06 SS/SC vs RSX-S
Originally Posted by xonic
yes rice{r},,,you basically said hey, at least my car rev's higher than yours does....like it makes it magically better.
Originally Posted by xonic
Have you been to a honda,acura,nissan,import site lately? Cobalt SS = crap cause it needed an S/C to get 100hp/liter and it's a chevy teh z06 is good, but if honda made a 7.0L v8 it'd have 10000000000hp and be 'refined' and reliable.
Originally Posted by FastFrontier17
i wish acura would have put a lsd in the type s (the type r lsd would be fine)...but anyways...what would say 250 ft_lbs of torque and 250 hp in a FWD car do.....SPINNNNNNN....
Originally Posted by maxpit
More HP makes you faster, and Torque gives you the quickness to get there. Plain and simple.
Originally Posted by FastFrontier17
alright? so your calling me a ricer for stating a fact...alright how cool are you... 

Originally Posted by FastFrontier17
hm...i walk ss/sc cobalts in my bolt-on rsx...
honda's stereotypical "lack" of torque is really the only cut down you guys have...
honda's stereotypical "lack" of torque is really the only cut down you guys have...
As for lack of torque, you can't deny that. You car makes 140ft/lbs of torque at 7000RPM. A stock base model Ecotec makes more torque than that - and at half the RPM too. I've driven plenty of Hondas, and I personally can't stand them. I can't stand the feeling of taking off from a light and having a completely gutless motor, there just no power until you hit over 6,000RPM. And of course by then you've already been walked by a Cobalt SS S/C, which pulls hard from idle to redline - plenty of power and torque everywhere in the rev range.
hey atleast i can safely run to 8800 rpms on the stock valvetrain...
In case you haven't noticed, most Cobalt SS S/C's are putting down between 205 - 215WHP stock - a couple guys are pushing 230WHP with just an intake. So unless you are putting down those kinds of numbers (RSX-S's put down about 180 stock) you aren't hanging with any SS S/C's.
Originally Posted by Doc
Does Honda even make a V8..??
Originally Posted by wesmanw02
In case you haven't noticed, most Cobalt SS S/C's are putting down between 205 - 215WHP stock - a couple guys are pushing 230WHP with just an intake. So unless you are putting down those kinds of numbers (RSX-S's put down about 180 stock) you aren't hanging with any SS S/C's.
With some of the numbers you guys are putting down(270whp from intense) RSXs would be knocking on 11s. With around 230whp NA(no internals) some RSXs have ran high 12s. 215whp in an RSX = mid 13s.
[QUOTE=wasey13]He would walk you.
Once again your random trolling, "I mean posting", proves you know very little about racing. Like I said it would not be a walking. I raced a Nissan at the track, he happened to post a 14.383@99.1. I posted a 14.729@97.4, he beat me by about 1 and 1/2 car lengths. A walking is like 3 plus!
Once again your random trolling, "I mean posting", proves you know very little about racing. Like I said it would not be a walking. I raced a Nissan at the track, he happened to post a 14.383@99.1. I posted a 14.729@97.4, he beat me by about 1 and 1/2 car lengths. A walking is like 3 plus!
Originally Posted by wasey13
With some of the numbers you guys are putting down(270whp from intense) RSXs would be knocking on 11s. With around 230whp NA(no internals) some RSXs have ran high 12s. 215whp in an RSX = mid 13s.
[QUOTE=SS4ME]
How am I trolling?? Just cause I disagree.
And since when has walking been defined as 3 or more cars??
RSXs weigh like 100lbs(or less) less then a SS/SC. Gearing you're right.
Originally Posted by wasey13
He would walk you.
Once again your random trolling, "I mean posting", proves you know very little about racing. Like I said it would not be a walking. I raced a Nissan at the track, he happened to post a 14.383@99.1. I posted a 14.729@97.4, he beat me by about 1 and 1/2 car lengths. A walking is like 3 plus!
Once again your random trolling, "I mean posting", proves you know very little about racing. Like I said it would not be a walking. I raced a Nissan at the track, he happened to post a 14.383@99.1. I posted a 14.729@97.4, he beat me by about 1 and 1/2 car lengths. A walking is like 3 plus!
And since when has walking been defined as 3 or more cars??
Originally Posted by xonic
meh,,,superior gearing + less weight FTW!!
Originally Posted by wasey13
This year or the year after, they will.
So a car with less hp can't beat a car with more hp???
With some of the numbers you guys are putting down(270whp from intense) RSXs would be knocking on 11s. With around 230whp NA(no internals) some RSXs have ran high 12s. 215whp in an RSX = mid 13s.
So a car with less hp can't beat a car with more hp???
With some of the numbers you guys are putting down(270whp from intense) RSXs would be knocking on 11s. With around 230whp NA(no internals) some RSXs have ran high 12s. 215whp in an RSX = mid 13s.
The RSX Type S weighs 2840lbs. The Cobalt SS S/C weighs 2991lbs.. Maybe you're not to great at math, but thats a difference of 151lbs.
Sorry, but 151lbs is not the difference between a low 14 second 1/4 mile and high 12 second 1/4 mile in two vehicle putting down the same Horsepower. You need to get your facts straight, you are totally off the map with your numbers
Originally Posted by wesmanw02
Wow nothing like totally exaggerating.
The RSX Type S weighs 2840lbs. The Cobalt SS S/C weighs 2991lbs.. Maybe you're not to great at math, but thats a difference of 151lbs.
Sorry, but 151lbs is not the difference between a low 14 second 1/4 mile and high 12 second 1/4 mile in two vehicle putting down the same Horsepower. You need to get your facts straight, you are totally off the map with your numbers
The RSX Type S weighs 2840lbs. The Cobalt SS S/C weighs 2991lbs.. Maybe you're not to great at math, but thats a difference of 151lbs.
Sorry, but 151lbs is not the difference between a low 14 second 1/4 mile and high 12 second 1/4 mile in two vehicle putting down the same Horsepower. You need to get your facts straight, you are totally off the map with your numbers
It would be intersting to drive a V8 Honda. Speaking of high rpm's, the '96-'98 cobra's can rev to 7,000 rpm all day long, which is pretty impressive for a V8.
The way I see it, is you can brag all day how high your engine can rev..I'm still going to laugh when I beat you.
The way I see it, is you can brag all day how high your engine can rev..I'm still going to laugh when I beat you.
I am wondering if some of you guys know how HP is tested. It is figured out from TORQUE x A Constant x RPMS. So the more Torque you have early on the more HP you have. That is why VTEC engines create max HP and TQ at almost Redline.
As for the comment about a RSX-S running 11s with 270whp I can highly doubt that. I know of a few guys with 300 whp/290 ft-lbs in a GTI running 11.8- 12.0 with a semi-gutted car. Some guys need to think before they start throwing numbers. My brother has a VW 1.8t putting down around 215 whp/250 wft-lbs and pulls a lot harder bottom end vs. my SS but doesn't have enough top end to keep up.
I am not sure why the comment was made that GM had to put the Supercharger on there to get 100 hp/liter. Hell there are V8s that don't put down 50hp/liter. And not everyone wants a engine that takes till redline to create any reasonable about of power and still have half any normal engines torque. If you want to talk trash about higher reving why don't you talk about the Street bikes that rev to 13k-15k and still create more power than a honda engine all over the board.
As for the comment about a RSX-S running 11s with 270whp I can highly doubt that. I know of a few guys with 300 whp/290 ft-lbs in a GTI running 11.8- 12.0 with a semi-gutted car. Some guys need to think before they start throwing numbers. My brother has a VW 1.8t putting down around 215 whp/250 wft-lbs and pulls a lot harder bottom end vs. my SS but doesn't have enough top end to keep up.
I am not sure why the comment was made that GM had to put the Supercharger on there to get 100 hp/liter. Hell there are V8s that don't put down 50hp/liter. And not everyone wants a engine that takes till redline to create any reasonable about of power and still have half any normal engines torque. If you want to talk trash about higher reving why don't you talk about the Street bikes that rev to 13k-15k and still create more power than a honda engine all over the board.
Who cares if the RSX can do over 8,000 revs? The DZ302 in the 60's Z28 Camaros could rev to 8,000 rpm easy while stock. However, he difference between the DZ302 and the H22 or whatever the RSX has is that the V8 made over 350 hp and over 300 lbs of torque. That old carb motor is a beast.
All the revs is the world won't help you if you don't have the power to back them up...
All the revs is the world won't help you if you don't have the power to back them up...
Originally Posted by FastFrontier17
your saying the rsx's lack of torque makes it slow? my tach probably moves faster than most of the ss/sc'd cobalts
[QUOTE=SS4ME]
Um.....You Were getting walked if we go by your exsample. Just cause the raced ended at that point and he was only a car and a half ahead doesn't mean you weren't getting walked. See since he traped higher than you at that point that means he was going faster than you right? So If he was going faster than you that means he was pulling away. The longer the race went It might have gottend worse. No guarentee that you woulda came back by 140 mph. If you weren't getting walked he would have been a car and a half ahead of you and you would traped almost the same. him doing almost 2mph more than you translates to you got walked.
Originally Posted by wasey13
He would walk you.
Once again your random trolling, "I mean posting", proves you know very little about racing. Like I said it would not be a walking. I raced a Nissan at the track, he happened to post a 14.383@99.1. I posted a 14.729@97.4, he beat me by about 1 and 1/2 car lengths. A walking is like 3 plus!
Once again your random trolling, "I mean posting", proves you know very little about racing. Like I said it would not be a walking. I raced a Nissan at the track, he happened to post a 14.383@99.1. I posted a 14.729@97.4, he beat me by about 1 and 1/2 car lengths. A walking is like 3 plus!
Originally Posted by FastFrontier17
NSX's lack torque? Accord v6's Lack Torque? Ridegelines lack torque? TL's, CL's, and RL's lack torque?....
hey atleast i can safely run to 8800 rpms on the stock valvetrain...
plain answer for the stock vs stock, ss/sc will win if the driver knows his car. it will rape the type s plain and simple. i raced a local guy here 15 times at least since i got my car and i beat him ever single time. the only local type s that could hang with me when i was stock was one that was making 210 hp. i was making 220. we raced 2 times and were neck and neck both times. gearing owns us i will admit. but even still, im not stock anymore and we have some more runs planned for the near future.
i finally got to race a type S this morning going to work lol, hes my buddy hand hes a good driver, hes had it for a few years, hes just got an intake, im totally stock, i won by a good margin and im still not 100 percent when it comes to racing.
Originally Posted by FastFrontier17
NSX's lack torque? Accord v6's Lack Torque? Ridegelines lack torque? TL's, CL's, and RL's lack torque?....hey atleast i can safely run to 8800 rpms on the stock valvetrain...
Originally Posted by c7015
Speaking of NSX's go to the video section and watch a cobalt beat an NSX (your halo car) ...but I guess the personal satisfaction of knowing you can rev high is some kind of consolation ?



