WRX or RSX type S ???

[Dan GSR]

WRX or RSX type S ???
Need a new car...what do you guys think.

[arkady151]

Although they are both really great cars , I would go with the WRX. The Acura Type-S probably has a better interior and comfort , but the WRX is a freaking monster on the road. I would definetly go with the WRX. Or if you have time to wait , then wait till fall , thats when the new Lancer Evolution 7 comes out and its even faster with than the WRX, plus a better quality interior.

[RSX S NJ]

Check the subaru site they got a comparison of the RSX and WRX

[kale82]

Originally posted by Dan GSR
WRX or RSX type S ???
Need a new car...what do you guys think.

Well, I hate to say it *choke* but the WRX looks pretty nice.. Depends on what yer look'n for I guess... look at the paperwork.

RSX MSRP: 23,650
WRX MSRP: 23,995
Not enough price difference to matter there..

RSX specs:
200hp
142lbs torque
2.0 litre
2795 lbs

WRX specs:
227hp
217lbs torque
2.0 litre
3085 lbs
AWD

WRX performance wise, seems quite a bit better, however quite a bit heavier as well... I wouldn't mind test drive'n a WRX to see if there's that big of a difference...

so I guess what it comes down to is styling.. IMHO the WRX looks less sporty and more grocery-getter to me... (4 door sedan, big round headlights, kinda boxy) but the rsx seems to look more sporty to me...

I like the RSX better, but that's only because I'm biased.. I like Acura alot, although I have to admit, the WRX looks very impressive on paper and I think if you didn't care one way or another, it'd be a hard choice, especially with the minimal price difference....

So, what it comes down to for me is Styling since I've never driven a WRX, I can't say how much "faster" it is..

Tough choice, good luck man.

-Bryan Layne
1995 Honda Civic EX

[Dan GSR]

0-60 the WRX is 1.2 secs better
1/4mile WRX is 0.9 secs better...

bahhhh..
what to do??
i won't be able to get it for 6 months at least..
plus the subaru is turbo already just get a bigger turbine, intercooler, maybe 50shot of NOS....and 300hp is easy.

[kale82]

Originally posted by Dan GSR
0-60 the WRX is 1.2 secs better
1/4mile WRX is 0.9 secs better...

bahhhh..
what to do??
i won't be able to get it for 6 months at least..
plus the subaru is turbo already just get a bigger turbine, intercooler, maybe 50shot of NOS....and 300hp is easy.

ya, but it's still ugly..

-Bryan Layne
1995 Honda Civic EX

[border_project]

i dont mind the wrx unless it has a kit. who has seen the wrx commercial with the blue wrx with the kit and the 17inch rims???
i really like that one. i dont like the wrx when its stock. fugly
the rsx is pretty cool. i would get red with the dealer bodykit.

[border_project]

oh yah forgot
if i were to chose one. i would definetely go for the wrx. seat 4 people in comfort without tilting the seat (god i hate tilting the seat to put passengers in the rear, screws up my seating position)
if it was for style i would go for the rsx, i like engines that screams at 8000rpm. other than that, too small and i like the awd

[markpa]

I ve got the s type and i couldnt be happier....looks and performace, i love it

[mikelemo]

Look you need to all realize this. I don't get why these cars are even compared.

I checked into the numbers, and the WRX is running 14 lbs of boost to get that 227 HP. So, take away the turbo set-up, and you lose about $5-8K in the car's value, and then you have a 130-160 HP car. So, there is a $4K difference between the WRX, which comes with SH*T in it, as opposed to a RSX Type S with leather, etc.

Anyway, put 14 lbs of boost in a turbo for the Type S with the extra $4K, plus $1.5K if you wanted leather in the WRX (which may or may not be possible to get from the factory), and you have a 260-285 HP RSX.

I wish they made an AWD RSX. I just don't think the WRX has any potential. You look in a magazine (I believe Automotive) with a tricked out WRX, which they have listed at $500,000 (Yes, that's 5 zeros!), and it is 300 HP.

Not worth it. Someone needs to make a way to AWD the RSX. It would be soooo coool!

My $0.02!

[border_project]

they should make a FR rsx
that would be better. it would be a pure sport
if they make a all wheel drive rsx it would cost about the same as a wrx.
besides wrx is a sports sedan. it would be stupid if you put leather in it because its ment to be driven hard.
the rsx is ment to be driven hard as well, but half of it is ment to be a luxurious sports coupe

[Phr0st]

a 75 lb-ft difference in torque.. who can argue that? Sure.. the WRX is turbocharged and the RSX isn't.. and yeah, you'd probably get alot more top end out of RSX if you turbocharged it, but that's going to cost at least another $4k, whereas the WRX is still going to hang, and if someone decided to put a moderate to heavy shot of NOS in the WRX it would only cost around 1.5-2k (and that's for a REALLY nice kit and possibly installation included), plus stock internals are already very beefy on the WRX, which means it could handle a higher shot, and still crank on the RSX.

So my vote is a WRX.

[LjasonL]

Originally posted by mikelemo
I checked into the numbers, and the WRX is running 14 lbs of boost to get that 227 HP. So, take away the turbo set-up, and you lose about $5-8K in the car's value, and then you have a 130-160 HP car. So, there is a $4K difference between the WRX, which comes with SH*T in it, as opposed to a RSX Type S with leather, etc.

Anyway, put 14 lbs of boost in a turbo for the Type S with the extra $4K, plus $1.5K if you wanted leather in the WRX (which may or may not be possible to get from the factory), and you have a 260-285 HP RSX.

so now were taking $4000-$8000 away from the wrx and adding $4000 to the rsx? so youre wanting to compare a $15000 car with a $27000 car? what kind of reasoning is that?

plus itll cost more than $4000 to push 14.7 psi (wrx has 14.7 psi not 14) in an rsx with its high compression.

how does the wrx have no potential? do u realize how easy it is to drag power out of a turbo car? i youve really researched it then u realize the wrx is breathing through 3 catalytic converters and has a low 8.0 compression ratio. remove a couple cats, add 2 pounds of boost, add a 50shot of nitrous, without needing any internal mods just some fuel delivery and ignition mods and some tuning, and youre easily pushing 310-320hp for the $4000 u wanted just to turbo the rsx, which is gonna be a very volatile mixture with that high compression, and youll probably need some internals if u want to push any meaningful amount of boost, including lower compression pistons.

and $4000 is definately and overestimate for how much it would cost to make 300hp in a wrx. lets look at it part by part. fuel pump $200, fpr $100, ignition $200, air/fuel controller $200, nitrous kit $500, manual boost controller $200, j&s ultrasafeguard $500, boost guage $50, air/fuel guage $50, intake $200, intercooler piping $200, downpipe $200, catback exhaust $500. there im at $2900, that even includes some guages and intake and exhaust. hell i even threw in the j&s safeguard that has individual knock sensors for each cylinder and advances and retards the timing in each cylinder individually to ensure there wont be any detonation. lets go ahead and add a programmable engine management system for another $1000 to get it up to $4000. with all those parts the wrx will definately make more than 340hp. thats how much itll cost to put a basic turbo kit on the rsx that will probably only push 5psi cuz of the compression.

dont get me wrong the rsx is a nice car, but u cant say it can make a lot of power easier or cheaper than the wrx.

[g_speed]

I'd go with the RSX because it offers so much more than the WRX. Plus, I'm from Canada, and the WRX is about $4,500 more than the RSX Type S. I will purchase the RSX after comparison because although the WRX has an incredible engine, RSX has better estetique and refinement.

[maceez13]

RSX... WRX is jus plain ugly