Last post on Sep 03, 2008 at 1:04 PM
You are in the Acura RSX
What is this discussion about?
Acura RSX, Coupe, Hatchback
#2199 of 2585 Re: '05 Facelift [nyccarguy]
Sep 01, 2004 (11:26 pm)
I agree that the extra 10 HP that the 2005 RSX-S will have will not be that noticeable since:
a.) you need to rev higher (max HP is now at 7800 RPM vs. 7400 RPM that the 2002-2004 RSX-S have) and
b.) the 2005 RSX-S weighs about 70-80 lbs. more than the 2002-2004 model.
I'm not really digging the triple circles that Acura uses for the new RSX's headlights and taillights. I do like the better quality seats and the stock 17" wheels. I also like the new magnesium metallic color, although it's replacing my desert silver metallic.
I know a few people who've already bought a 2005 RSX-S out in the West. It'll take NJ a little while longer to get them (my dealership said mid-Oct.) since the cars are typically shipped from Japan to some Western US ports, and then they are trucked eastward. But I'm not looking to trade in my 2002 RSX-S just yet.
Sep 02, 2004 (7:13 am)
how many miles do you have now?
I am assuming there will be a new RSX for '07...perhaps a trade then, eh? I swore I would keep this one five years, so for me the earliest trade date is '09! :-/
I could see the next base RSX being similar in spec to the current 'S'. Maybe they could offer AWD and a slightly larger engine as well. But only if they could keep the weight under 3000 pounds, otherwise forget it.
Sep 02, 2004 (10:06 pm)
An RSX AWD would be completely unecessary. The added weight (not to mention more computer complexity) of the AWD system would only hurt the RSXs' performance capabilities. Now if they made it RWD we'd be talking, but I have a better shot of making a video with Paris Hilton than a RWD RSX. I think they really need to add a Limited Slip Differential to help the RSX out!
For now I'll be keeping my '01 Prelude Type SH:)
Sep 03, 2004 (5:05 pm)
yeah, I know, AWD adds lots of complexity and more than a little weight. But it is just plain too easy to get the wheels slipping from stops with the FWD, and imagine how much that could get worse with more power. Of course, I would love to see them go RWD with the RSX, but I am sure that is never going to happen (never say never??!!)
#2203 of 2585 Re: beowulf [nippononly]
Sep 04, 2004 (7:49 am)
I have about 23.5 kmi. on my car now. :\ I put on a record # of miles last month - all that summer driving! LOL.
How many miles does your car have?
I initially swore to myself that I'd keep my car for 8 years - until 2010. But I'm getting tempted to explore my options. I'm definitely going to keep it until the end of the warranty - 2006. Then based on my finances, I'll either keep it another 4 or trade it in for another car.
But who knows what my financial situation will be by then, never mind if I get married and have kids.
#2204 of 2585 Re: AWD? [nyccarguy]
Sep 04, 2004 (7:53 am)
I actually would be in favor of an AWD RSX. I don't like FWD b/c I keep slipping my front wheels when I turn and accelerate. (Granted, I can upgrade my tires b/c we all know that the stock Michelins suck.)
I don't like RWD b/c we get a fair amount of rain and snow in NJ. If I lived in a warm weather state, then RWD would obviously be my first choice.
I figure AWD will add 50-100 pounds, but I think that's worth it if Acura adds a proportionate amount of power.
Maybe I'm hung over from last night, but I think Acura can add AWD and drop a 2.2 L engine and still keep the curb weight of a redesigned RSX < 1.5 tons. And that 2.2 L engine should do at least 240 HP/160 ft-lb.
Sep 05, 2004 (1:36 pm)
mine is just about to cross the 10K barrier - never again to have a 4-digit odo reading! *tears in eyes*
I would like to see them offer the current type S as base, or at least boost the base hp to be at least 20 more than the most powerful Civic, for '07. And I would like to see them put in SH-AWD, which I think would be possible while keeping the weight under 3000#. Now whether or not they could also put in the new 2.2L engine you propose and still hold the price to $23-24K is up for debate. Perhaps they could benefit from economies of scale by merely subbing in the TSX engine - would that add more than a few pounds?
My car will be out of warranty by early calendar-year '07, and I am betting the new model will be looking pretty tempting by then, what with it being close to close-out time when they go to the '08s in the fall.
#2206 of 2585 Goodbye RSX Type-S
Sep 05, 2004 (3:13 pm)
Hello there RSX drivers. I was once the proud owner of a 2004 Arctic Blue Pearl RSX Type-S. Man I loved that car! Great interior, precise handling, and you gotta love that 8000 RPM redline. Unfortunately, it was time to move on so I traded in my baby for a 2004 Daytona Blue 350Z 6M. It doesn't come close to the RSX-S' refinements but all is forgiven once I hear the VQ growl. Well, good luck to all of you and by the way, what do you think about the 05's?
#2207 of 2585 My view of the RSX changes
Sep 05, 2004 (5:08 pm)
I really like the scalloped openings around the front and read lights on our 2003 RSX. With that gone, I think the car will look more like a Civic, just like someone else said.
We have the base model, which I guess has 16 inch wheels. The ride is about as rough as I would want. I would not want 17 inch wheels.
I don't drive fast and I don't think I have even had the engine over 5K rpm, but I doubt that any of you could possible enjoy your car more than I do.
My wife and I just went on a nice 60 mile drive today to the beautiful historic town of Fredericksburg VA, where we walked around town and stopped at our favorite coffee shop. It was a great day, and the car was a joy to drive.
Sep 05, 2004 (10:14 pm)
how well they do the suspension, 17s don't have to make the ride super-hard or crashy. This car will noticeably benefit from the bigger rims in '05, I am sure. Plus, the base and the 'S' should have had different size rims from the very beginning, so as to differentiate the two. I read (in here?) that Acura was going to use a 15 for the base model, but didn't like the way it tested or something, so went to the 16 for both. There are plenty of times I would wish for slightly more precise steering, especially on center, as well as a little tighter handling. I should have bought the 'S' for that, but didn't want the higher insurance, the lower mid-range torque, and the premium fuel requirement. (or the leather, honestly).