Ouch.

My recent Car and Driver says 0 - 60 in 6.1 and 1320 in 14.8.

If C & D can get that then if driven hard, they should be sub 6 and mid 14s.

I don't want one but I don't want to lose to one either.

Hmmmm . . . ..

 

good god, with a 6.1 0-60 that thing should be better than 14.8 in the 1/4. that's a bit bloated...

 

maybe at low speeds the car moves faster and at higher speeds it doesn't so it can manage to get 6.1 at 0-60 but 14.8 for 1/4 mile

 

what sense does that make? Isnt it a 4 banger shouldnt it be slow 0-60 but decent quarter?

 

those times do sound a bit strange

 

maybe the 1st and 2nd gears are short?

 

the only thing i can think of is that it must be in the gearing. short 1 and 2 and long others... can you post what the mph is in the 1/4?

 

Due to the nature of the engine [read: low on torque], all of the gearing is short. The final drive is upwards of 4.5:1.

A 6.1 second spring to 60 suggests that the car hooks up really well. With that in mind and, given the fact that all the highly-strung DOHC VTEC 4-cylinders make their power way up high, you'd think the quarter-mile time would be quicker. I, too, am curious as to the MPH they achieved. Perhaps they collected this data on different runs and simply got a less than optimal launch at the dragstrip??

 

Jaysus, their final drive 4.5:1! What's their top speed, 100? And ya, the engine has no down low power and thats why i was surprised it did so well in the 60 and so bad in the 1/4.

 

That car is damn ugly! It is probably quick but don't get too caught up in the magazine crap...just go up against one and see how it does.

 

If I recall correctly, the trap speed was 95 mph. I think the 0 - 100 was 16.4.

Everyone's comments are interesting since I initially posted it as 14.3. That made sense to me but then I got to thinking that wasn't what the mag said - when I checked, it was 14.8.

As for gearing, it is also a six speed.

Obviously, it is getting off the line quickly. Unfortunately, even a stock 5spd max is going to have a hard time catching it.

 

interesting car......

 

I've gotta check the numbers again to see what the 30-50 and 50 - 70 times are. If it is only turning 14.8 with a 6.1, then we (5spds) ought to be able to take it from a roll.

 

If those numbers are right then it's decently quicker than the GS-R it replaces. A 95MPH trap speed isn't bad, but the times... I dunno.

When it was normally-aspirated, my 1997 GS-R ran 93MPH with a few bolt-ons: that was RIGHT at the rev limiter in 3rd gear. The RSX-S's 1st-4th gears are shorter than the GS-R if I remember correctly; and the redline is slightly lower, so it may mean that you end up going through the traps in 4th... maybe they granny-shifted the 3-4.. who knows. It'll be interesting to see how they do "in person."

 

At least it wasn't Motor Trend that was testing, or else we would have gotten sub 6 0-60s and 14.0 flat quarters. They do have that special thing for getting numbers out of Hondas that no one else can reproduce.

 

That's one quick Paseo!

 

Tell ya guys what, the RSX Type S is MUCH better looking in person. I sat in one a couple weekends ago at a concert sponsered by Acura. The interior is awesome and same goes for the shift linkage. The wheels are also VERY nice.

If C&D can get a 14.8@95mph out of the Type S, that means it's an easy mid 14 second car. If you guys remember, C&D and MT have only been able to get 14.8-15.2 out of the ITRs. No bad performance, but there are other cars out there I'd rather have for $24K.......WRX.


Dave

 

The JDM 200hp Integra Type-R does quarter mile in 14.94sec. The Silvia with 220hp does it in 15.13sec. This shows the good gear ratio honda done to the Type-R cars. Information from Best Motoring 2000 March

Imagine the RSX Type-R, it will be a faster car than the RSX tested by C/D.