06 SS/SC vs RSX-S
Originally Posted by Cobalt443
I could have sworn it was ATLEAST 82hp.......lol
My buddy has an 03 Cobra and the other one has a supercharged m3...does that mean my Cobalt gets another 164 hp??? Sweeeet!
Originally Posted by Blainestang
It's 82hp at the crank, 73hp at the wheels.
haha ok thanks for correcting me on that cuz i was telling people that my friend's mother's brother's uncle's cousin had a 06' Z06 and i was telling people that i was getting an extra 82 hp because of that...ok i'll go back and tell them it's only 73.....
omg this has turned into a contest. Well, I know this guys brother who know this girl who once dated the guy that worked on the car of the mechanic who got fired from John Forces mail handling service. That has to be worth at least 100HP
(since he is one of the fastest people in the 1/4)
Originally Posted by FastFrontier17
i'll try
Originally Posted by FastFrontier17
can you tell me the difference between a cobra's v8 compared to a GT ??? doesnt the cobra have a ohc
....
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
Does 400lbs make the difference between a low 14 and high 12 sec, Mr. Race Expert??? Since I never listed the weights of the RSXs that could be running those times with the power you guys make. Next time argue one post at a time, before you insult my intelligence.
Hey FastFrontier17, time to move on to another thread. You won't get anything else but insults now from everyone because they know you are right.
Originally Posted by wasey13
Nice, take 2 different posts and argue as if they are one. What about all the people and magazines that claim the Cobalt weighs 2934(or around there)?
Does 400lbs make the difference between a low 14 and high 12 sec, Mr. Race Expert??? Since I never listed the weights of the RSXs that could be running those times with the power you guys make. Next time argue one post at a time, before you insult my intelligence.
Hey FastFrontier17, time to move on to another thread. You won't get anything else but insults now from everyone because they know you are right.
Does 400lbs make the difference between a low 14 and high 12 sec, Mr. Race Expert??? Since I never listed the weights of the RSXs that could be running those times with the power you guys make. Next time argue one post at a time, before you insult my intelligence.
Hey FastFrontier17, time to move on to another thread. You won't get anything else but insults now from everyone because they know you are right.
As for the issue at hand, you never mentioned anything about weight. You never said a "difference of 400lbs", you were just talking about horsepower. And for the record, 400lbs will not get a car from low 14's to high 12's. Not even close, I don't know where you pulled that from.
And as for weight, in order to even lose 400lbs off of an RSX you'd need to really gut the thing out. In which case it would pretty much be a race car, not a driveable/liveable street vehicle. And since you're talking about weight reduction, you can't just take 400lbs off the RSX without taking 400lbs off of the Cobalt as well, thats ridiculous, of course the RSX would have the weight advantage if the Cobalt was left stock
FastFrontier pretty much got owned in this thread. If he had been "right", he would still be posting in this thread right now. We proved him wrong, case closed.
Originally Posted by wesmanw02
What are you even talking about?? Combining 2 posts into one?? You're lost buddy, I merely quoted your post and replied to it.
As for the issue at hand, you never mentioned anything about weight. You never said a "difference of 400lbs", you were just talking about horsepower. And for the record, 400lbs will not get a car from low 14's to high 12's. Not even close, I don't know where you pulled that from.
And as for weight, in order to even lose 400lbs off of an RSX you'd need to really gut the thing out. In which case it would pretty much be a race car, not a driveable/liveable street vehicle. And since you're talking about weight reduction, you can't just take 400lbs off the RSX without taking 400lbs off of the Cobalt as well, thats ridiculous, of course the RSX would have the weight advantage if the Cobalt was left stock
FastFrontier pretty much got owned in this thread. If he had been "right", he would still be posting in this thread right now. We proved him wrong, case closed.
As for the issue at hand, you never mentioned anything about weight. You never said a "difference of 400lbs", you were just talking about horsepower. And for the record, 400lbs will not get a car from low 14's to high 12's. Not even close, I don't know where you pulled that from.
And as for weight, in order to even lose 400lbs off of an RSX you'd need to really gut the thing out. In which case it would pretty much be a race car, not a driveable/liveable street vehicle. And since you're talking about weight reduction, you can't just take 400lbs off the RSX without taking 400lbs off of the Cobalt as well, thats ridiculous, of course the RSX would have the weight advantage if the Cobalt was left stock
FastFrontier pretty much got owned in this thread. If he had been "right", he would still be posting in this thread right now. We proved him wrong, case closed.
Exactly, I never said weight. That is why I asked if a car with less horsepower could win a race. My buddy's RSX with 230whp weighed 2538lbs and ran 12.9s with no internal work just bolts ons..
His car was minus back seat, sub and amp, and a few other things. He still had AC, power steering, passenger seat, original glass, and original body parts. It was very far from a race car. He even had an MP3 storage unit and laptop in it and he added the type R wing. Maybe you should educate yourself A LOT more before you continue to insult my intelligence.
Originally Posted by wasey13
You only quoted one post but you talked about both of my posts.
Exactly, I never said weight. That is why I asked if a car with less horsepower could win a race. My buddy's RSX with 230whp weighed 2538lbs and ran 12.9s with no internal work just bolts ons..
His car was minus back seat, sub and amp, and a few other things. He still had AC, power steering, passenger seat, original glass, and original body parts. It was very far from a race car. He even had an MP3 storage unit and laptop in it and he added the type R wing. Maybe you should educate yourself A LOT more before you continue to insult my intelligence.
Exactly, I never said weight. That is why I asked if a car with less horsepower could win a race. My buddy's RSX with 230whp weighed 2538lbs and ran 12.9s with no internal work just bolts ons..
His car was minus back seat, sub and amp, and a few other things. He still had AC, power steering, passenger seat, original glass, and original body parts. It was very far from a race car. He even had an MP3 storage unit and laptop in it and he added the type R wing. Maybe you should educate yourself A LOT more before you continue to insult my intelligence.
I also have a hard time believing that an RSX weighing 2538 with only 230WHP runs a 12.9. A stock C6 Corvette, with an extra 140HP and 250ft/lbs of torque, only weighs 500lbs more, yet they run mid 12's. Somehow the gap should be much larger than a half second. So either your buddy's RSX has much more than 230WHP, weighs less than what you say it does, or he has 8.10:1 gears in the differential to get him down the strip in that kind of time
Originally Posted by wesmanw02
I'm not trying to insult your intelligence. The thing about being bad at math was just a pun, seeing as you didn't provide any numbers with your statements. I didn't mean for you to take it so personally.
I also have a hard time believing that an RSX weighing 2538 with only 230WHP runs a 12.9. A stock C6 Corvette, with an extra 140HP and 250ft/lbs of torque, only weighs 500lbs more, yet they run mid 12's. Somehow the gap should be much larger than a half second. So either your buddy's RSX has much more than 230WHP, weighs less than what you say it does, or he has 8.10:1 gears in the differential to get him down the strip in that kind of time
I also have a hard time believing that an RSX weighing 2538 with only 230WHP runs a 12.9. A stock C6 Corvette, with an extra 140HP and 250ft/lbs of torque, only weighs 500lbs more, yet they run mid 12's. Somehow the gap should be much larger than a half second. So either your buddy's RSX has much more than 230WHP, weighs less than what you say it does, or he has 8.10:1 gears in the differential to get him down the strip in that kind of time
HONDATA PHENOLIC SPACER
K20A SWAP
COMPTECH RACE HEADER
COMPTECH CAT BACK
AEM PULLEYS
RC ENG 550 INJECTORS
NITTO 555 225/40ZR18
TYPE R WING
TSW TURN 7 18s
NOLOGY WIRE SET
APEXI V-AFC2(FOR SALE)
TEIN FLEX SUSPENSION W/EFDC
WELD RACING 15x8 DRAGLITE 90 ON TYPE S ROTORS
M&H 23 8.5 15
DYNOJET DYNO 8-9-03
218 HP 155 TQ ON 18'S THIRD GEAR HONDATA ITR
BEST N/A TIME 12.963 @ 104.78
BEST N/A MHP 105.25 @ 13.035
BEST NOS 12.521 @ 113.46
BEST 60 FT 1.856
DRAG WEIGHT 2580 WITH 3/4 TANK OF GAS
SKUNK2 WHEEL STUDS AND LUG NUTS
DENSO IK27
Edit... that dyno was with a conservative tune.
Originally Posted by wasey13
HONDATA K PRO
HONDATA PHENOLIC SPACER
K20A SWAP
COMPTECH RACE HEADER
COMPTECH CAT BACK
AEM PULLEYS
RC ENG 550 INJECTORS
NITTO 555 225/40ZR18
TYPE R WING
TSW TURN 7 18s
NOLOGY WIRE SET
APEXI V-AFC2(FOR SALE)
TEIN FLEX SUSPENSION W/EFDC
WELD RACING 15x8 DRAGLITE 90 ON TYPE S ROTORS
M&H 23 8.5 15
DYNOJET DYNO 8-9-03
218 HP 155 TQ ON 18'S THIRD GEAR HONDATA ITR
BEST N/A TIME 12.963 @ 104.78
BEST N/A MHP 105.25 @ 13.035
BEST NOS 12.521 @ 113.46
BEST 60 FT 1.856
DRAG WEIGHT 2580 WITH 3/4 TANK OF GAS
SKUNK2 WHEEL STUDS AND LUG NUTS
DENSO IK27
Edit... that dyno was with a conservative tune.
HONDATA PHENOLIC SPACER
K20A SWAP
COMPTECH RACE HEADER
COMPTECH CAT BACK
AEM PULLEYS
RC ENG 550 INJECTORS
NITTO 555 225/40ZR18
TYPE R WING
TSW TURN 7 18s
NOLOGY WIRE SET
APEXI V-AFC2(FOR SALE)
TEIN FLEX SUSPENSION W/EFDC
WELD RACING 15x8 DRAGLITE 90 ON TYPE S ROTORS
M&H 23 8.5 15
DYNOJET DYNO 8-9-03
218 HP 155 TQ ON 18'S THIRD GEAR HONDATA ITR
BEST N/A TIME 12.963 @ 104.78
BEST N/A MHP 105.25 @ 13.035
BEST NOS 12.521 @ 113.46
BEST 60 FT 1.856
DRAG WEIGHT 2580 WITH 3/4 TANK OF GAS
SKUNK2 WHEEL STUDS AND LUG NUTS
DENSO IK27
Edit... that dyno was with a conservative tune.
Thats no big deal, list it along with the other mods as if its just another bolt-on...
Originally Posted by trent_ky
^Dayum...Nice car! (I still like my balt better...sorry)
Originally Posted by wesmanw02
O ok so it only took a complete engine swap to run a 12.9 in an RSX
Thats no big deal, list it along with the other mods as if its just another bolt-on...
Thats no big deal, list it along with the other mods as if its just another bolt-on...
Originally Posted by wasey13
No biggie, I like Cobalts too.
It was a < 6 hour job, either way I was right and you were wrong. It would be cool if you just admitted it and that his time was impressive, instead of always bashing Hondas. And with some internals the stock motor can run 12.8s-9s.
It was a < 6 hour job, either way I was right and you were wrong. It would be cool if you just admitted it and that his time was impressive, instead of always bashing Hondas. And with some internals the stock motor can run 12.8s-9s.
Originally Posted by wesmanw02
What were you right about and what was I wrong about?? Please specifically show me where I was "wrong", I only based my posts off the information you provided.
Originally Posted by wesmanw02
As for the issue at hand, you never mentioned anything about weight. You never said a "difference of 400lbs", you were just talking about horsepower. And for the record, 400lbs will not get a car from low 14's to high 12's. Not even close, I don't know where you pulled that from.
And as for weight, in order to even lose 400lbs off of an RSX you'd need to really gut the thing out. In which case it would pretty much be a race car, not a driveable/liveable street vehicle. And since you're talking about weight reduction, you can't just take 400lbs off the RSX without taking 400lbs off of the Cobalt as well, thats ridiculous, of course the RSX would have the weight advantage if the Cobalt was left stock
And as for weight, in order to even lose 400lbs off of an RSX you'd need to really gut the thing out. In which case it would pretty much be a race car, not a driveable/liveable street vehicle. And since you're talking about weight reduction, you can't just take 400lbs off the RSX without taking 400lbs off of the Cobalt as well, thats ridiculous, of course the RSX would have the weight advantage if the Cobalt was left stock
Wasey you're going in circles here. You still haven't specifically told me how I was "wrong" according to you. Quoting my post as your reference and saying nothing else proves nothing other than that you know how to quote posts - which isn't the issue here.
All the things I said in my post that you quoted are accurate. Eliminating 400lbs from a vehicle will not get it from low 14's to high 12's - I posted that and its true. Then I said taking 400lbs off involves some substantial gutting of the vehicle, making it generally uncomfortable for everyday use. Thats also correct. I don't see what you're talking about here, maybe we should just leave it at that.
All the things I said in my post that you quoted are accurate. Eliminating 400lbs from a vehicle will not get it from low 14's to high 12's - I posted that and its true. Then I said taking 400lbs off involves some substantial gutting of the vehicle, making it generally uncomfortable for everyday use. Thats also correct. I don't see what you're talking about here, maybe we should just leave it at that.
Originally Posted by wesmanw02
Wasey you're going in circles here. You still haven't specifically told me how I was "wrong" according to you. Quoting my post as your reference and saying nothing else proves nothing other than that you know how to quote posts - which isn't the issue here.
All the things I said in my post that you quoted are accurate. Eliminating 400lbs from a vehicle will not get it from low 14's to high 12's - I posted that and its true. Then I said taking 400lbs off involves some substantial gutting of the vehicle, making it generally uncomfortable for everyday use. Thats also correct. I don't see what you're talking about here, maybe we should just leave it at that.
All the things I said in my post that you quoted are accurate. Eliminating 400lbs from a vehicle will not get it from low 14's to high 12's - I posted that and its true. Then I said taking 400lbs off involves some substantial gutting of the vehicle, making it generally uncomfortable for everyday use. Thats also correct. I don't see what you're talking about here, maybe we should just leave it at that.
Originally Posted by eastcoastz
Why did they do that to the front end of the WRX\STi?? Last years front was so much nicer.


