how would a 4th gen auto do against a rsx type s manual?

 

Maxima will run away with the win.

 

stock for stock the rsx-s will have it.... those things are pretty quick.....

 

RSX-S: high-14 to mid-15 depending on driver
4G Max auto: usually high-15's

 

if he has basic bolt-ons then it is a definite loss. They run high 13's and low 14's modded depending on driver, and high 14's to low 15's stock.

 

no contest, a base manual rsx is probably more comparable to an auto 4thgen

stick 4thgen to rsx s, the edge goin to the rsx more in the high end

can a rsx-s hit high 13s with basic mods? i would guess low 14s at best......

 

I beat an rsx-s with intake/headers/full exhaust/vtec conroller. But I have a 5speed with intake/ypipe/heavy 17"rims. I only had him by 1/2 a car from a dig up to the top of 3rd. I thought he would pull away a little but it ended pretty close. It was pretty much a driver's race.

I bet if we were to switch cars I would beat my max. It all depends on the driver and it seemed to me that he wasn't that great of a driver judging by his launch. I took off nice and smooth feathering the clutch while he spun like crazy. When we pulled over he said his car is so light thats why it spins?!? whatever. doesn't make sense to me.
-Paul

 

No just means he does not have enough weight or downforce on the frotn wheels.

 

There are several people on clubrsx.com that have run high 13's with bolt-ons. This includes I/H/E/ECU/IM gasket. There are also many that run low 14's. I have seen one at the track many times with I/H/ECU that runs 14.2's at 99mph.

 

There are a few of them that have done it. Keep in mind the RSX-S is a harder car to drag race than a 4th gen maxima is because it has so little torque. They are pretty fast cars though. Mod for mod with good drivers in each I would give the RSX the advantage.

 

but to achieve these high 13 sec passes on basic mods, i would assume the driver would have to hit high 14s stock, which i RARELY see???

how bout celica gts, type r's, neone see/think they can hit high 13s with basic modifications?

 

No, yes, yes. With the SRT4 its cake. With Type R its possible I have two friends who run 13s in them with just basic mods, celicas don't have a chance in hell unless they are on slicks.

 

I took my friends type s, s standing for ****, in my bone stock 4th gen 5pd. I have it on video to. He's bone stock and so am I. We hit it from a light and I got his front bumper to my side mirror and by the end of second his front bumper at my rear bumper.

 

well srt4, no doubt, modern TURBO car, even in stock they can probably hit high 13s, and minor mods with boost controller, probably 12s.....

but i never really expected a type R and type S to get high 13s....... wow

which one is faster btw?
i gotta watch out for them in the future......

 

The type R is a faster car than the type S is.

 

The Acura will stomp a 4th gen. They have around 200 hp and under 3000 curb weight, i think its around 2800 or so, thats a nice power to weight. If you got a friend with one, race him for fun. Cant hurt, he'll probly get ya tho

 

the RSX-S is a very capable car. Being an acura owner, many people with these high redline, light weight cars cant drive them very well. Any type R or RSX-s you see running mid to low 15's was not properly driven. most run 14.7-14.9 and with exceptional drivers mid 14's have been seen in a stock type R.

there are many bolt on type R and RSX-S in the 13's. it just seems that people have a hard time with driving these cars. Personally I own an Acura integra GSR and many people think its a high 15sec car stock and only good for high 14's with a bunch of bolt on's. High 14's are fairly common on a GSR with only intake over at the integra boards. my car is pretty lightly modded, intake, catback, clutch, flywheel, STS and its a mid 14sec car.

auto max will get beat up pretty badly by a well driven RSX-s, but a manual maxima is much closer. When asking if you can beat a car with your car, many people will give you experiences of their own, but before that... think about what the CAR is capable of, not the driver.

 

^^^

that is why i think a rsx base model manual vs the auto 4th gen is probably more comparable

???

 

I think acura boy is impresive. So I guess car and driver and acura it's self is just dead wrong about the fact that a type r can only run 15.3 at sea level. I guess your just a better driver the those stupid head pro's huh. If I hear one more person say that type Sh!ty's are faster than they are I'm gunna puke. Those car's suck. I have on video Me pulling a type s in my bone stock 95 se 5spd. And I happen to know the other driver and he's my friend and no he doe'nt drive ****ty. I also have that same car versus my other friends spec v with cai. and he barely barely takes spec v until 3rd gear v tech. You guys know we can beat spec v's. Look at the type s, spec v stats befor posting this bull ****. There almost the same. Jessus listening to a fancy honda owner is waking up and into a ****ing wall every morning. What's next he's gunna infect the org with kill story's??? acura drivers are just so..........

 

http://www.car-stats.com/stats/shows...tsgivenid.aspx
And this is at sea level, with profesional drivers, runing aired down tires, with no spare in the truck. These times are all of off car and driver, read there fine print on how they obtaine there quarter mile data.

 

fastest rated type r by mags was 14.7
rsx s 14.8
MAXIMA, 15.2.....

we have torque, but those hondas have better hp/weight ratio, 3rd gear = byebye

but those cars r difficult to launch and drive, and since its never equal drivers, its a toss up

 

You are one ignorant p r i c k. Do you realize you are basing your assumpsions on magazine stats. 15.2 and 14.7 are just f u c k i n g numbers. We've all heard of people running 14.8s in there stock 5speed max and not everybody runs the magazine numbers. I have driven an rsx-s and 3rd gear pulls harder than my max with i/y. It's only the low end that makes it hard to drive, lack of torque.


Try racing your friend with the rsx-s from a 3rd gear roll from 60mph and see what happens. You'll be surprised.
-Paul

 

1) The people who drive cars for magazines are professional WRITERS not professional drivers, so you can drop that point right there.

2) The WRITERS who drive the cars for magazine articles have posession of the car for about a day, 3 days tops. Do you really think you could get into a car you've never driven before and drive it to perfection in 1-3 days? Didn't think so.

3) Your obvious reliance on magazine times proves to everyone here with real racing experience that you don't have a clue what goes on in the real world. I believe that you beat your buddies RSX-S. That's not the issue. The issue is that you think that every driver is the same, and especially the fact that you think magazine times are as good as it gets. Go look up the magazine times for a 5spd 4th gen. In 4 years of production, not a single magazine ran faster than 15.2. My first run EVER, at 111,000 miles, 800ft above sea level, in 85 degree weather and 70% humidity, I ran 14.9. Later that day I ran 14.8. Another driver on this board ran a 14.7 in his stock 97. Don't get it confused... magazines use professional writers, not professional drivers.

4) Get to the track and stop spewing magazine numbers like they are gospel. They aren't, they are just ballpark numbers.

Next time it might be a good idea to know what you're talking about before you get schooled.

 

Well actualy bud,
I'm not saying all drivers are the same. And befor you jump my **** about never being to the track jump his. He should go to a real track and see real rsx's run. I get so sick of them being so over rated. Maybe some mad pro driver some where can make them run sick but in life that me and you see they suck. I don't think all drivers are the same. I don't think mag numbers are gospel either. But definetly not punks that say type r's run 13's with average bolt on's. In fact magazine's say that vg third gens are good for 16.9 at sea level new. and I got my old stock one to run that at mile high elevation with 180k on it. So all i'm saying is look both way's befor you decide to jump somebody's ****, because you didn't school **** mother ****er.

 

You can't win this so you might as well stop arguing. My experience > your magazine racing + inexperience.

I have seen two (count, 1, 2) Type Rs run 13s with basic bolt ons with my own two eyeballs. I have seen it happen over and over again. I'm not saying it's the average for them. I'm saying with a good driver it can be done. I am good friends with these guys and we head to the track at least once a month together, usually more. You look like an idiot, spouting off at the mouth, cursing on the internet til your face is red, only to have a bunch of little asterisks (those are the little stars * incase you aren't aware) show up and block out your words.

You got schooled by almost every person on this thread, most people on here are not living in the same dream world you are. We've seen these cars at the track running the times we are claiming to have seen them run, and then there's you with your miniscule knowledge based upon the track times in a magazine that some Joe Shmo journalist happened to put down, after driving the car for like 4 hours total, and your one experience racing some ******* who probably can't drive and you have the nerve to call us punks and say go to a real track and watch real cars race?

What do you think I spend my weekends doing from April to October? What do you think I do at the 11 different 1/4 tracks I've been to (Stanton, Milan, Martin, Route 66, Byron, US41, Osceola, Norwalk, GLD, Lapeer, Ubly) in my state and the neighboring 4 states (Indiana, Ohio, Illinois and Wisconsin, I live in Michigan). What do you think I do at the national import events in which I have raced, and placed competitively. What do you think I've learned from the more than 250 (thats right two hundred and fifty) 1/4 mile passes I've made, in addition to the road racing events in which I've competed.

I'll tell you what I do. I size up the competition. I research it, I talk to the owners, and I watch the cars run.

So who's the punk now. The guy with the racing experience, who's probably spent more time racing his car than you have spent in your car, ever. Or the guy who reads magazines and thinks that journalists are also professional race car drivers. Who's the punk again, I forgot?

 

click video in my sig - im not sure now what type it is ? i have type s and its manual. the best i saw the guy run was a 14.7

 

New integra type Rs (thats what they call the RSX in japan) aren't available in the US or canada. That's a type S.

 

gotcha ...you are correct neal !

 

I have intake and y pipe. What else you think i need besides supercharger,turbo,nitrous,mevi? I was thinking about adding ud pulley, catback, dr mod.

 

if he has the comptech headers youre done.(bad experience)

 

Have tthey ome out with turbos or superchargers for the rsx yet? that could be trouble

 

The RSX-S is very quick. They are also very hard to drive fast because of low torque. Race him and let us know, if he can drive you will be owned.

LEMAR

 

What about just the base RSX model.. manual of course.. Friend at school thinks hes hot **** in his blue RSX mommy bought him. I think its like a 2000...

can a max 5 speed with a y pipe take it down?

 

quote:
Try racing your friend with the rsx-s from a 3rd gear roll from 60mph and see what happens. You'll be surprised.
-Paul

I disagree. The RSX showed a good 0-60 time (6.1) and a 14.8 quarter
since the 0-60 is pretneir a second faster than a stock 5-speed but only about four tenths a second faster in the quarter tells me the max takes the rsx on top end.

 

Power to weight analysis of a 4g 5spd vs RSX-S



The Max has a slim advantage in the low-end and mid-range, but in the last 1/8th mile the RSX-S will blow the Max right out of the water. A skilled driver in an RSX-S will take a 4g manual, but due to the low-torque high-rev launch required on the RSX, it's a driver's race.

 

Please don't ever discuss magazine times again in here because they mean nothing and you cannot compare them, thanks.

RSX-S vs 4th Gen (stock vs stock) is the RSX all the way up top.