210 HP but only 143 Torque???

I was thinking about getting a Type S cuz the HP looks good but is the acceleration pretty slow? I saw in a previous thread that it kinda sucks in the 3000-4500 range and that really sucks from my perspective cuz thats where Im used to getting power from as I have a 240 with a KA. Not trying to bash on the RSX but does the lack of Torque really take away from it or is it not even that noticeable?

Don't let the lack of torque fool you. I raced my friends prelude when my car was stock. and he had h/i/e pullys and carbon fiber hood. He handed my ass to me twice. it also has more hp>tq.

Did you really expect tons of torque from a 2.0L NA engine? If you keep it above 5500 when racing you will not be bogged down with poor acceleration

honestly, the lack to bottom-end torque is noticable, but so is the fact that I could go on forever on a tank of gas...Premium gas but still..

Might be a good idea to test drive one before you commit. The lack of torque is still disconcerting to me. I used to drive a V6 Oldsmobile and it's a very different experience with the RSX.

It is mostly a problem while using the A/C. Damn thing feels like it will die if I don't rev it just right from either a stop or between gears. And if I rev it too much, it lights up the tires.

Mine's a base, the situation with a Type-S might be better since it has more power. I don't know how much difference there is in torque between the two.

Is someone missing the picture here? The lack of torque in a 2.0? 143lbs. of tq for a N/A I4 car that has only 2.0 liters of displacement isn't bad at all. The shorter gearing helps with lack of tq in the TypeS. There are a lot of torque less wonders out there that get around town just fine. I figure you will have to learn how to drive the TypeS. In race situations TQ is kind of decieving just think about it when you launch you might notice a difference but the rest of the shifting in the race will land you in the prime highend hp spot especially with TypeS's and most Hondas.

The 2005 also has better gearing, improving acceleration. Its honestly hard to say if hyou haven't test driven it, but I don't really notice it in my 02 Type S. When I do need power (usually for overtaking) its there because i'm at least at 3500 RPMs.

Go test drive one, its the best 143tq ive ever felt ;)

yea, i cant think of any 2.0L I4's, (and no turbocharger) that give as much torque...

closest thing is the 2.2L S2000 with 162 lb-ft, and back when it was 2.0L, it had 153 lb-ft, so really, a small I4 is not built for torque, unless you give it a turbo. in which case you can do things like the evolution VIII, 276 lb-ft out of four half-liter cylinders...

In more cases, a supercharger would be better for torque....

from my basic understanding, a supercharger is better for the low end then a turbocharger is, because it doesnt have to spool up.

so i would say (from what i know), that the supercharger is better for the power and torque curve. may be able to create more torque per HP, but i'm not sure if thats what you mean?

Not neccesarily tq per hp, but just tq overall. As you said SC is for low-end and turbo is for top-end. Most stage 1 or 2 turbo RSXs have less tq than the supecharged ones, but the turbos have more hp.

well, i dont know much about RSX's, considering i have a neon r/t... and i'm just starting to really learn about cars, and what you can do to them...

i just hear the import vs. domestic wars... and i'm trying to figure out the virtues of both...

the RSX is the only honda/acura that even would appeal to me, except for its torque rating being at 7000rpm's... but i've never driven a car with a vtec engine... so i'm not so quick to write it off, if it can GET to 7000rpm's quickly...

the car i really wanted to get was the VW gti 1.8t... which has its max torque from 1950rpm's all the way to around 5000 rpm's... (even if the thing is 3000lbs) i would only assume you wouldnt notice turbo lag at all... but again, i havnt driven one.

not too sure what any of that has to do with the RSX having only 143lb-ft of torque... but thats what turbo's and superchargers are for.

Well if it isn't crazy canuck back from the dead...then again Clay's been missing for a few months (or mabe hes just not popular nemore); did you have anything to do with that canuck??

an s/c will give you more torque, especially down low, but how much torque do you really want from a fwd car?? it gets kinda pointless after a while...plus turbos are so much fun!!

as for import vs domestic cars are designed in country A, parts are assembled in country B,C,D,E and its finally put together in country F...so where exactly is it from??

i'd say wherever the R&D engineers are, so country A in your example. unless you're talking about "i buy a domestic to support the economy", then its country F.

either that or i dont much like the letters B, C, D, or E. :D

but i'm just saying, that even though i have a neon, i'm trying to figure out why people like each "division" of cars... and no, i'm not trying to start a import vs. domestic war in this thread. i was just giving an explanation of why i'm in a car forum that i dont own, and am not looking to own the car it's representing.

Well look at Toyota...you could almost consider it a domestic.....

And i'm not back from the dead:p the forum was just dead period. And Clay is probably resting is vocal chords. He deserves it.



Back on topic (or less off topic, actually) I wouldn't go near a 1.8T. Good motors and trannies, completely worthless everything else - ugly, extremely hit or miss on reliability, and ugly. :D

hey... ugly is just a matter of opinion. ;)

and toyota... what do they have to offer as sports cars... a celica? mr2? nothing that even breaks 200hp... unless you count the solara, but honestly... i dont consider toyota much of anything so far as sports cars. :loser:

I definetly feels like there is more torque that there really is. I haven't test drove the 05 but i test dorve an 04 the other day, and I must say I was rather impressed. It test drove that and WRX Imprezza in the same day, and the RSX Type S would have easily taken the WRX Imprezza off the line.

hey... ugly is just a matter of opinion. ;)

and toyota... what do they have to offer as sports cars... a celica? mr2? nothing that even breaks 200hp... unless you count the solara, but honestly... i dont consider toyota much of anything so far as sports cars. :loser:


Actually they don't even offer the celica anymore. They dropped that to further the Scion line with I have heard (don't know if it is true or not) that they are planning to make the Tc come stock supercharged in the future. If you want a toyota that is breaking 200hp though your only real opinion is the soloria. Other than that you need to start looking at the lexus in the toyota family

wow... with as many celica's that i see on the road, i wouldnt have expected them to drop that.

not that i liked the car anyway...

The Celica isn't selling well, especially since the RSX, SRT-4, Cobalt, and now their own tC has been released.

Yeah not to mention that they wanted like 30,000 dollars for a brand new GTS and they wanted even more for the Action pack celica (a joke my opinion) There are things that are alot quicker and alot cheapier on the market. For that much money.

Celica is dead, Mr2 is dead...Toyota is phasing them out for 2006...There just wasn't enough margin on them and sales were slowing on both products

Toyota does understand the new trend for powerful and practical sports cars, and look for some interesting new entries in the near-future

Also, look for the IS350, its supossed to be a 3 series killer...300+hp 3.5L V6 and styling thats very un-lexus like

With the new BMWs looking so weird and being just as overpriced, I think Lexus has a great opportunity. Too bad the RL's sales haven't been good for Acura :(

With the new BMWs looking so weird and being just as overpriced, I think Lexus has a great opportunity. Too bad the RL's sales haven't been good for Acura :(

yeah I've personally lost alot of respect for BMW just because of Mr. bangle's designs

and its sad that the RL's arent selling well...but after 4 months of co op I could have gone to the morons at Honda and told them that Executives dont want V6's no matter how much hp they put out....oh and its gotta be bigger, and look slung and lazy, like an Audi

Yeah, to me I like the RL but the general public wants a big bragging sheet with their cars.

And the 2006 330i looks like it was the result of a threesome with a Mazda3, a Civic, and Tubgirl.

Don't ever speak of tubgirl! ugh horrible pictures in my head now, im gonna be sick

3 series is rough...but I wouldnt go that far

As for RL heres what im saying

http://www.rsportscars.com/foto/02/acurarl05_05.jpg

Just the way its slung forward and aggressive

VERSUS

http://www.autogazeta.com/g/383/a8-2.jpg

which is slung a little further back, more relaxed passive look



Oh and this is another reason rich execs dont buy RL's

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/hondaracingclub/acura_rl_prototype_2004_01_.jpg

I mean how many A8's and 760's do you see doing that??

Oh, lord, that is making me sick just looking at it......poor RL!!

lol, I really like the RL but i don't think it can compete with the A8(which has either the v8 or W12 motor) adn the 760i with only a V6. I think the RL can go toe to toe with the new and ugly 530i.

Compared to the A8 the RL looks like a rental car.

Thats a photochopped RL :P

Thats a photochopped RL :P


Thats not the point!

the point is that how can you expect an Acura to compete with an A8 when ppl treat it a friggin tuner-car...the entire Honda/Acura brand is typecast to be these stupid ricer mobiles...and an executive or CEO looks at an RL and happns to see something like that, is he really gonna get it? hell think its a civic

Well, I'm not quite an executive, but when I saw the RSX and KNEW it was a Civic but better looking, higher performing, and with nicer features, I wanted it. And I was considering Audis.

I heard a lot more good experiences with Honda/Acura than I did with Audi, VW or Saab. Sure, a lot of kids rice them out, but people do crap to all kinds of cars.

I don't think the problem is with Acura being associated with ricers (look at the TL and TSX) but its just not the right styling for most people and lacks a V8. They also know how much more reliable Acura is comapred to Volkslemon/OWdi.

not starting a flame war, but I dunt agree

the corp execs are driving around and they see a bunch of Honda's with Acura labels on them, and integras and RSX's flying by with fart can mufflers....then they look at the RL and say "I wanna associate myself with that?"

The V6 and styling play a role I mentioned that already, but I think the brand image plays a role as well

Well I'm sure there's some truth to what you're saying.......maybe that's why I'm not an exec!

I don't want to associate myself with fat Lexus (Japanese copy of M-B) or snotty VW/Audi (especially now with their new hideous styling).
Infiniti has always struck me as a real oddball, though that image may be no longer valid. It's an old association from when their designs were worse than anything Hyundai ever styled.

and toyota... what do they have to offer as sports cars... a celica? mr2? nothing that even breaks 200hp... unless you count the solara, but honestly... i dont consider toyota much of anything so far as sports cars. :loser:

That's a pretty ignorant statement. The GT-S may not have 200hp, but it is just as fast or faster than other cars in its class.

difference between sports car, and sporty coupe.

i mean a proper sports car... like the toyota supra was. you cant put the celica in the same class as the supra, can you? just like i dont really consider the RSX a sports car...

dont take it as ignorance... just a distinction between car classes.

difference between sports car, and sporty coupe.

i mean a proper sports car... like the toyota supra was. you cant put the celica in the same class as the supra, can you? just like i dont really consider the RSX a sports car...

dont take it as ignorance... just a distinction between car classes.

I see what you mean.. the rsx, celica, etc are only sport compacts.. definitely not a sports car by any means.

and toyota... what do they have to offer as sports cars... a celica? mr2? ... i dont consider toyota much of anything so far as sports cars. :loser:

http://www.jekylhyderacing.com/images/lmfao.gifhttp://www.jekylhyderacing.com/images/lmfao.gifhttp://www.jekylhyderacing.com/images/lmfao.gif

http://www.jekylhyderacing.com/images/resthinking.gif

yea... i'm so glad you read my explanation that even someone with one of the cars i named accepted. ;)

maybe reading the whole thread has hit the road?

EDIT: i see you've got a couple of '91 MR2's. no disrespect to them... but just the same, i'm not calling my dodge neon a proper sports car just because it says "R/T" and "Magnum 2.0" on it. ;)

point is, you own two sporty coupes, not two full blown sports cars. that is... unless you modified them, in which case they're not proper examples in this argument.

I read your explanation (and the whole thread) and my comments stand.

You apparently do not understand the term "sports car." I own four MR2s, an '85, '88 and two 91s and they are all sports cars ~ as is the 2000+ MR2 Spyders. "Big horsepower" is not part of the equation of a sports car. Miatas, MGs, Elises, TVRs ... they are all sports cars and none of them are very powerful.

The Celica is not a sports car. I would agree to the term "sport comapct" for that vehicle as I would for the RSX, Integras, Neons, Civics, etc ...

All "coupe" means is a car with 2 doors.

in that case what seperates the celica from the mr2? other then one being FWD and one being RWD?

and, the mr2 is more of a roadster, as is the miata, and maybe even the elise.

mg and tvr are brands... and look at the tvr speed12, got enough power and torque there.

Why bother with the excruciating and irrelevant task of labeling and classification anymore? If you can modify lightly and kill a Mustang or other traditionally dubbed sports car, what's the point? If you want to attempt to classify cars stock for stock, you can- but in today's market where cars can be easily tuned/modified with any number of readily available parts- where RSXs and Celicas have been heavily modified to pump out ridiculous horsepower with a stock block, it seems like a waste of time. I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't consider the RSX or the Celica a sports car, but then again, they probably have no idea of each car's potential- and probably haven't done any research concerning the beasts that have been put together lately.

Celica is not a 2-seater and it's not set up to be a curve huggin performance car.

The cars I listed are purpose built sports car. There primary function, by design, is driving.

The Supra I would classify as a high-performance vehicle. They are heavy, big cars ... not exactly tossable.

yea... i'm so glad you read my explanation that even someone with one of the cars i named accepted. ;)

maybe reading the whole thread has hit the road?

EDIT: i see you've got a couple of '91 MR2's. no disrespect to them... but just the same, i'm not calling my dodge neon a proper sports car just because it says "R/T" and "Magnum 2.0" on it. ;)

point is, you own two sporty coupes, not two full blown sports cars. that is... unless you modified them, in which case they're not proper examples in this argument.

You can see from his sig that hes got a pretty fast Mr2...were talking about it in the non-specific racing forum

and S777 where have you been? no RSX stories or nothin?? or did you get your dream car mustang?? :lol:

and welcome to my neck of the woods Hyde

it is very tough to properly define a sports car... and theres alot of cars that are borderline sports cars...for example, a Bentley Continental flying spur is considered a luxury car, but it gets to 60 in 5s and can his 200mph, a definate sports car credential

mason_RsX, thanks for the welcome :)
I'm not familiar with the Bentley you are talking about, but the numbers you gave to represent it sound more like a high performance car than a sports car. Sports cars, by definition, are cars designed for corner carving and curve hugging :)

It doesn't matter if it's top speed is 90 or 210 :D

The numbers is my siggy are not accurate, they are higher now ... I am just waiting to update my siggy because we are making biggersnumbers this week *crosses fingers*

well yea, i wouldn'd deny that HIS MR2 is a proper sports car, but thats quite different from what toyota has to offer the general public.

and my original statement was "what does toyota have to offer?". certainly not something like in his sig.


but RSX-S777, point taken, each car is what the owner makes of it... and i suppose on forums like these, thats a bit more then what the general public will make of any given car.

and S777 where have you been? no RSX stories or nothin?? or did you get your dream car mustang?? :lol:

No stories. I've been laying low and driving safe ever since that fucking blimp hit me. Canuck still out on tour I take it? Lucky Canadian bastard...

I've been posting here before you have you Celine CD theif :p

no racing in the taurus S777?

I blew the doors off his Taurus after I ate a lot of chili.

Ah, the Taurus. I'd almost forgotten all about it...and was much happier that way. What a P-O-S. Ford Taurus stops on a dime...because it can't get over it.
:grinyes:

Oh shit...don't tell me I left Canuck's box set in the rental...

mason_RsX, thanks for the welcome :)
I'm not familiar with the Bentley you are talking about, but the numbers you gave to represent it sound more like a high performance car than a sports car. Sports cars, by definition, are cars designed for corner carving and curve hugging :)

It doesn't matter if it's top speed is 90 or 210 :D

The numbers is my siggy are not accurate, they are higher now ... I am just waiting to update my siggy because we are making biggersnumbers this week *crosses fingers*

your welcome to keep posting...it can get really quiet here...the Bently im talking about is a W12 TT thats a 200mph+ luxury car...its extremely fast, but it wighs something like 6500lbs...My whole point was its very fast, but nobody would call it a sports car, so speed doesnt determine it

and yeah I know your over your sig hp, I posted in your intercooler + piping post


and S777 you know you miss your speed demon Taurus...why exactly did you buy it neways? and I heard Canucks forcing Celine and Clay to make a duet...at gunpoint...

Fool. Its Celine, Clay, and Anne Murruy to form a trio....at gunpoint.