The chances are, the numbers are overrated on the SI. Honda genarally inflates the numbers a little. It still should have good accelaration due to the lite weight.

 

Honda may be giving it 200 hp but the torque number will probably be around ........35 ?
J/K Honda owners.

Respect to all.

 

What's the joke in that? probably will only have 35 lbs of torque

 

so you're saying that the 95,000,000 rpm that it will turn does not compensate for the honda aka torque-less wonder

 

My focus was a high-winder (170hp @ 7,000 rpm and 145 tq @ 5500rpm) so I know what it's like to have a car like that, and I tell you what..the SS is a WAY better daily driver than the focus was. It was horrible, power wise on the street, but was great on the freeway.

 

Well said Nocturn.

 

Think you better wait for the Nissan sport concept or just buy a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution.

 

Can't get an Evo in Canada. Just a weak-@$$ Lancer.

 

I dont like the body lines. That flange that runs from the front fender, to the back makes the car look like a shoe box. Sure 205 Hp @ 8000, with 120 Ft/lbs ...LOL

Anyhow 205 at 8000 RPM isnt impressive.

I test drove the Type-S, ZERO torque for a car that hyped so much. The dealer dude looked at me like I had two heads when I told him I wasnt really impressed and its bark was MUCH bigger than the bite. Thats just my opinion. EVeryone has always told me to look out for these they are the ****. Maybe they jaded me.

I think the new civic will be a decent car but its not worth its price in this case. However I will still go test drive one so I know for sure.

 

Ya i hate that just because of some bumper issue. If we could get evo's i would have waiting to get one instead of my SS.

And for the civic, its the first civic I like but its just a small accord with a weak rsx engine. Recently C&D had the 0-60 to be 7.3 ***** SLOW!!! But the car has to be faster than that.

 

Few resons why this car is GAY.
#1- its a Honda civic..
#2- it looks like its on the wrong planet
#3- i bet its really putting out 170 HP max.

 

I think the new SI looks cool.... "H" make decent daily drivers... Good resale... I plan on buying one.... It will be perfect for the GF....

 

yeah, the rsx-s engine is so weak it's only rated 210hp at the crank N/A. that weak ass engine w/ simple bolt ons also can be a drivers race w/ an SS/SC. sure the torque is low but still manages to go 14.9 at the 1/4 stock N/A.

 

Personaly I don't agree with the Engine being weak, but I would never go anywhere near saying it's powerful. It didn't impress me at all when I test drove it, at least not for the money .

When I was lookings it came down to the RSX Type S and the Cobalt SS/SC, and the real killer for the RSX was that, I had to buy a more expensive (around 13% more for equivalent features) and then spend more money to make it just as fast or slightly faster then the SS!

I not trieing to bash hear but when it comes right down to it the SS is much better car for what you spend.

and I don't care what anyone says about the resale value. the truth is anyone who buys a ne car shouldn't because a soon as you drive off the lot you through away $3-6 k, and you'll never get it back...

P.S. a car that costs $8,000 more better damn well be worth more when I sell it.

 

i wasn't saying that the rsx-s engine is powerfull but it's not weak. yeah, the SS/SC is better bang for the buck. no argument there. i just love the aftermarket support i have for my car and i'm sure someday the cobalt will have that too. but for someone to just completely bash on the rsx-s just because it's a Honda is simply dumb. who's car costs $8,000 more than an SS/SC?

 

maybe weak isnt the best word but 210 @ what 8000 rpm. Sorry let other engine rev that high and see what happens. The word weak was dervived from the sad performance stats that I read in C&D for the Civic Si. Knowing that the rsx-s performs better than that, was why i said "has to be faster than that".

 

When I got a new 05 Priced it was about $8000 more then the cobalt on the road.

just adding the skirts and fog lights ran an extra 3.5g

 

As of 2006, maybe even already in effect are new SAE tests mandated in the U.S for factory HP ratings. The RSX has been re-rated to 201, and most other jap cars have proven to be over rated. Most all north american cars turned out to be under rated, thats why all the new chevys have these odd HP numbers now like 205 and 303. And you thought they were just being weird!.

 

I think he means Canadian .... Darn Canadians... So confusing

 

haha, oh ok.

 

Yes, but we are "Darn nice people up here" You have to be since we spend so much time with people indoors during winter months.

 

Ya... you canucks are alright in my book... when I lived in Michigan I used to go to canada all the time... Everyone there was really cool... way better strip clubs there too !

although I did go to Toronto once and the people there were being major dicks...

 

Hell yea, Vancouver BC has per capita, some of the finest women in the world! Never saw a woman with breasts smaller than a "C" cup, and a waist larger than a size 7

 

I own an 03 Type S, daily driver with CAI and Hondata. That's it. I'm over 50 and grew up eating, sleeping and shitting Chevy. Needless to say, when I bought the Type S, Chevy didn't have the SS/SC Cobalt or I would have tested it. The new Si is not in the same ballpark as the SS/SC performance wise but the 06 is a hell of a lot better looking than the "min-mini vans" the last Si models were.

I respect the Cobalt a great deal. It is a well priced, performance based, compact sport coupe. I can't say it is a better car for the money than an RSX, unless you are speaking strictly performance. No, I'm not racing my "interior" against the Cobalt. The proof for the Cobalt SS/SC is 3 years down the road when it has 60K on the odometer. If they hold up as well as you guys hope they will, Chevy will have a true winner.

 

i agree 100% with you.