When I say I was looking for the bottle I ment I was looking for lines wires that were not suppose to be there, but if you know your car you can hide it anywhere. I highly dought it was a nasty RSX because like I was trying to say before I out 60ft him and was some what pulling on him and then bam instent 4 car's. if it wasn't a Nitros car he would have not put that many cars on me that fast. That is why I figure he was on the spray

 

2 words for you.

Sneaky Pete

 

Not true. Our cars are easy enough to spin the tires that we could easily lose. I would almost guarantee if you took 2 crappy drivers that the type-s would win.

 

Stock for stock the S will lose. Not by bus lengths but the S will and should lose and even if you had decent drivers behind the wheel of each car, the S should lose. What are we talking here, a car with around 170/175hp to the wheels and around 110/115lbs of tq. to the wheels. So with what the SS/SC is putting down compared to the Type S, it just doesn't add up that stock for stock with decent drivers in each car that the Type S would come out in front. And if I'm not mistaking, the SS/SC weighs hundred pounds more then the Type S or a tad bit more but not enough to make a big diffrence in the out come of a race. So I just don't see the S being victorious over the SS/SC stock for stock.

 

yes, stock for stock a ss/sc will beat them all the time. our cars are just faster period. same with a civic si. our cars are just faster period. last night i ran a 14.9 with an insane (and accidental) burnout in first off the line and still out ran the si than ran a 15.7. I didn't get to see what an rsx ran, but an srt with a 50trim turbo ran a 14.4.

I also know how to launch my car so line me up with an rsx and I will almost put money that I will always outperform them...unless the road ahead of me is bumpy and I lose traction.

 

yup, hes "blacknite" on vadriven. he wanted to race me until I got my alky tuned, lol

 

I have always wanted that so no one knows

 

if it was turbo or blown it would have rocked the **** outta his car by more than that. it probably had full bolt ons, possibly cams. those things respond to mods very well.

 

well i dono your altitude, but a 14.9 is very easy in an rsx-s with a few bolt ons and it is attainable stock. im assuming you are at a fairly high altitude because a 50 trim srt should be running low 13's at the slowest and a new si should be running low 15's/high 14's if it was new, but you didnt say.

 

gearing plays a roll....what kinda gearing does the ss/sc have? i know the rsx-s has like 4.05's or something like that. the ss/sc should definately take the rsx-s with equal drivers tho, you are right, the ss/sc is the faster car.

 

my altitude is very low...im in florida. it was just 86 degrees out at 9 pm and extremely humid. it was a new civic si. not like temp tags but an 06. my 14.9 was faster than the 15.1's from mustang GT's. I think the track was just pure slow.

 

I'm willing to bet it was cammed, probably running the IPS K2's which seemed to be popular among the RSX crowd. Stock idle and everything, you'd never know it. Did you catch what year it was? 02-04 or 05-06? Cause the 05-06 has a few more goodies, better gearing, better cams ect.

Theres a few guys running bolt-ons (i/h/e) and cam's tuned with Hondata KPRO turning 13.3's @107mph.

Thats what I want next, CAMS and KPRO.

 

cams are not a bolt on, and im assuming they have dr's and probably weight reduction? not trying to flame just curious.

 

He's in Florida. The air is like pea soup down there for 9 months out of the year if not more. It seems some of the worst times for the SS/SC come from Florida and the mountain west.

 

i raced an 03 rsx type s at the track and his best time was 10.39..with header/full exhaust/intake...

 

I heard sneakys have no added fuel so its basically a dry system shot of about 40-50 hp? Anyone ever use one with success??

 

Yeah I know they are not bolt ons thats why if you read my post again, I put bolt-ons (i/h/e) and cams and not.. bolt ons (i/h/e/cams).

And yes he was on DR's, not too sure about weight reduction since he didn't say so in the thread.
http://forums.clubrsx.com/showthread.php?t=424354

 

You must have ran into a REALLY CRAPPY driver to pull 10.39 with those mods in a Type S or it was a base RSX.

Here are a couple of my slips when I had the same mods, I/H/E on Nitto NT555 (this is at LACR too)

9.0@78MPH

 

wow...what year gt was running a 15.1? im assuming an sn95?

 

2004 dude...trust me, the track wasnt running fast...the air was way too humid.

 

that is horrible. it is just surprising how bad the track must have been. a 2004 can run 14's flat. i am not trying to accuse you of lying or anything im just saying that is very slow.

 

Trust me bro, the air here sucks. That, and the tracks here suck too. I raced my stock SS/SC at the Lakeland Dragstrip, and in 2 runs, with like .560-.620 reactions all I managed was a 10.1 and a 10 flat. As far as the tread starter, all I have two words for you bro: Hondata and TODA. In Super Street mag they took the editors car and hooked it up with cams, ecu, header, exhaust, intake and netted 231whp and 165wtq. The main thing about this all: The car is STILL naturally aspirated.

 

yea i wouldnt try racing that car again, expecially if you dont have mods