04 spec vs rsx type s

[brad2.5]

sup guys i see yall talk about spec vs rsx s a lot.I have seen a rsx s beat a 02 spec like two in a row.Then i just seen a 04 spec and a rsx s not sure what year but they raced 3 times and the spec had it all 3.First time the rsx was on its ass 2 time bout the same and 3 the rsx s was about half a car behind it .The spec is stock and the rsx only got a aem intake.But it was a good race to watch.

[crazy_canuck]

Street racing is:
a) stupid
b) not the determining factor of who's faster

[RSX-S777]

I would rather lose in an RSX-S than win in a Sentra. Of course, I have a biased opinion...

[brad2.5]

well rsx s are nice but not for that money.I would go with spec look at the price and u can slap a nice turbo on one.i think the spec looks good.yall are payin just as much a wrx and gti and much more.

[mmont0]

Originally Posted by brad2.5

well rsx s are nice but not for that money.I would go with spec look at the price and u can slap a nice turbo on one.i think the spec looks good.yall are payin just as much a wrx and gti and much more.

The WRX is actually about 1k more, STi about 7k more, the GTI VR6 is about the same price, the R32 about 7k more.

I agree with you with the WRX since it is much faster, but the VR6 is a little slower. Also, if you take a look at the consumer reports issue for 2004 best and worst cars you can see why we are paying more.

Make Problems/100 new vehicles
Lexus 9
Infiniti 10
Honda 10
Toyota 11
Acura 13
Mazda 13
Buick 13
Saturn 14
Hyundai 14
Nissan 14
Pontiac 15
Dodge 16
Saab 16
Kia 16
Jeep 16
Chrysler 17
Ford 17
Subaru 17
Mercury 18
BMW 19
Volkswagen 19
Chevrolet 19
Audi 20
Volvo 20
Mercedes-Benz 22
GMC 24
Mini 25
Cadillac 25
Hummer 26
Jaguar 30
Lincoln 31

After 5 years, the stats look like this:
Acura 34 #3 on the list
Nissan 46 #4 on the list
Subaru 51 #6 on the list
Volkswagen 138 Last on the list

So now you're more educated on why Acura is a little more expensive than another Subaru or Volkswagen in its class - because after 5 years, an Acura is not expected to break down. And we probably won't have to dish out as much money as the Nissan/Subaru/Volkswagen owners to fix all the problems. So in the long run an Acura is actually cheaper!

[MexSiR]

The RSX-S is faster assuming equal drivers. Period.

I work at the Nissan, and I have a 99 civic SiR. I beat the Spec-V from a roll, he beat me from a standstill and my car is 1.6 liter 160 hp against 2.5 liter 177 hp of the Sentras.

[brad2.5]

im talkin bout a 1.8t not vr6

[crazy_canuck]

Originally Posted by brad2.5

well rsx s are nice but not for that money.I would go with spec look at the price and u can slap a nice turbo on one.i think the spec looks good.yall are payin just as much a wrx and gti and much more.

Straight line isn't everything. And yes the Spec V is cheaper, but for a lot less i'd get a 1986 Mustang, but 5K in mods, will still have a ton of cash left, and will blow the Spec V's doors off. Your point?

IMO the Spec V is ugly. There's a modded one here that looks better than normal and everyone passes by and says "why spend money on a corolla". That's a kick to the nuts.

WRX is faster but has a crappy tranny. GTi is a volkswagon. It uses old school technology, Bosch/VAG makes tuning harder by changing their codes monthly, and it'll spend more time in repairs then it will with you.

If speed is your only concern, a stang or f-body will be much better.

[lamehonda]

Originally Posted by MexSiR

The RSX-S is faster assuming equal drivers. Period.

I work at the Nissan, and I have a 99 civic SiR. I beat the Spec-V from a roll, he beat me from a standstill and my car is 1.6 liter 160 hp against 2.5 liter 177 hp of the Sentras.

yeah, but your a really good driver

[RSX-S777]

Originally Posted by brad2.5

well rsx s are nice but not for that money.I would go with spec look at the price and u can slap a nice turbo on one.

I'll say it again. Start with a superior platform, end up with a superior result. Why buy a Sentra just so I can turbo it immediately when I can buy an Acura and turbo it later. I end up in a better looking, better handling, better quality, classier, more reliable and ultimately faster car (with a much higher resale) instead of a glorified economy sedan...

[crazy_canuck]

^ What he said.

[brad2.5]

sry but turbo spec is faster then a rsx s.With the same turbos.and about more reliable nissan has proven there self in the past just like the honda.All it comes down is what u like.Like i think there both nice cars they do preety much everything well.Then yall yall say its a sentra or a neon but everything got to start of from something.

[mmont0]

Originally Posted by brad2.5

All it comes down is what u like.Like i think there both nice cars they do preety much everything well.Then yall yall say its a sentra or a neon but everything got to start of from something.

Very true. I don't dispute your statements and I agree! It's up to the personal preference of the person who buys the car. Like I have said before, you(or your parents, in some cases) are the one making the payments, so buy a car that YOU choose and not a car that everyone else tells you to get.

[crazy_canuck]

Yes, a turbo charged car vs. a NA car of the same calibre is going to win. Speed isn't everything though. I'd rather have a slower RSX than drive a fast sentra.

If speed is all a Mustang would be a much better choice...

The Sentra isn't a good handler, one of the most unreliable cars and people still think its a sentra. And about the reliabilty - Nissan issued a multilmillion car recall about a month ago because of fires (I think) and the Spec V's are pissing off 90% of their owners.

[RSX-S777]

Wait...is he saying a turboed Spec will beat an RSX-S with a similar kit??