a 6 speed tranny doesn't help performance. It's a matter of driveability. A 6-speed allows you to run a more stout final drive ratio (which will help performance) and still have highway cruising.

To my knowledge the RSX-S does have a 4.11 +- final drive ratio, compared to the V6 Camaro's 3.23, or 3.42 rear end.

 

Why is it so hard to conceive that the car with a better

power-to-weight-ratio by 24% would at the very least pull even with the RSX-S. You kinda slam me for hanging on to this wild fantasy that the V6 Camaro will run even or (heaven forbid go faster) yet, you sit there and praise the RSX-S almost blindly.

I've seen what the V6 Camaro can do in person! I've driven one! I own one! I've seen them raced at the track! That first website, said "15.2" - once again everyone but Car&Driver (up till December) says the RSX-S is on average about a 15.5 car.

The second website said

. In stock form, the 200-horsepower Acura RSX Type-S runs the quarter-mile in 14.8 seconds at 95 mph

They didn't say "Our RSX-S went 14.8 They said The RSX-S - all they did was quote Car and Driver. They didn't post that time, nor did they make implication they posted that time. Everyone who says 14.8 is posting Car and Drivers timeslip for dear life. While real RSX-S owners are going out there and posting 15.5 to 15 flat quartermile times. Which is about dead even with the V6 Camaro.

 

How on earth is 143 ft/lbs. vs 225 ft/lbs. a fair fight - anywhich way you slice it? Not only do I think the Camaro V6 would pull even, based on the physics alone it isn't far off to say the Camaro V6 has the edge here. The only place the RSX-S has the edge is in the final drive ratio. And I don't believe that a 4.11 is going to make up for 83 ft/lbs. of torque! Not against a 3.42. Maybe against a 3.08, or a 2.43, but a 3.42 is on the weaker side of a performance rear end.

 

I think they are both 15 flat cars with good drivers that know what they are doing. Honestly I think the Camaro has the edge, but not the clear cut winner. I think it would truly be a clutch race. I am aware that there are a good number of F-body's I listed that were modified. But, if you go down to the bottom of the list, and look for the slowest '98-'02 5-speed cars. They are running a 15.5 on average leading me to believe that they have a good chance of being stock compared to the cars towards the top of the list.

 

Put it this way, the best non Car & Driver time I have seen for the RSX-S is 15.2 If we can agree that the Camaro 'hypothetically' runs a 15.5. That's 3/10's of a second difference. Not exactly: murdering, blow-the-doors-off, eating, spanking, burning etc., the Camaro V6 is it? 3/10's is a car length.

You've only heard of an RSX-S going 14.8 - I have physically seen a stock V6 Camaro go 14.5 once. I didn't think it was stock, I looked for myself and spotted nothing aftermarket about it. To assume the guy had an all internal engine is far fetched, and I didn't see a nitrous bottle, and I own the car to know where you can hide one. The same with the rear end as the engine, it could be all internal but that's a little far-fetched - I would speculate a person would do the intake/exhaust deal first. Maybe he had some good tires on it, but they weren't slicks, they were in the stock 235 size, I checked!

 

Like I said I believe they are closely matched. I'm not sure who would win consistantly over the other, but I don't believe the RSX-S is as fast as you seem to think it is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why I've been searching the net for NSX and V6 Camaro 1/4 time slots to see if that would end the "battle". But then again, finding that info on the net wouldn't verify if either car was modded. I for one would like to see both cars on the track in person. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 spds do help performance and 1/4 mile times more than u think. it allows a closer gear ratio when you are banging through them so u get to the power a lot faster. im not saying the rsx s would truly murder the v6 camaro. but i still think it would beat it consistently. i also dont think any v6 "muscle car" is fast for a v6. obviously not if a 4 banger hangs with it consistently. too me it just doesnt seem like a big enough gap between the 4 banger and the v6 now that i think about it. the faster of both can be a 15.0 and the middle of both is a low 16 to mid 16. i dont praise the rsx s at all. i really dont like them all that much. but we are comparing it to a v6 camaro, so im going to strongly back up my belief that the rsx s is faster. personally i would rather have an rsx s also, but im not allowing any bias from it. i just think its faster. i know the camaro ss is faster but i would still rather have a cobra mustang. anyway, plz dont bring up that often that the guy pulled a 14.5 in the v6 camaro because it really is irrelevant. thats a once in a lifetime thing right there. we are talking about consistency here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Show me consistant 14.8's on the RSX-S other than Car&Driver, and I'll shut up!

 

Everyone else with an RSX-S runs 15.5!

 

I never said the V6 Camaro was a "Muscle car" so don't go putting words into my mouth. Fact is, stock for stock it will fend off almost any rice attack, period.

 

Anyway, I hope you know that I like ya Turbo and this in no way means that I have any ill feelings towards you!

 

...I asked Santa for a G-Tech Pro, to which she (mom) said, "Whatsa G-tech Probe? Where's that go?" I about died! anyway we'll see. I'm suppose to have some financial backing to getting my bike running again and as much as I would absolutely love a G-Tech Pro, my bike takes presidence. But If I do get one, I'll have my neighbor video our best time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

g tech probe. lol thats funny. i didnt mean to put words in ur mouth blig. ill never come up with the proof of a 14.8 just as u most likely wont have the proof of consisten 15.0. but im sure there is a lot of rsx s pulling faster than a 15.5s ive only seen one and it ran a 15.7 up here at altitude. so down at sea level thats at least a 15.0. the rsx s isnt your average ricer, ricer are under 18 thousand dollars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
- Back to Top -

×