Ran across an 06 Civic, with my 2.4ss
12-11-2005, 05:34 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 09-30-05
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ran across an 06 Civic, with my 2.4ss
The other night (Friday to be exact) I was cruizin down our main drag here in Red Deer Alberta when low and behold what should appear on my left. A brand new 06 Civic, sure it was an lx or higher, the driver and I traded looks I looked at his car he looked at mine he was on and off the gas but there was no way I was going to race him due to the fact it was damn icy out and I still had stock tires on! he took off pretty fast though. I would love to meet an SI on the track whether it be solo racing or straight line, I mean come on, 139ftlbs of torque yikes thats bad! even for the SI.. Honda has alot to learn I think in the torque arena.. but thats just me.. sorry if I blabbed here to much! 
12-11-2005, 10:01 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-06-05
Location: Seneca, South Carolina
Posts: 10,944
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
you prob would have killed it. lol. there is one riding around here in guam on base. it's not the si. but if i see him off base on the open road, i'm sure he'll try to give it a go. it's a very nice looking car tho. the ass end of them is a little to large for my liking tho. just my opinion.
12-11-2005, 11:22 PM
#5
Banned
Join Date: 10-30-05
Location: in a house
Posts: 7,752
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dragon007
I would love to meet an SI on the track whether it be solo racing or straight line, I mean come on, 139ftlbs of torque yikes thats bad! even for the SI.. Honda has alot to learn I think in the torque arena.. but thats just me.. sorry if I blabbed here to much!
Yeah, what good is that HP claim of 197 if their torque isn't worth a crap? I'm always amazed at how much more credit people give HP numbers over torque. They act like torque doesn't matter at all. I'm waiting for a new Civic SI kill in here myself.
12-11-2005, 11:26 PM
#6
Member
Join Date: 08-04-05
Location: ??????
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TXRLU
Yeah, what good is that HP claim of 197 if their torque isn't worth a crap? I'm always amazed at how much more credit people give HP numbers over torque. They act like torque doesn't matter at all. I'm waiting for a new Civic SI kill in here myself.
12-12-2005, 12:47 AM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-19-05
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TXRLU
Yeah, what good is that HP claim of 197 if their torque isn't worth a crap? I'm always amazed at how much more credit people give HP numbers over torque. They act like torque doesn't matter at all. I'm waiting for a new Civic SI kill in here myself.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a Mustang guy and I love torque, but 197 hp is 197 hp whether you get it from "high tq and low rpm", "low torque and high rpm", or anywhere in between.
12-12-2005, 01:01 AM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-19-05
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sneaky
torque is what gets you off the line, torque is what gives you the quick umph between gears. Don't tell me Torque doesn't matter... tell that to a Z28 or a Cobra owner.
Actually, torque is what is multiplied by RPM to make hp. A car with plenty of torque will make much more HP at low rpm than a Civic Si or an S2000, but that's why they rev to the moon... to multiply their little torque by a LOT of rpm, therefore making decent HP.
All else being equal, 2 cars making instantaneously the same hp will be equally fast no matter how much torque they are making or what rpm they are spinning.
12-12-2005, 01:10 AM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-19-05
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dragonsfire12345
so what yall think close race or what?
12-12-2005, 01:13 AM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-06-05
Location: Seneca, South Carolina
Posts: 10,944
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
between a ss n/a and the new si? driver's race for sure with the edge going to the si. i think he's gonna pull up top. but if you don't really race over 100mph, then you don't have anything to worry about. neither car is going to trap over 100mph in the quarter anyways.
12-12-2005, 02:36 PM
#16
Banned
Join Date: 11-11-05
Location: Bako
Posts: 764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Blainestang
Actually, torque is what is multiplied by RPM to make hp. A car with plenty of torque will make much more HP at low rpm than a Civic Si or an S2000, but that's why they rev to the moon... to multiply their little torque by a LOT of rpm, therefore making decent HP.
All else being equal, 2 cars making instantaneously the same hp will be equally fast no matter how much torque they are making or what rpm they are spinning.
All else being equal, 2 cars making instantaneously the same hp will be equally fast no matter how much torque they are making or what rpm they are spinning.
12-12-2005, 02:39 PM
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: 04-17-04
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dragonsfire12345
what about an automatic, with a CAI, and the driver knows how to shift the gears on an auto?
And every single raod test I have ever read, say that for best straight line performance just leave it in drive. Of course--if the trans is shifting obscenely low then it might help.
But thats not too likely.
(I am not talking about any SMG or clutchless manual--like in Porches?Ferraris/BMWs)
12-12-2005, 03:06 PM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-19-05
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by wasey13
Thank you Blainestang... very intelligent post. Torque is almost completely useless in a 2900lb FWD car. So maybe Honda is doing everything right.
When I swap the 347 into my currently 2700lb Fox-body, I'll be happy to make 400+ lb*ft of tq and be able to cruise around comfortably @ 2000rpm intead of having to rev to 8k in a Honda to make the same power I'm making @ 2000rpm.Anyway, My point is just that there's more than one way to make HP. I prefer torque over a tiny engine that revs to the moon, but that's just me.
12-12-2005, 06:07 PM
#19
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 09-30-05
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hehehe boy i didn't mean to start a torque problem or something,lol Being a prevoius Honda owner I was just a little depressed about the look of the coupe, int/ext...I'm sure the rest of the car is fine and all.. But me likey my Cobalt more,lol....
12-12-2005, 06:52 PM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-20-05
Location: Buckeye, Az
Posts: 2,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They have low torque, but all a driver has to do is mash the gas a little harder on a launch..no big deal. However, it does suck to have low torque for day to day traffic driving.
12-12-2005, 09:30 PM
#21
Banned
Join Date: 11-11-05
Location: Bako
Posts: 764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Blainestang
Well, I wouldn't say useless When I swap the 347 into my currently 2700lb Fox-body, I'll be happy to make 400+ lb*ft of tq and be able to cruise around comfortably @ 2000rpm intead of having to rev to 8k in a Honda to make the same power I'm making @ 2000rpm.
Anyway, My point is just that there's more than one way to make HP. I prefer torque over a tiny engine that revs to the moon, but that's just me.
When I swap the 347 into my currently 2700lb Fox-body, I'll be happy to make 400+ lb*ft of tq and be able to cruise around comfortably @ 2000rpm intead of having to rev to 8k in a Honda to make the same power I'm making @ 2000rpm.Anyway, My point is just that there's more than one way to make HP. I prefer torque over a tiny engine that revs to the moon, but that's just me.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
agentirons
Electronics, Audio, and Video
2
10-16-2015 02:11 AM