my buddy wants me to race his friends rsx type s, i have a 1990 300zx n/a, 5 spd, with some mods done to it, since i know nothing about the car i was just wondering how you guys think the race would go

If ur 300zx was stock the rsx would win...but not by much, since u've done mods its prob even now.

What does the RSX have as far as mods?

Hey gradyman as for you racing the acura rsx I can tell you about my experience with one in my stock 93 z28. I got behind one that is all riced out with a license plate that says "wantsome". Well I had heard about the car from my friend because of the license plate. Well I happened to get behind him going to my grandmothers house for dinner. We were behind a slow poke but eventually the slow poke had to stop and wait on oncoming traffic to turn left. Once the oncoming traffic passed and the slow poke turned left I pulled out from behind a brand new riced out acura rsx type r type s who cares as soon as i changed lanes he nailed it well i pulled right by him what a joke. Then after a little straight away theirs a wierd banked turn and then my grandmothers road turns really sharp back the other way. Well I came in there in my camaro fast because it handles "really well" HAhahahaha then I look in the mirror to see if he follows me and I see him slide all the way across the road and into a ditch, then slams into a bank and cocks it up on two wheels. I guess he "gotsome". Since your N/A 300zx is so much better than my camaro you should have zero problems with the acura rsx.

lol, once again in another post talking trash, are you 16 or something, you kids always get on these forums and talk shit, your car in every sense is faster than mine, but it wont handle like mine, thats all i said, so please stop your child's play

plus the maximum amount of letters that are on a license plate are 7, therefore making it impossible for his to say "wantsome" just thought i would point that out

well in northcarolina you can have 8 characters on a personalized plate thats just the way it is. Im not talking trash just want you to accept the fact that any stock car with 200 to 300 horsepower no matter what it is, is fair game in handling ability. Driver skill plays the biggest part. If your judging handling ability by how fast the car will go without gettting loose thats wrong. If your not sliding your not driving as fast as the car can go. Im saying that even though my camaro slides I can make it handle and go around the track as fast as a 300zx or a 350z. I am not 16 I am 22 and have a lot of experience builiding engines and tuning cars. Just look at my ftp site ftp://filesrus.sytes.net to see pictures of the car I just built with a direct port nitrous setup. You can log in with a user name of gradyman and a password of gradyman. I think you will see im much more inteligent than you think. I'm also a computer whiz and have a college education. Evidently the 300zx must not be any better than a z28 because they run in the same scca solo 2 category F stock but the 350z is better because it is in B stock with bmw M roadsters and m3's and 928 and 944 porsches and turbo 90+ 300zx but I keep up. Just wait till I go back again this was my first try. The N/A 300zx's are in my group so maybe there will be some at the next event I'll let you know how they measure up.

Originally posted by lsr313
Hey gradyman as for you racing the acura rsx I can tell you about my experience with one in my stock 93 z28. I got behind one that is all riced out with a license plate that says "wantsome". Well I had heard about the car from my friend because of the license plate. Well I happened to get behind him going to my grandmothers house for dinner. We were behind a slow poke but eventually the slow poke had to stop and wait on oncoming traffic to turn left. Once the oncoming traffic passed and the slow poke turned left I pulled out from behind a brand new riced out acura rsx type r type s who cares as soon as i changed lanes he nailed it well i pulled right by him what a joke. Then after a little straight away theirs a wierd banked turn and then my grandmothers road turns really sharp back the other way. Well I came in there in my camaro fast because it handles "really well" HAhahahaha then I look in the mirror to see if he follows me and I see him slide all the way across the road and into a ditch, then slams into a bank and cocks it up on two wheels. I guess he "gotsome". Since your N/A 300zx is so much better than my camaro you should have zero problems with the acura rsx.


ahahah........... got to love this...................I got only love for the other side now:D

Having trouble understanding the exact meaning of your post elaborate a little more please.:confused:

Love for the GM's cause we both have one common dislike

a 93 camaro outhandle a 2002/2003 rsx, ha, now that is comedy

what makes u guys so sure that an 4 cylinder 200 hp i-vtec will win against a 1990 na 5 speed with one of nissan's most reliable and powerful(for it's time) the VG series?? that is putting out at least 225 hp...
correct me if i am wrong but the 300 would whup the shit out of the rsx...but i could be wrong...so no flaming just trying to learn here.

does power to weight ratio mean anything to u?
:sly:

does power to weight ratio mean anything to u?
:sly:
:iagree: the z weighs more the the rsx and the non turbo version only has 222hp to be exact, not atleast 225. i do agree that the z's base engine is strong and has great potential if modifed,but when it comes to handling i go for the rsx, when it comes to straight away maybe the z if they are lucky cause if u think about its almost even. the z has 22 more horses but the rsx weighs less. with the twin turbo version that makes 300hp thats another story, but come on now its twin turbo. imo though thats pathetic, 2 turbo's both making 77hp? but on that topic of a camaro having better handling, please. that is the dumbest thing i've heard, domestics has the advantage on straight road , but when it comes to turns imports rule. the only explanation if this really happened is the driver of the rsx can't drive, what a disopointment.

went to do some research just to confirm what i wrote was true, and it was. the rsx type-s is actually faster the the z by .2 secs
(rsx-s 1/4 mile=15.2, z's 1/4 mile=15.4)
weight of rsx=2775lbs
w of z=3221lbs
w of camaro= 3510lbs, this thing weighs freakin 900+ lbs more!

w of camaro= 3510lbs, this thing weighs freakin 900+ lbs more!


Dont forget the Camaro has 183ft-lbs of torque more than the RSX Type S.

Camaro's Torque - 325
RSX Type S - 142

Torque is really whats important, Horsepower just happens to be a byproduct of torque.

Dont forget the Camaro has 183ft-lbs of torque more than the RSX Type S.

Camaro's Torque - 325
RSX Type S - 142

Torque is really whats important, Horsepower just happens to be a byproduct of torque.

yes and so what is ur point? are ur trying to tell me the camaro is faster or something? how about u tell me something i don't know. the comparison was between the rsx and the z. i put the weight of the camaro just to show the huge gap, and how this can be a huge role for handling on corners which is refering to the guy's post on how his z28 was handling better than the rsx, something i highly doubt.the only reason the camaro is so fast is because it has a massive v8 engine, but hey when u can pump out 100 bhp per liter instead of the measley 53hp per liter then u can brag.

yes and so what is ur point? are ur trying to tell me the camaro is faster or something? how about u tell me something i don't know. the comparison was between the rsx and the z. i put the weight of the camaro just to show the huge gap, and how this can be a huge role for handling on corners which is refering to the guy's post on how his z28 was handling better than the rsx, something i highly doubt.the only reason the camaro is so fast is because it has a massive v8 engine, but hey when u can pump out 100 bhp per liter instead of the measley 53hp per liter then u can brag.


When will you realise that Horsepower per liter means nothing? If you're making 200hp from a 2.0L motor thats great... but my motor is still making over 2 times that amount at 425hp, which equates to 67hp per liter (6.3L). A RSX with 200hp has a power to weight ratio of 13.8:1. My car with 425hp @ 3200lbs has a power to weight ratio of 7.5:1. As you can see the RSX maybe the more efficient car, but I'm still 'better'. The RSX can talk mad crap about having 100hp per liter while he watches me walk him up and down the street.

I could care less if your motor is 'more efficient'. Truth of the matter is, once Honda motors reach the higher RPM's or in the RSX's case Vtec they suck gas down almost as much as my motor does. If you dont believe me ask somebody who has a motor with Vtec, heck even my best friends stock 90 Civic Si sucks gas down when you put the pedal to the floor through a few gears. My buddies 2000 Civic Si will drink the gas like a V8 when it engages Vtec... its incredible how inefficent these efficient motors get once taken into their powerbands. If you want to play with the V8s, you gotta use gas like them. Which is sad but true... :(

I'd hate to sound like a dick, but this whole arguement about power per liter is just dumb. Especially when it doesn't mean diddly. As for the comments about the '93 Camaro Z28 being a better handler than a RSX Type S... The Camaro handles good stock, more so than most people will want to admit. But I'll agree the RSX probably can turn the tighter corner and hold the pavement easier. Unless the guy in the riced out RSX was a horrible driver... I just don't see it happening.

:2cents:

When will you realise that Horsepower per liter means nothing? If you're making 200hp from a 2.0L motor thats great... but my motor is still making over 2 times that amount at 425hp, which equates to 67hp per liter (6.3L). A RSX with 200hp has a power to weight ratio of 13.8:1. My car with 425hp @ 3200lbs has a power to weight ratio of 7.5:1. As you can see the RSX maybe the more efficient car, but I'm still 'better'. The RSX can talk mad crap about having 100hp per liter while he watches me walk him up and down the street.

I could care less if your motor is 'more efficient'. Truth of the matter is, once Honda motors reach the higher RPM's or in the RSX's case Vtec they suck gas down almost as much as my motor does. If you dont believe me ask somebody who has a motor with Vtec, heck even my best friends stock 90 Civic Si sucks gas down when you put the pedal to the floor through a few gears. My buddies 2000 Civic Si will drink the gas like a V8 when it engages Vtec... its incredible how inefficent these efficient motors get once taken into their powerbands. If you want to play with the V8s, you gotta use gas like them. Which is sad but true... :(

I'd hate to sound like a dick, but this whole arguement about power per liter is just dumb. Especially when it doesn't mean diddly. As for the comments about the '93 Camaro Z28 being a better handler than a RSX Type S... The Camaro handles good stock, more so than most people will want to admit. But I'll agree the RSX probably can turn the tighter corner and hold the pavement easier. Unless the guy in the riced out RSX was a horrible driver... I just don't see it happening.

:2cents:

horsepower per liter means nothing? please. u do sound like a red neck,it means people are actually using their brains and applying technology into thier vehicles to get high performance gains and at the same time making them fuel effecient. lets do some basic math, if and when honda decide to a v8, apply the numbers from the rsx output into lets say a 6.3l engine which is the same as urs, but what the heck lets bring the hp down just to make it fair to lets say 90, and what u get? a horrific number of 567 per liter on a stock car, 100+ more than what ur car makes. going to another topic u brought up, of course the si will consume more fuel, when it reaches vtec, common sense the motor is working harder then its use to, but if u gonna compare a v8 and a honda on fuel effeciency, the honda will still no doubt gonna win even when it hits vtec, its just consuming more than usual, and its not like a person's gonna be driving at 5500+ rpm's every day everywhere he goes. even though honda makes their car's to be more economical, the motors they make are definately one of the best created in the world, they just have no reason to make some high performance v10 super car in a already croede country. im getting from ur post it sounds like ur hating because even with all those hp u have it still doesn't match the bhp per liter from the rsx. how about u stop drinking ur hatorade.

on another issue i don't know why ur trying to a compare a camaro with an rsx? how about u open ur eyes and look at the big picture, camaro=v8, rsx=4cyl. they are in two totally different class. im visualizying u as a bully who likes to pick are the little guys. how bout u go race the big boys ur size like the porshe 911, acura nsx, or supra, then we'll see who wins? how about an even comparison, wait about 1 more year for the v8 nsx and compared that to the camaro, u'll see the importance of bhp per liter. i don't go around with my teg trying to smoke minivans and station wagons, and talk shit, thats pathetic. also what car do u drive? its definately not no camaro by the specs ur giving me, and is it even stock, which i definately doubt. my hypothesis is that ur vehicle is modified, and ur trying to compare that to a stock rsx?

on a last note u remind me of a guy i met here, he has a muscle car which he race against civics and integs which imo is only lightly modified like i/h/e. im not gonna lie he wins and he talks all this crap about imports, the ironic thing is he doesn't have any proof these car are crap, they are just slower, well the ones he raced. people even gave him a hard time when he came into the integra forum because he told his story of beating the imports. but if modified correctly an integra can obtain over 600+ hp from a tiny 1.8 l engine.ok well one day at a car auction he sees this beautiful car sitting in a corner, and right away he fell in love with it. the ironic part of it was the man never thought he would ever drive if even owning this type of vehicle. the car was a 92 integra gs. now he wants to modify it, thats the reason why he came into the forum, i help him out on some his questions, and he's willing to put in 15-20 g's into the modifications. now hes presently trying to fix it up, the goal was to put as much into it as possible in order to try to achieve a nine sec car. the point of the story is ur the same man as he was, just waiting for his import if not an integ to show up. i've been studying psychology for two semester now and i do spot one of the defense mechanism from what i've learned, its called denial.

First off, I don't hate on Imports. I have a lot of respect for them, If you can squeeze 400hp out of a 4 cylinder then more power to you. It's just not my cup of tea. If you knew me, you'd know I'm not a 'bully' and I don't go around starting fights, I just was bored and decided to browse parts of AF that I normally don't.

Quote from http://www.europeanhonda.demon.nl/hondanews6.htm#v8

"Honda to produce its first production V8s.

The next generation NSX and Legend models from Honda will share a brand-new 4.0 litre V8 based on the technology used in the new S2000 sports car. The NSX replacement will be a 380kW all-alloy mid- engined design, while the Legend will use the same engine in detuned form mounted up front but driving the rear wheels. Honda is in no hurry to build the new NSX as its specialist Tochigi factory is already running at full capacity, coping with demand for the S2000, which is running at several times the initial predictions for the car.

While the engine size and configuration should be correct, we seriously doubt the power output of 380 kW, which is approx. 517 HP. More likely is 380 HP, which would be 95 HP/liter ( similar to that of the present NSX ) instead of almost 130 HP/L of the 380 kW.
Of course, it would not be a problem for Honda to built an utterly reliable engine with a specific output of 130 HP/L ( Honda's Super Touring car engines have a spec. output more than 150 HP/L, while Honda's superbike and F1 non-turbo engines have more than 250 HP/L ). But 500 HP or more just does not make sense and Honda fans know that Honda would not indulge itself in a HP-race against such monsters like F550 or Lamborghini Diablo ( rather, Honda will beat them on the RACE track ). Honda built cars which are enjoyable, technologically superior but at the same time ecologically acceptable. Therefore, sorry folks, no 500 plus HP NSX. Expect about 350HP for the NSX and 250 to 300 HP for the Legend. "


I just want to know why you're trying to compare the NSX to the Camaro they're in two seperate leagues. Such as the Camaro and the RSX are in different leagues. I only brought up the Camaro's performance stats to help point out that it would be the better contender in the straight line, And if you read my post again you'll see I'm agreeing with you on the fact that the Camaro although a good sporty handler, it's nothing a good driver in a RSX can't pass up. :p


EDIT: If you're interested in finding out what I drive just click on the Motor in my signature.

i've been studying psychology for two semester now and i do spot one of the defense mechanism from what i've learned, its called denial.

Hate to break the news to you, but I'm not in denial about Imports being a good platform from which to build from to make a good hotrod. Maybe two more semesters of psychology is in order before you're ready to diagnose people from over the internet. :iceslolan :smooch:

u don't hate imports? have u read ur earlier post lately or did someone else write them for u? ur confuse buddy :screwy: , first u say bhp per liter doesn't mean diddly, then u try to say honda's cars are gas guzzlers and put down the company's engineering marvel; vtec. then u try to compare ur modified car to stock rsx,(which is totally unequal) pointing out ur the one with the most hp? yeah ok ur not hating.

my numbers and theory i got for the v-8 nsx were pretty dam close if u asked me, even though i haven't read no article on it yet besides the one u just offered. by using the bhp per liter theory from its smaller engines into a bigger one let saw a v-8, u see that the hp it makes sounds unbelievable but still possible. can ur car do this stock? but again imo honda wouldn't want to make something this powerful because there's no need, especially when japan's to freaken crowded and it supposedly has the limited hp regulation to be under 300hp and its plain out of the ordinary for honda to make a super sport cars when their reputation is known for making economy cars.

now i was comparing the nsx and the camaro because they have a more closer hp output range and almost an acute gap between the engine size although the camaro is still bigger (unless its the v-8 nsx which would be an even engine comparison, but that can't really be compared yet since there isn't a real one in existence). the only major difference from the v-6 version is the price gap, engine layout, and how one is a fwd and the other is a rwd, which really doesn't apply unless they are racing on a track where all the configuration has to be exact. but i wasn't reefering to those differences, again i was comparing them due to engine's similar engine displacement, v-6 and v-8.

as far as the rsx and camaro, i already know the camaro can take it on the straight away which i admit earlier because it simply just has a bigger engine. when it comes to cornering, the handling goes to the rsx, due to its lighter weight and performance suspension.

i don't have a medical degree to diagnose anyone, especially someone online, but i do see the characteristcs of denial. oh the guy who bought the 92 teg, u wanna take a guess on why kind of muscle car he drives? if u guessing chevy nova then thats out-stinkin-standing!. hmmm sounds like someone im writing to don't u think? hint hint. just for ur info his name is bolognie sandwich, u can write to him if u don't believe me heres the thread he started http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/t126657.html. one more question, are u starting to like the pic of my teg yet? :grinyes: go ahead u don't have to deny it, just nod ur head up and down. lol

tran_nsx: Matt has never shown anything but respect for any of my recent cars, which have all been imports. It's not imports he hates, it's idiotic comments like "yah? but my hp-per-liter is better!"http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/disappointed.gif. HP-per-liter might look good on paper, but in the real world it don't mean diddly-squat.

My current car is a 1992 Sentra SE-R with the SR20DE engine which, by your standards, is "inefficient" since it only currently produces 75 hp-per-liter (henceforth to be refferred to as HPPL). I have beaten MANY "efficient" b16-powered cars modified even, including a Del Sol, which is almost comparable to my car's light-weight.

"How can that be?" you say? "The b16 has 160hp stock, with 100HPPL, and yours had 140 stock and 70HPPL!"

Let me explain.

My engine's set-up, helped-out by it's displacement (2.0 liters), allows it to have a horsepower and torque curve that was only matched recently by the RSX type-S's advanced K20 motor.

Don't believe me? Take a peek:
(don't forget, all of these figures are to the wheels, with different dynos, so results may vary...but you can't vary the power-curve)

USDM B16a3 with a JDM ITR tranny with a 4.785 final drive ratio, apexi world sport exhaust, comptech header, iceman air intake and a test pipe. Tested with various b16 ECUs, including a Skunk2 p28 ECU:
http://www.hondaswap.com/~pills/pics/chet_dyno4.jpg

1991 USDM SR20DE with Hotshot CAI, Hotshot Muffler, Hotshot Header (1st generation), JWT ECU, Timing at 17 degrees, crush-bent mid-pipe:http://www.se-r.net/car_info/dyno/rob_cadle/dynopull.jpgStock RSX-S:http://www.ivtecdaily.com/rsx/articles/HT-10-2002/IntakeTest/pages/Page5.jpgLastly, for comparison's sake:Stock USDM Integra Type-R:http://www.bseries.net/images/dynos/NA/97Rstock.jpgShould I even bother showing you the powerband of an "inneficient" Camaro V8?Lastly, I speak from experience, since I used to be the proud owner of a G2 'Teg like yours, powered by a nicely-modified JDM b16, that redlined at 10,000rpms with a custom-programmed ECU from HASport. My last car was a 1997 Civic LX, which at last estimate, was making about 140-150hp with all the mods done to it's SOHC-non-VTEC motor. Even though it was almost the same weight as my Sentra, (2350 Sentra vs 2430 Civic), making almost the same HP, I could never DREAM of keeping up with my Sentra with that car...it's called torque and powerband.

the only major difference from the v-6 version is the price gap, engine layout, and how one is a fwd and the other is a rwd, which really doesn't apply unless they are racing on a track where all the configuration has to be exact. but i wasn't reefering to those differences, again i was comparing them due to engine's similar engine displacement, v-6 and v-8.


and how one is a fwd and the other is a rwd

Since when is the NSX fwd?...




i don't have a medical degree to diagnose anyone, especially someone online, but i do see the characteristcs of denial.

I'll agree you don't have a medical degree yet, cause if you did you'd have better sense not to have a picture of your car online with its license plate exposed. hehe. You really should fix that man, there are some freaky people on the net. Don't want our resident psychologist getting hunted down and beat up by some toothless hick. :icon16:



oh the guy who bought the 92 teg, u wanna take a guess on why kind of muscle car he drives? if u guessing chevy nova then thats out-stinkin-standing!.

I'm glad he's got a Nova, great little muscle car. Very light weight considering the era it came from.

one more question, are u starting to like the pic of my teg yet? :grinyes: go ahead u don't have to deny it, just nod ur head up and down. lol

To be honest, No I do not like the way your particular Integra looks. The hood makes it look like its got some sorta abnormal growth or whart on its nose. :grinno:

I don't mind Integra's, cause not to long ago I was planning on getting one when I sold my truck. I still may, but I think i'd really rather have a '70-'72 240z just cause they're badass. You can make the sweetest little car out of those by dropping in a inefficient Chevy LT1 with a 6 speed transmission. Probably get upwards of 20mpg and run high 12s. Ain't that sweet? :iceslolan

im sorry carrnut these dyno spec's is just too insufficient because theres too many missing variables that wasn't added into these conclusions. for instance, condition of car?, how many miles has been driven, and the main one i think is have any of these cars been raced b4 or pushed to the extreme. i see the numbers but they are just too inconclusive, even baffling if u may. just to make my defense, i know a friend, his name is irrelevant who had a 96 civic ex which is supposed to have a stock hp of around 126, he even added i/e to increase the hp but the problem is he had been racing the car with all of the other guys. after a couple of months he went to get it dynoed, b4 further upgrades. hoping to see atleast above 130's , what he got was below 90 hp and thats with the i/h. pathetic, period. he was so ashamed he sold the car. if u want to show real evidence bring it from a good source or let say from the company itself, not some dyno specs of some messed up raced out engines, and please for less confusion lets make them all stock that way it's unbiased.

on another issue i checked out the stock specs of the sr20de (se-r). it makes 140 hp and 132lbs of tq with a 1/4 mile time of approx. 15.8 sec.with the b16 (civic si) it makes 160 hp and 111 lbs of tq with a 1/4 mile approx. 15.7 sec. basically the two are almost even when it come to speed. what the se-r lacks in hp in makes up in torque due to the bigger displacement. what the civic lacks in torque due to smaller displacement it makes up in hp. so the only explanation for u winning is therefore u've been the better driver not because the b16 is inferior. with the del sol the 1/4 mile time is 15.5 but i guess the driver doesn't driver well. just to throw it out there an rsx-s would be and even comparison due to the same displacement of 2.0l of the se-r, but it makes 200hp with a torque of 142, 1/4 mile at 15.2, beating the se-r in every way.

going back to u red neck the nsx is rwd, guess i fucked up. can't believe i forgot, since my uncle has one. shit happens, u want a cookie? oh thats really funny a toothless hick coming after me, what a picture.lol. yeah i was too lazy to take the license plate off, the reason i put my car on here is because bolognie sandwich wanted to see it, but hey if some one is willing to drive across the country to kick my ass, i think they have problems, especially when i just got out of the marine corps.

with the guys nova, he sold it, i wonder why? honestly it can't be that great it he sold it.with the 240z, i do like those too, was supposed to get one b4 my integ. it was brought back to life with silver metallic paint, and everything restored for 5g's, that or a 1972 mach 1. decide not to get neither because i was worried about fuel consumption, repairs and availabilty of parts. so i decide to pick something more up to date and more economical thats reliable.

lastly about the comment on the hood, why are u still hating? well beauty is in the eye of the beholder and everyone has given me compliments on it. on one occasion i had another integra owner followed me off the free way until we reach a stop sign. i thought he wanted to race, turns out he shouted compliments for my hood and wanted to know where he can get the same one. how about this, people what u think on my hood. yah or nah

im sorry carrnut these dyno spec's is just too insufficient because theres too many missing variables that wasn't added into these conclusions. for instance, condition of car?, how many miles has been driven, and the main one i think is have any of these cars been raced b4 or pushed to the extreme.
And your point? I was referring to the power-curve...which whatever power your car is making with what conditions, will remain constant. If you notice, the "efficient" b16 has a bit more mods than the SR20...which by the way, is older, since the b16 is clearly stated as a USDM b16a3...1999-2000 Si.

What does that tell you about the "inneficient" SR20?

on another issue i checked out the stock specs of the sr20de (se-r). it makes 140 hp and 132lbs of tq with a 1/4 mile time of approx. 15.8 sec.with the b16 (civic si) it makes 160 hp and 111 lbs of tq with a 1/4 mile approx. 15.7 sec. basically the two are almost even when it come to speed. what the se-r lacks in hp in makes up in torque due to the bigger displacement. what the civic lacks in torque due to smaller displacement it makes up in hp. so the only explanation for u winning is therefore u've been the better driver not because the b16 is inferior. with the del sol the 1/4 mile time is 15.5 but i guess the driver doesn't driver well. just to throw it out there an rsx-s would be and even comparison due to the same displacement of 2.0l of the se-r, but it makes 200hp with a torque of 142, 1/4 mile at 15.2, beating the se-r in every way.
C'MON!...I shouldn't have to tell such a smart individual as you to quit mag-racing, shouldn't I?

Have you EVER seen a b16-powered car run against an SR20DE car? Have YOU EVER owned a b16 car yourself? I have done both, MANY times, and driver-for-driver, the SR20 wins.

Here's an actual track-time for a SE-R with some mods with a shitty 2.2 '60 time: http://www.se-r.net/owners/timeslip/display.php?ID=2097

Here's a STOCK NX200:
http://www.se-r.net/owners/timeslip/display.php?ID=2121

The NX is about 75-100lbs heavier than my trim SE-R (no power options), but quite a match for a stock Si's weight.

Here's a simple I/H/E SE-R with an ugly 2.2 60':
http://www.se-r.net/owners/timeslip/display.php?ID=2181

2.0 '60 is not out of the question with these cars, with the stock LSD and the front-weight bias.

Here's an Si owner bragging about his 15.1 time WITH I/H/E, Apex'i electronics (VAFC, I'm assuming), and MSD ignition:
http://www.cardomain.com/id/falotz20

Here's an actual race that happened between me and another member:
http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/t130547.html

You'll see my mods and a G-Tech time I have in there. G-Tech is a bit optimistic with MPH, but it was still 15.00@99mph with a BAD launch.

If you want to talk about "efficiency", the Nissan SR16VE...which is a 1.6-liter, N/A motor with NEO-VVL (Nissan's version of VTEC), makes about 184HP, comparable to a Civic Type R motor. The SR16VE-N1 makes almost 200HP from the same 1.6 liter...STOCK. Nissan's higher-production SR20VE ("V" for variable) makes about 204HP stock...with almost 160ft-lbs of tq...comparable to the K20, which has the advantage of variable ignition timing AND variable valves (i-VTEC).

Either way, a higher HPPL does NOT translate to higher acceleration...you still have to harness it, which is the argument RedNeck was trying to make all along. FYI: the HPI nitro-motor for their RC cars has a specific output of 476.2HP-per-liter (1 HP for 2.10cc's of displacement). Will you expect that motor to run your car then? Think about it.

going back to u red neck the nsx is rwd, guess i fucked up. can't believe i forgot, since my uncle has one. shit happens, u want a cookie? oh thats really funny a toothless hick coming after me, what a picture.lol. yeah i was too lazy to take the license plate off, the reason i put my car on here is because bolognie sandwich wanted to see it, but hey if some one is willing to drive across the country to kick my ass, i think they have problems, especially when i just got out of the marine corps.

Yeah, It can be hard to remember its a mid-engined rear wheel drive car at times... And yeah, a Chocolate chip cookie would be great... Thaannks. :lol:

And I really don't care if bolognie, or salami and cheese, or Grilled Ham and Cheese Sandwhich wanted to see your car. You still put up a identifiable piece of equipment... that can be traced back to your home. I thought they tought that sorta thing in the Marines? Not to carry any type of personal identification or whatever?:confused:



with the guys nova, he sold it, i wonder why? honestly it can't be that great it he sold it.with the 240z, i do like those too, was supposed to get one b4 my integ. it was brought back to life with silver metallic paint, and everything restored for 5g's, that or a 1972 mach 1. decide not to get neither because i was worried about fuel consumption, repairs and availabilty of parts. so i decide to pick something more up to date and more economical thats reliable.

So the guy sold his Nova? I used to have two Novas, I sold one cause it was a rust bucket and it would of cost me too much to fix up. People sell cars for all sorts of reasons. This point of yours holds not validation.

[i]
lastly about the comment on the hood, why are u still hating? well beauty is in the eye of the beholder and everyone has given me compliments on it. on one occasion i had another integra owner followed me off the free way until we reach a stop sign. i thought he wanted to race, turns out he shouted compliments for my hood and wanted to know where he can get the same one. how about this, people what u think on my hood. yah or nah

I'm not hating on your car, I just dislike the hood on it. And great, you get looks... possibly good looks or bad looks who knows? I'm sure the car looks good, but I just don't agree with your choice on the hood.

my point is most if not all of these dyno result is a misrepresentation of the individual cars themselves since we don't what the hell they been through. heck the b16a3 that u showed me isn't really a b16a3 anymore. its some wierd hybrid with a itr tranny thats not even making the same amount of power a regular b16a3 would make. one other point i wanna stress out is that not all mods increase hp, some might even backfire causing a decrease in hp. my last point is that these timeslips u shown aren't always correct on the exact time the car has made due to each and individual person experience. for example, lets i have hmmm an nsx. and i give it to my sister who barely have any expience with racing, do u honestly think her time slips gonna be in the low 13's if i let her test it on a 1/4 m? i highly doubt it. of course this is an exageration to prove a point and not trying to put down female drivers. this is the main reason why i suggested u bring proof of the specs and 1/4 m themselves as when they are stock. instead u bring me more cars with more mods?

to evenly compare and evaluate them with the best reprsentation of both is to get them in stock form. here are some specs with no modification from ur source http://www.se-r.net/about/sentra_se-r/specs.html with a 1/4 mile of 15.8. if u disagree let me know, but im pretty sure this is a reasonable time. and for the b16 a real b16 with no mods http://tuneman1.tripod.com/index.html has a time of 15.7 sec. again like i said b4 the winner of these 2 goes to whose the better driver since u can clearly see the 1/4 time is almost exact. again if im wrong let me know about these times if they wrong, but these do sound correct, and they are not from some guy who modded their car. just a pain simple stock car where neither one is considrably better than the other. honestly carrnutt no offense but i think so far ur opinions on the se-r as faster is biased maybe due to the fact that u've beat more people with it. sometimes just the feel of it when acclerating makes it seems faster, like when the car is lower or the seat low. i really don't know but i see the numbers and they are pretty even in stock form.

what im pondering is how u got that time of 15 sec with just the 2 mods? actually one if u don't consider the generic intake, which would probably extract only 1-3 hp if ur lucky. so im guessing the other mod is getting all the power, its kinda hard to believe, but its not impossible, especially if ur a good driver whose pushing his car to its extreme limits. and to answer ur question if i have ever owned these cars, i would say no, and neither would i want to, well maybe the civic si because of its sleek looks. beside that i would rather have a nicer car like let say a type-r or a 300 zx twin turbo. if somone was to give me a b16 motor for free i still wouldn't swap it with my b18 nonvtec, since it still has so much potenial for forced induction.

the last issue is on what redneck said about not carrying any personal identification? where the hell u get that? guess u've been watching to many war movies, or heck maybe not enough who knows. fyi what do u see when u look at the chest of a military personnel camaflouged utilities? their last name. look at thier collar and what u see? thier rank? and what do u think every military personnel carry? thier dog tags which has thier full name, religion, blood type, gas mask size, and thier soc sec num. and if captured as a p.o.w. the only information we're allowed to give out is our rank, first and last name and our soc. unless they currently changed it. hell even now on the shoulder we carry the amercan flag when on foreign soil, perfect target imo. if thats not carrying i.d. i don't know what is? think about it, we're in a war situation u jump in a fox hole to take cover from enemy rounds, all of a sudden a grenade flies in ur hole. now ur in fifty different pieces hence the name fubar(fucked up beyond all recognition which is a army term). how else are we gonna identify u redneck billybob from redneck billyjoe? lol hopefully from the name on ur chest, it thats been burned up then the dog tags (one around the neck and one in ur shoe just in case the rest of u is in tiny smithereens).but less say we're here in the great country of the U.S. of A, are u saying we we can't even carry our wallets? :lol2:
man u are funny. also if some one wanted to know where i live i believe they have easier methods, like maybe asking me or look through the profile. heck we're in the internet theres tons of was to find a person. leaving the license plate on there shouldn't be that much of a threat, hell then shouldn't everyone be taking thier plates off every time thier done driving cause u never know when a stalker or killer is gonna copy ur plate number and find out where u live.

i made the mistake on the nsx cause at the same time i was thinking of the rsx so hey screw me. to finish i just wanna say its been a good debate with u guys,(especially when it two autoforum members against one) but hey u don't see me complaining. now u might or might not hear from me today or tomorrow since i got school, if there's a problem i try to answer when possible, now cya.

Well, what I do know is that in Special Ops missions they carry nothing... not even dog tags.

But thats why I asked you, cause I'm not in the military... I wouldn't know all the rules. So off my sack. :p :lol:

I do believe the '92 Sentra SE-R's run low 15s stock, not 15.8... Like a 15.2ish.

hey u should read again i just edited my post. also i want to clarify what u said about special ops so theres no misunderstanding. yes on special ops they still wear thier dog tags, although now the dog tag is cover in a clear plastic to eliminate noise, like for instance snipers going behind enemy lines or a reconnaisance unit inspecting terrain or the enemy. in the marine corps we try to abide by this saying "leave no man behind".
i don't know any branch that was told not to wear thier dog tags for the fact that its of great paramount and last resort of accountability. what ur talking about i don't know about and it could be all hollywood hype to make it more attractive to the viewers. the closes representation made by hollywood imo is full metal jacket and even still its an exageration that exceeds the truth. for example the drill seargeant is actually call drill instructor, and never can they touch or hurt u physically with their own body, but they do have other methods of torture ahmm did i say torture? i mean I.T.( its been a long time since boot camp, but i think it mean individual training) and not every marine looks like some buff killing machine.people becomes U.S. Marines for the fact that they past all the physical and whats harder was the mental obstacle thrown thier way. in boot camp i've seen some crazy shit , but the one that etched in my memory was seeing a man almost 6 ft, buff and tough as a tank, an allstar hometown football player crying :crying: in front of us. he said he couldn't take it no more, he told the D.I. he wanted to go home, this is on of the most surprising and embarrasing thing i've seen in my whole life. but coming back to the point the people ur talking about aren't suppose to be in existance, and i never heard of such a group, of course that doesn't mean they don't exist. the best name i can think to give them are cells, or maybe even spies, but as u can see by thier names they don't even seem to be part of any military branch. also the operations wouldn't be special they would be call covert and if they are caught they have to take a cyanide pill to elimated themselves b4 being exposed just like in the game return to castle wolfenstein, and splinter cell :loser: :lol2:
the se-r doing 15.2ish? thats a bold claim, so what ur saying is that the sentra se-r has the equivalent 1/4 mile of an rsx-s which has 200 hp and 142 tq? how about u stop telling me what u believe and give me the proof (make sure its stock too) specs for rsx and yes its from an unbiased source, just click on rsx-s http://tuneman1.tripod.com/index.html here some more proof of the se-r 1/4 mile time http://www.serhomepage.com/history/perform.html but if u look closely theres three sources, road and track. nissan, and car and driver.
road and track and nissan gave the se-r 16.2sec 1/4m. only car and driver gave it a 15.8. so i definatley don't see where u get the 15.2? heres more from a newer version the 200se-r which has the same hp and tq so basically the same engine, they didn't have the sentra se-r time becuase it was too old for this site again so click on the 200se-r http://tuneman1.tripod.com/index.html, its time is still 16.2. this should be quite enough evidence to back my claim wheres ur?

tran_nsx: The reason why I asked you if you've ever seen an SR20DE car run or if you have owned a b16 car before, is because you keep coming back with these mag times.

Again...have YOU PERSONALLY seen an SR20DE car run? Especially against a b16 car?

They have similar gearing...in that they are both very aggressive and close-together. In the case of a 1999-2000 Civic Si, the car weighs about 150lbs more than my car. My car has a stock LSD with a weight-bias of 62-percent up-front. The SR20 has more torque from the get-go. How is that similar in performance? The mags have the EK-Si running high 15's, as do they the Classic SE-R...fine. but AGAIN...have you seen one run? Talk to KrNxRaCer00 (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/member.php?u=53432), who witnessed a simple bolt-ons SE-R run 14.6 at the track...basically better than his similarly-modified GS-R.

Here's the thread...check right after my 1st post in it.
http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/t103988.html

Now, a b16 swapped into a light chassis like an EF hatch or EG hatch will more than likely beat me. Simple math...it's lighter. But even the 2,400-lb Del Sol I raced, which is similar in weight to my car, I beat by about three cars.

EDIT: BTW, you say you don't trust the published dyno sheets...how are you going to trust two different times that are almost a decade apart?

hey read my earlier post there might be some changes.
ok im getting really tired of the same debate, and again ur misunderstanding what i wrote. hopefully this time u will get a grasp on what im trying to repeat. let me start from the beginning, im gonna use stock cars that way theres no misrepresentation, or bias opinion of each vehicle. also once a vehicle had been modified, theres different conseqences that might increase or decrease the total outcome of the original performance. and by adding a simple mod to replace the oem part with a plethora of options available in the aftermarket that too can cause a variety of results, for example an aem cai vs a generic short ram intake will give two different increases. also these time slips u've given me are the result of each individual's driving experiences, which can differ from driver to driver. now the best way to compare these two is to like i said b4, get the specs and performance results from reputable sources. the times and results that i've obtain are indeed very reliable, so i don't know why ur calling these mag times as is if they are some results of false information? is that that what ur implying? that these are false info? i hope not cause i got some of these results from the sources u given me. not including that, but one of the 1/4 miles are from the manufacturer it self, nissan motor corp. now lets begin:

the se-r makes 140hp, and 132lbs of tq with 1/4 of 15.8

the civic si makes 160hp, and 111lbs of tq with 1/4 of 5.7

when i said the performance was similar, its due to the fact that if u look closely, each car has an increase amount power of whether it hp or tq, so they both outweigh each other where one car has more hp the other has more tq. the se-r creates 21 more tq due to bigger displacement, but the si makes 20 more hp, thus making them basically similar. all i ask of u is to get me a reputable source and specs that are stock to prove me wrong. imo this will be hard since one of the sources come from nissan itself. but the reason i didn't want to bring that result up before is because im trying to give u the benefit of the doubt. nissan and two other sources got 16.2, the other two got 15.8, but i gave u the best time. so hopefully u get the picture that both car's 1/4 mile time is almost exact, what now comes down too is the driver which the situation u describe, then u were the winner of the race.

i know what ur thinking yes so u got the lsd and 62% weight ratio correct? honestly the best even comparison is not to the civic si but to the integra ls, since the hp and tq is so alike. ls has 140hp and 126tq short of 6 tq from the se-r. the ls is a mid 16's sec car while urs is a low 16's maybe even hi 15's car ,now do u see the advantage of the lsd and the weight ratio application? not much of a big difference but a difference none the less to beat the teg, of course im giving u the benefit because im doing this unbiasely.

now to answer ur question if have i ever seen one run? no i haven't and neither do i want too. besides that, i don't see many people race with that vehicle either, but the information supplied to me on the web will basically tell me the result. give and take a few mili sec. due to people's experience in drag racing the time is always exact am i not correct. and no i never own any of the two and neither do i really want too also, but if have to i would prefer the civic cause of the looks not because of performance. if im going to get a car i would have to move up on sportiness and class lets say the rsx type-r when it arrives or 300zx tt, maybe even the supra tt. the nsx will take awhile, hell maybe even decide to get the v-8 nsx instead, after im done with college that is. i have just fyi, own two other cars, an 88 celica gts, and a 91 crx si, as u can see im trying to upgrade. and just as a side note i did test drive my friends new spec-v which is the best se-r, correct me if im wrong. that seems more of a mid to low 15 sec car, it was pretty quick i give u that, but they do need to work on the exterior looks i think, but of course beauty is in the eye of the holder.

with the issue of the published dynosheets, those are an inclusive evidence to some up a whole individual type of car. for example the b16a3 shown is not the same engine anymore, but some screwed up hybrid that is actually making less hp that originally intended. i swear the b16a3 makes a peak hp of 158 stock, not some 148 and thats with the mods? is the mods hurting it? or maybe has the engine suffered to much wear and tear because of racing, well what ever the unknown reason its impoverished result disgraces the b16 altogether. how would u like it if i show u a dyno of an se-r that has been trashed with lets say making a total 100hp and told u this is how much hp is created from all se-r's. bluntly that would be a false and time for an ass kicking :chair: statement.

to conclude i just wanna say it takes more then a regular driver to push fast car and make it achieve its highest performance abilities possible. what is also required is have a talented driver behind the wheel. why do u think race car organizations use professional drivers who knows, and has been train on what they are doing, instead of some joe shmoe off the street. can't remember the saying word for word but it something like 75% car and 25% percent driver. the percentages might differ a bit, but its around there i imagine. lastly here are the specs and sources that i got from the research, if u do like i said find a source better then nissan, which i doubt just let me know.again these specs have to be stock no mods, period.

se-r specs:
http://www.se-r.net/about/sentra_se-r/specs.html
http://www.serhomepage.com/history/perform.html
http://tuneman1.tripod.com/index.html - go to nissan 200sx se-r

civic si specs:
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/fionabra/honda/civc_si.htm
http://tuneman1.tripod.com/index.html - go to civic si- 1999

Okay...normally, I'd pick your post apart, and respond point-by-point. Your run-on sentences, and tornado-like statements (they go round-and-round, circling the point, but never touching-down), make it damn near impossible. So, I'll just say that I do get what you are saying...but it's YOU who are not getting what I'm saying. I'll do this by the numbers. If you disagree with any of them, refer to them by number...then MAYBE we'll understand each other. I will even highlight the more pertinent information.

1) When the Subaru WRX first came-out, it was rated by Subaru at 6.4 seconds 0-60. Does that mean it does? No. The WRX, as clocked at the track, does 0-60 in about 5.8 seconds. THAT, is the difference between mag-racing and REAL racing. I will stop rolling my eyes at your every claim about each vehicles speed, until you actually talk about something YOU have seen PERSONALLY, and quit quoting these MAG-TIMES.

The Mustang GT 5.0 was rated at mid-to-low 15's till 1995. Are you going to claim that a stock EG-Si is a driver's race against one? What if I told you that my car hangs/pulls regularly on stock versions of those cars? THAT'S ACTUAL EXPERIENCE, NOT SOME MAGAZINE QUOTE.

Did you not know that MAG-RACER is an insult within the online car-community?

Oh, just in case you didn't believe me:

From the very back of my April 2001 issue of Road & Track:
http://import.h8rs.com/carrrnuttt/WRX.jpg

2) Like I said before, and I will say again...THE DYNO GRAPHS ARE SHOWING POWER TO THE WHEELS. Comprende? Also, I will explain for the THIRD TIME...the power-output DOES NOT MATTER...it is the POWERBAND I am trying to illustrate to you. How much of a NOOB are you to cars that you don't know what a POWERBAND does and means to a car's acceleration? How much of a NOOB are you that you can't tell what power to the wheels looks like...EVEN AFTER I SAID SO.

3) DID YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THE PART WHERE I SAID THAT EVEN THE EG-CIVIC Si IS ABOUT 150LBS HEAVIER THAN MY CAR? The Integra LS? Do you even know how much a stock LS weighs? LOL. Do you know the concept of POWER-TO-WEIGHT?

4) In your best interest, I think you should just swallow your big Marine ego and admit that YOU DON'T KNOW DIDDLY-SQUAT ABOUT CARS BESIDES WHAT YOU READ IN SUPER-STREET. Every-time I read a new post of yours, this fact becomes clearer. Seriously. There are about 2-3 people in a chat-room right now that have proven to me through time, facts and know-how that they have presented that they know cars...and guess what? THEY ARE LAUGHING AT YOU.

5) Don't act like you know about Hondas. Please DON'T test my Honda-knowledge. I started out as a mod of the Honda forums, and have owned/worked on Hondas since 1992. If it's something I don't happen to know, since I'm not exactly a mechanic...I will go to my friend's shop...he's a Honda specialist who can do a full-running Honda swap in three hours. I know I won't be coming to YOU for Honda advice.

Holy Bombshell Batman...


He's been :owned:

There's no way I'm reading this whole thread, I'd just like to say that nobody cares about hp/liter

this is gonna be my 4th time time trying to post this reply. if this doesn't get through "cause the server is too busy" then screw it don't expect me to reply again.

im gonna make this really short since im tired of writing it over and over,bring me a stock 1/4 mile time. ur making the se-r seem like its some kind of super car. if i wasn't so bored of this subject, i would be laughing my butt off.

weight of integ- 2560lbs
dist. wt of integ -62/38(hmm same as se-r )
dist. wt of civic si -61/39

now what else u want, the torque specs of the nuts and bolts? u don't have to use such bitter and offensive words just cause u can't find any better stock times. don't worry im not gonna drop down as low as u and use such harsh words. i have better things to do than argue about a car thats only running lo 16's maybe hi 15's if lucky. now im gonna go check out my friends 11 sec and 13 sec mr2's. and if u think this isn't fast, one of my other uncle owns a 9 sec rx-7, so don't bother me with this crap again. se-r running lo 15's stock? please

heres story of a guy whose whole family drag races and why he chose the se-r:
http://www.hmp.net/slowse-r/why_sentra/
o yeah him and his whole family races and he looks at car and driver 1/4m times or what u call mag times? hmmm

heres tons more 1/4 mile specs - just go to se-r:
http://ouray.cudenver.edu/~jwhirsch/se-r/
http://www.zotz.com/nissan/sentra_se-r_specs.htm
http://nismonx2000.tripod.com/mylifeandmyride/id3.html
http://www.hostultra.com/~ford/performance1.htm
http://ichou.freeshell.org/specs.html
http://www.angelfire.com/pa3/ford/performance1.htm

i was also correct about the se-r spec being a mid to lo 15's sec car. its 1/4 e.t. is 15.7, but i forgot my friend's spec v had i/h/e and afc, so either way it would of been lo 15's

His Se-R has basically 1 modification and thats Advanced timing... and he's running a 15 flat.

I personally know Carrrnuttt, and he doesn't lie. The car is stock other than Timing advance and a cone filter. G-tech Pro's usually don't lie either. Kinda hard to fool it.

Also, take into consideration that magazine times are not always correct. You think magazine testers are going to spend hours messing with a little Sentra to get all of its potiential out? I doubt they'll give it as much time on the track as they do say a Corvette or a WRX. Cars which readers really want to know times for.

Plus Carrrnuttt can shift like a monkey on speed, so he's got the 'good driver' award going for him.

http://www.hmp.net/slowse-r/why_sentra/
http://ouray.cudenver.edu/~jwhirsch/se-r/
http://www.zotz.com/nissan/sentra_se-r_specs.htm
http://nismonx2000.tripod.com/mylifeandmyride/id3.html
http://www.hostultra.com/~ford/performance1.htm
http://ichou.freeshell.org/specs.html
http://www.angelfire.com/pa3/ford/performance1.htm


What was the question they kept asking Forrest Gump? Oh yah..."are you stupid or something"?

If you look at every last site you linked to above, all of them are fan-sites or stat-sites that basically took numbers from the same magazines. If you notice, the very first link you put up has a muscle-car-family guy who is gushing about a Sentra because it was fast and cheap.

Let me quote him:
"All told, the 121 c.i. SE-R was not too far off the pace of a stock 302 Mustang."

This one:
"It took awhile to quiet my dad’s laughter about the car ("You bought a what?! Because it’s fast?!"). It will never be as fast as a modded V8, but after a FEW go-fast goodies here and there, a few trophies from bracket racing and a few passes down the quarter mile in UNDER 15 seconds, I’m still part of the family."


Here's another little factoid for you to think about:

In this link you gave: http://ichou.freeshell.org/specs.html, they have a Ford Probe running a 15.3@87.7MPH (15.3@87.7MPH) (I've beaten one of these, BTW). In the same site, they have a Mazda MX-6 running a 15.8@88.6MPH (15.8@88.6MPH). The funny thing is, THESE ARE BOTH THE SAME CARS! Exact same drivetrain, exact same transmission, similar curb-weight...yet are running 5 seconds apart! Whoa! Yet, the MX-6 trapped a bit higher at 88.6MPH as opposed to 87.7 for the Probe...hmmm. They even have ANOTHER Ford Probe time in there where they ran a 15.8@87.2MPH (15.8@87.2MPH)!

I don't know what areas of the country these cars were tested, obviously, but if you notice, the 15.3 Probe GT run was conducted in December, while the 15.8 runs by both the Mazda MX-6 and the Probe GT were conducted in August...think about it. In the middle of summer. YES...heat DOES affect performance and acceleration. The two Sentra SE-R runs (the other SE-R was a 200SX...less aggressive motor, more weight) were conducted in the summer...yet both of them got upper 80's traps. I wonder what they would run in better conditions with more aggressive drivers. What? You think car mags drive nearly as aggressive as somebody actually racing would? Especially in an econo-box?

Think about this...in June of 1993, they ran a Camaro Z28 to mid 14's, and in August of 1994, low 14's. If you got to any Chevy site, they will tell you that these cars can, and will run high-to-mid 13's...THAT'S ALMOST A SECOND OFF the mag-times!

An E39 BMW M3 they ran (do you EVEN know what an E39 is?), did the quarter in 14.6...yet these cars are universally known as 14-flat to high-13 second cars.

THIS is why magazine-quoting is worthless. Good for estimating your car's performance, yes, but to rely on them in an argument like you are? Dumb. I must admit, when I first got my car, I never thought of it as a 15--flat/low-15-second car. Then I drove it...and raced cars that I expected to stomp all-over me...but didn't. THAT IS REAL-WORLD EXPERIENCE, son. Not sitting behind your computer, quoting times from magazines whose driver for all you know had bunions that day and couldn't step on the gas too hard.

Here is the stock NX2000's actual track run made by an owner:
http://www.se-r.net/owners/timeslip/display.php?ID=2121

Like I said before, the NX2000 is a bit heavier than the Sentra SE-R, but have the exact same powerplant. Notice the car's trap-speed.

SO AGAIN, HAVE YOU EVER, EVER SEEN ONE RUN FOR YOURSELF? BECAUSE IF YOU HAVEN'T, YOU SHOULD PROBABLY BELIEVE IN THE TOOTH-FAIRY TOO. "Yeah, I saw it in some magazine, she's real alright...never seen her, but the magazine says so...they HAVE to be right, right?"

Here, go to http://www.serca.org/socal/. That's the Southern California chapter of the SE-R Club of America. I'm sure you'll find a couple of people in your are that would gladly meet-up and show you how "slow" the car is. Other than that, I'm done...if you haven't learned by now...you never will.

Mag-racerhttp://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/shakehead.gif.

:eek:

Holy shit-faced cockmaster Batman...

He's been owned twice!

:owned: :owned:

:lol: this is too good...

cept...i got here late.

if u don't believe it, its tru...the guy popped the hood an everything an all he had was i/h/e an he ran consistantly 14.6-9 all day long (yes he stripped the interior, but that isn't going to make up for .5 or anything)

so lets think...i/h/e on a sentra will lower the stock time about .2 of a second (being generous) and then if the guys stripped the interior, thats MAYBE another .1) well...put everything back in, and put the stock parts back on and ur looking at a 15.0 car....weird isn't it?

:iceslolan

A year ago if someone had told me a stock Sentra could run 15's I wouldn't have believed it. Then I met Ross and started going to the track with him.

http://www.arimport.com/L-S/R/rossr20vsron.JPG

That's a 2000 Sentra SE. That's the SR20 powered Sentra. It's stock other than a cone filter and a custom exhaust. The car behind him is a del sol VTEC. That's the B16 powered del sol, not your average everyday SOHC del sol, and it also has a cone filter and a catback. So what is he doing behind the Sentra? They're not even at half track yet, he's already got a car lead! I've seen this Sentra repeat this same scene with several cocky Honda owners in thier 160hp Si's. Funny thing about carrrnuttt's model Sentra, is it's the same motor, but a lighter car...

You wanna get crazier? I know a stock 98 Neon that consistently cranks times a full second faster than i/h/e Civic Si's. A Neon! His only mod is stripped interior.

Funny thing about carrrnuttt's model Sentra, is it's the same motor, but a lighter car...
About 300lbs lighter, actually. Not too mention, my car has more aggressive cams and redline. Same HP and torque, but better powerband over-all (my car). Thanks for that |delaysion|...at least he can realize I'm not just blowing smoke up his ass.
You wanna get crazier? I know a stock 98 Neon that consistently cranks times a full second faster than i/h/e Civic Si's. A Neon! His only mod is stripped interior.
Is it a 4-dr Highline Neon with DOHC? Those were actually the fastest stock, non-turbo Neons. Faster than the R/T and the ACR. That's because it had the same motor as the other two, but lighter...crazy, huh?

:disappoin im through with u carrrnutt, talking to u is pointless and redundant. next time u want to talk to me how bout u have some respect and common courtesy. some thing im doing no matter now heated th debate, it can bring a person a long way. this goes to krnxracer, hey bro i had an old friend who timed his stock crx si and it got 16's. he then strip his interior (i didn't know how much) and it got him into the 15's, surprised by the difference he then gutted the whole car and it got into the mid 14's. i was kinda doubtful about the times but im not gonna call him a lier, since they are in a race crew with cars doing 12's to 13's, this is four years ago. i just got out of the military so if they are still racing they're cars shold now should be 11's maybe even 10's.

things to consider also is all the varieties of thing that can effect the strip enviroment like weather, temp, and elevation of the track. this is not including whats inside the car like how much gas in the tank, what octane, what tires used etc. another thing is the performance parts that he added like i/h/e etc, but do u know if he added other stuff thats hard to spot like brand new wires, plugs, axles, clutch,or chips. lastly how experience is the driver, and has any vital part of the car been removed to increase the hp like for example the cat or interior removal. when it comes to drag racing every little piece of power count, and alot of people do anything for that 1 or 2 milli sec. i would do the same thing like put back on my stock 14in steelies with racing tires instead of my 18 in tenzo-r rims and removing my 3 sub stereo system. u should know what im talking about, this is why i said there are so many missing variables leading to those times. again like i said b4, i driven the brand new se-r spec v and it felt like a 15's sec car, so i don't see how a stock sr20de can take that.

another thing i wanna mention to is how some of the people act around here. how bout u grow up. some people with 3-4k post thinks they know everything about cars. they also make themselves feel better by putting others down, this makes me shake my head at how ignorant they really are. what ever happen to leading by example? everyday is a learning experience whether u know a little or a lot about cars. i bet my friend whose a car mechanic in his 50's, know how to break down an engine and put it back together again faster than over 80% of us here, and he hasn't had one post. even the best mechanics and engineers go through an ongoing and never ending training to keep up with society and technology.

things to consider also is all the varieties of thing that can effect the strip enviroment like weather, temp, and elevation of the track. this is not including whats inside the car like how much gas in the tank, what octane, what tires used etc. another thing is the performance parts that he added like i/h/e etc, but do u know if he added other stuff thats hard to spot like brand new wires, plugs, axles, clutch,or chips. lastly how experience is the driver, and has any vital part of the car been removed to increase the hp like for example the cat or interior removal. when it comes to drag racing every little piece of power count, and alot of people do anything for that 1 or 2 milli sec. i would do the same thing like put back on my stock 14in steelies with racing tires instead of my 18 in tenzo-r rims and removing my 3 sub stereo system. u should know what im talking about, this is why i said there are so many missing variables leading to those times. again like i said b4, i driven the brand new se-r spec v and it felt like a 15's sec car, so i don't see how a stock sr20de can take that.



Everything you just said.... has already been said by US!

And now you're trying to make us look like we're the ones who dont know what we're talking about?!

:screwy:

things to consider also is all the varieties of thing that can effect the strip enviroment like weather, temp, and elevation of the track. this is not including whats inside the car like how much gas in the tank, what octane, what tires used etc.

You have GOT to be the most thick-headed, stubborn d%$&head I have EVER met. I fully, and truly believe that you were a Marine...and if you're not, you should be.

"Things to consider" this, genius: the picture above you which shows the Del Sol being left behind, is a picture of a 2,400lb Del Sol BEHIND a 2,600lb Sentra. The Del Sol has a b16 with an "efficient" 160HP right? I mean...100HP-per-liter, right? The Sentra that's in FRONT of the Del Sol has the same motor as me, making an "inefficient" 70HP-per-liter...140HP from a 2.0. Now, why is the lighter, "more powerful" Del Sol behind? Hmmm...could it be...THE SENTRA HAS A BETTER POWERBAND? BTW, They're both in the same conditions.

Now consider this: you keep insisting that my car against the EG-Si is a driver's race...or maybe even the Sentra losing...since it's been clocked in the 16's by the magazines and all:rolleyes:...I keep telling you that FROM MY ACTUAL EXPERIENCE, it is NOT. The Civic Si, with a similar power-plant as the Del Sol above, weighs MORE than the said Del Sol...YOU FOLLOWING ME SO FAR? The 1991-1994 Sentra SE-R, weighs A LOT LESS than that newer Sentra above. Getting that? Or is your brain going "IT DOES NOT COMPUTE! IT DOES NOT COMPUTE!...I CANNOT ACCEPT IT!!! IT IS NOT THE TRUTH!"?

You have several people showing you the facts of life, yet you refuse to accept it...you cling to your magazine stats like some toddler with his security blanket. I have already given you a way of contacting your local SE-R enthusiasts. Prove to me how "slow" they are with their "inefficient" 70HP-per-liter stock output. Hell, you have a fellow Integra driver trying to enlighten you...yet you don't listen. I was an Integra driver too...probably a MUCH faster car than what you have now...but I guess that doesn't count, since I drive an "inefficient" "slow" car now:rolleyes:.

C'mon...find some SE-Rs that aren't running around in a magazine, take pics if you have to. Prove me wrong...especially against the people that are trying to edumacate you in here. Until you do that, or admit that you are just a stubborn, ignorant FOOL, you are just some entertaining fodder for PM and chat conversation, and an AF laughing-stock.

:loser: DAMN MOTHA FUCKA YOU JUST GOT :owned: for like the 7th time... i think its your time to give up

and with Carrrnuttt'S post..i think that u should close this thread

and with Carrrnuttt'S post..i think that u should close this thread

Trust me, I would LOVE to. It's just that I don't want him thinking that I am using my "powers" to get the last word in. I WANT him to reply to my posts. He either gives up, or keeps entertaining the rest of us who knpw better. If he gives up, this thread shall die a natural death.

:cwm27:

this is great...it reminds me of the time the cougar guy told us all he could run a 0-60 faster than super cars because of his "electronics..."

classic... :lol:

haha.. i remember that... :loser: some people just dont get it sometimes... the people on these forums arent dumb enough to not notice when newbies try and pull some bull shit so everyone thinks that they know what they're talkin about :grinno:

damn carrrnut some these guys are on ur jock like white one rice, :rofl: lol.let me guess these are ur friends right? did u guys even read my post and look at the sites i offered, i guess some are just gullible and believe what anyone tells them huh? next time how about u do the research instead of listening to someone's exaggerations.

hey idelaysionl thats a good pic of the a sentra in the lead, im not surprised. im glad u have a pic of them at the beginning, but do u have a pic of the two cars at the finish line, (thats where it really counts :wink: ). any one wanna take a shot at why the sentra is in the lead at the starting line and what will happen near the end of the race? i wanna hear some responces from some of u (preferably guys with del sols vtec or guys w/ vtec, hint, hint) before i answer.

oh and carrrnutt, how u get 24000lbs for the del sol dohc vtec? go back and read ur book, and ur telling me u know about honda's? pul-leezz :biggrin2:

another thing how u get ur car to weigh less than 2500lbs with u in it? se-r.net, let me say again ser.net weighed a stock sentra se-r with no a/c, no cruise, no sunroof and only 3 gal of gas at 2450. let me guess u weigh 45lbs right? :lol: i really wanna hear ur excuse, well no not really since im bored with this issue. imo ur one of the lamest person ive met. u started racing in 92, it is now 2003 and all u got is a 15sec car? not even that, u also wanna to race anything on wheels too, now that gents is lame.

hopefully idelaysionl u do have a pic of them at the finish line, im kinda curious how that del sol did.

. u started racing in 92, it is now 2003 and all u got is a 15sec car? not even that, u also wanna to race anything on wheels too, now that gents is lame.


It's called life, and He has one. This thing called life has twists and turns that nobody can predict. Some of these twist and turns cost money.

But, lets take into consideration he hasn't had the car for 6 months. And lets also consider that he's been in school earning a degree. College can be very expensive. He's also got a family, that also doesn't allow much extra money to be spent towards a car.

But he'll be graduating soon, getting a high dollar job. Then it wont matter.

And remember, Mr. Carrrnuttt spent most of his early twenties in the military. Not exactly the best thing for letting you mod up a car.

I see nothing wrong with a man getting his priorites straight. :dunno:

"weighed a stock sentra se-r with no a/c, no cruise, no sunroof and only 3 gal of gas at 2450." - tran_nsx

you do realize that there are other things that u can do to reduce weight.. such as strip the interior and get rid of the spare and other shit like that :shakehead therefore just by taking out the ac and cruise control and all that shit u are not making the car as light as it could be

hopefully idelaysionl u do have a pic of them at the finish line, im kinda curious how that del sol did.


No pic, but the del sol's best 1000ft time is 12.9 and the Sentra's is 12.4

]"weighed a stock sentra se-r with no a/c, no cruise, no sunroof and only 3 gal of gas at 2450." - tran_nsx[/i]

you do realize that there are other things that u can do to reduce weight.. such as strip the interior and get rid of the spare and other shit like that :shakehead therefore just by taking out the ac and cruise control and all that shit u are not making the car as light as it could be
Actually, what the article doesn't mention is that that weight also includes the weight of a full roll-cage. You get weighed at the track.

If you look at the article he's quoting: http://www.se-r.net/about/sentra_se-r/specs.html, you'll see the roll-cage going diagonal behind the driver in th small track picture.

Here's the specs on the Sentra:
http://www.zotz.com/nissan/sentra_se-r_specs.htm#Exterior%20Dimensions

Curb weight 2414 lb

The Sentra they weighed above is the full-option SE-R, with moonroof, power-windows, power-mirrors, the works. Min doesn't have any of that. The moonroof alone is about 30lbs. Think about it.

Oh, and tran, I had, among the numerous cars I've owned, a naturally-aspirated 4-cylinder Chevy that was capable of high 13's, low 14's...does that count? You're talking about me, when obviously, the car in your sig seems to be the only car you've ever ownedhttp://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif...oh yah, had one of those toohttp://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/uhoh.gif.

:iagree: when it comes to handling i go for the rsx, when it comes to straight away maybe the z

I guess you haven't tried the 300z yet. The multi link suspension is very good. It can definitely handle the rsx.
Japanese can out handle American but so doeslot of other cars.

my buddy wants me to race his friends rsx type s, i have a 1990 300zx n/a, 5 spd, with some mods done to it, since i know nothing about the car i was just wondering how you guys think the race would go

Oh, thats easy, 300zx. 222hp 198lbs torque, if properly stock tuned. And if you want to race him, do it on some type of "track" or curvy street, make that basterd feel the pain of understeer with his FF(300zx is FR, so you have less understeer). Good luck.