Last post on Aug 14, 2003 at 7:03 AM
You are in the Hatchbacks - Archived Discussions
This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Hatchbacks Host for directions! discussion.
What is this discussion about?
Honda Civic, Volkswagen GTI, Coupe, Hatchback
#161 of 523 RE: anonymousposts
Oct 17, 2002 (11:08 pm)
Quote: "inigoco: Calling the RSX-S wheels uninspiring is a matter of preference. I happen to like them. You may get 18" wheels on the 337 but the car was $25,000+ and since they only sold 1500 and according to people in here they all sold at MSRP. So that means that the 337 is a few grand more than the RSX-S and it has less power out of a turbo engine. Take that $3,000 and get a turbo for the RSX-S and you won't even notice a Jet.. I mean Golf. " :End Quote
Well, I don't have a big problem with the wheels offered on the Type-S either, just stating that for being the up-level version of the RSX, it has essentially the same wheels. Again, as stated before, the 337's were about $22,225 MSRP, about $1,000 less than theType-S MSRP of $23,270, hence the comparison. But, for the price, the 337 has more features and at least definetly looks sportier. The Type-S is pretty bland by comparison.
You compare the output of the engines, yet you don't notice that the specific output is the same for both, 100HP/Liter. Yes, the VW uses a turbo to get that power, but that also allows for a cheap power upgrade. You can get around 240HP out of the 1.8T at about half the cost of getting a turbo onto the Type-S, plus the installation will be much cheaper as well since the turbo is already on the VW. Plus, a good reason fot the increased power int he Type-S engine has to do with the compression ratio. The Type-S has a ration of 11:1, that's pretty high for a street car and not very friendly if you plan to add a turbo. The 1.8T gets by with a less radical 9.5:1 ratio, mainly because of the turbo. If the turbo were removed and the compression ratio increased, the 1.8T would likely still be pretty close to 180 HP. It's just that the 1.8T was built to be a turbo from the get-go and as such has a lower compression ratio to protect the engine.
Yes, the Type-S is slightly faster than the 337. A few tenths of a seconds difference 0-60, but the RSX has a slight weight advantage as well. The 20HP extra doesn't seem to make a huge difference. 20HP should amount to a bit more of an advantage than that. Why are the times so close, the answer is in the powerband. The Type-S's 2.0 has a relatively peaky powerband. The power it makes is up high in the rev range, mostly due to i-VTEC. The HP peaks at 7400 RPM and the torque peaks at 6000 RPM at 142 lb/ft. The 1.8T HP peaks at 5500 RPM and the torque at 1950-5000 RPM at 173 lb/ft. The redline for the Type-S is 7900 RPM, the 1.8T is at 6500 RPM.
So, you can see by the numbers that the the Type-S makes it's power pretty high up in the rev range, whereas the 1.8T has power which is there for 3/4 of the rev range. Not to mention that the torque for the 1.8T is much higher than for the 2.0, this is where the difference in 0-60 times comes from. No matter what you hear about HP, Torque is what does the work, other wise why would truck engines have high torque engines? The torque is what moves the mass and creates the acceleration. Because of the higher torque rating and flat power band of the 1.8T, it is able to keep within a few tenths of a second in acceleration even though the 337 is giving up about 100lbs. to the RSX.
Do a comparison of the 2 on acura's website, www.acura.com, you will see the similarities for yourself. Make sure you choose 2002 for the model year of the 337 because it's not available as a 2003. I feel like I'm making the same points over and over just against different cars. Just seems that in their price class, the GTI's offer many more options than the others and generally have more power as well. Yet again, it all comes down to what you want in a car and which vehicles suits your style better.
Oct 17, 2002 (11:17 pm)
The wheels on the 337 are definitely awesome.
And I'm just going to take this space to mention that I am _NEVER_ eating whatever stupid brand of protein bars I've been buying again. They upset my stomach every single time. (they were fine for the first month or two) I am about to go in the bathroom and disembowel myself. Where is the damn Pepto?
#163 of 523 Civic Type-R/SiR
Oct 17, 2002 (11:21 pm)
Quote: BTW, the Civic Type R has 200hp, right? The 220hp car is the Honda Integra Type R, no? : End Quote
From the information I have, the Honda Civic Type-R as it is called in Europe and Japan is powered by a 197 HP version of the 2.0 with an 8000 RPM redline, 6-speed, 17" wheels, and a body package which helps the looks quite a bit. If it is brought to the US, which it probably will, it will likely arrive in this form around 2004 and be called the SiR. I believe this is the most likely case. I doubt Honda would allow itself to sell a Civic with more HP(220) than their own premium sport compact, the RSX Type-S(200). I'm sure there is an RSX Type-R in the pipeline as well that will likely have about 220 HP, but this still puts the SiR at a level below that so as to keep the RSX as the Premium car.
Oct 17, 2002 (11:27 pm)
Hey Muffin_Man are you in the US or elsewhere? I ask this since I am writing this message at about 1:30am in my time zone and you posted around the same time. What are we doing up this late? I understand your problem may be a bit different than mine, you have a problem with protein bars, I just have a problem with my inner clock. Anyway, this should be my last message for tonight as it's time I see about going to bed.
Oct 18, 2002 (12:03 am)
I lied, this isn't my last post for the night. I had hoped to find this info on the acura website, but I didn't so I had to look elsewhere. Have you all seen the Performance Package that will be offered for the RSX for 2003? I found some pictures and info on a website called www.supercars.net. Just click on "Present" and then scroll down into the "A's" and you will see the link for the "2003 Acura Type-S Performance Package" This package is mainly a visual package, though it does include slotted brake roters and performance pads and a lowered, stiffer suspension as well as 17" wheels. The rest is pretty much a body kit which looks pretty good on the RSX. I mainly brought this up as it is about the closest relative to the 337 GTI. The GTI mostly gets by with a body kit, as well as upgraded wheels, and suspension, and brakes over the base model as the Perf. Package does for the RSX. This will of course add to the price of the RSX Type-S, which makes it even more expensive than the 337.
One final thing I've noticed, it seems from the pictures on that website, the RSX with the body kit bears a very striking resemblance to the Civic Coupe, especially in the second pic which doesn't show the distinctive acura front end. This is of course intentional as the RSX is a Honda in the rest of the world, but it gives me a good idea as to what the Civic Si should have been. The same upgrades on this RSX put onto a Civic Coupe with the same 200 HP, 6-speed powertrain would have been a very competitive opponent to the other sport compacts in this class. But then again, our main discussion revolves around the Si and GTI which are both hatchbacks, so this point is mostly moot. Just an observation.
#166 of 523 Si test drive impressions
Oct 18, 2002 (7:44 am)
As I said they 'feel' completely different. I agree on that point definitely. If you look at my prior post I stated that the SI was the better handler, AND felt more substantial. But the difference in acceleration is nearly negligable. What's the times 0-60 and 1/4 mile? Probably not much difference. The EX I drove had 14000 miles on it, so the SI needed a little more loosening up at only 1100 miles. But the seat of the pants feel was equal to me. I'm not trying to bash the SI, I think it's a great car for what it is, especially at $16.5K. The i-vtec is great. Smooth as butter, I should know our CRV uses the 2.4L version.
anonymousposts- I don't really appreciate the comments you made against my driving ability. Think about this. MAYBE you should learn how to drive the EX. The SI is faster than the EX, but barely. Nothing like what a GTI is to an SI. Not even close, especially at 6000+ elevation. Unless of course you decide to put NOS in your car. Then to that I say, GREAT! No hard feelings, but I don't believe personal attacks should belong in these discussions. This board was dead for a while, now it's live n' kickin.
inigoco- Go to team honda, that's where I went and they have like 10 or so on the lot.
Just found this, fair comparison since the 2002 SI and 2001 EX(doesn't specify coupe or sedan, but I'm guessing sedan) both tested by Car and Driver. Of course driver, course conditions play in. But at least it's the same mag and testing methods, they take the best times out of multiple runs.
#167 of 523 Forget about anonymouspost
Oct 18, 2002 (8:14 am)
She's in a world of her own. No matter what you say about Honda/Acura, both of these cars will be the best in the world (for her). So, save your breath and enjoy your cars. Honda and Acuras are nice cars no doubt but EVERY car in this world has limitations.
If you search all her previous posts and read about them, you'll see what I mean. There's no point arguing with her bet. SI <-> GTi or RSX/RSX-S <-> 337 for that matter. And when she took a cheap shot at the Jetta/Golf/GTi implying you can't tell a difference bet. them, that's the whole point of Euro cars! The higher performance version has small clues (a little aggressive body styling, wheels, small badges etc.) to stand out but not overly so in the crowd. This coming from her driving a SI which incidently looks like a Honda Minivan! Or a Focus. Not to mention the RSX looking so plain jane.
But guess what? When I sell my 01 Audi A4 Quattro, I'll be buying a Civic SI. I like the small little car that looks like a minivan but at least I admit what it looks like.
Oct 18, 2002 (9:07 am)
"From the information I have, the Honda Civic Type-R as it is called in Europe and Japan is powered by a 197 HP version of the 2.0 with an 8000 RPM redline, 6-speed, 17" wheels, and a body package which helps the looks quite a bit. If it is brought to the US, which it probably will, it will likely arrive in this form around 2004 and be called the SiR. I believe this is the most likely case. I doubt Honda would allow itself to sell a Civic with more HP(220) than their own premium sport compact, the RSX Type-S(200). I'm sure there is an RSX Type-R in the pipeline as well that will likely have about 220 HP, but this still puts the SiR at a level below that so as to keep the RSX as the Premium car. "
I just checked out the Japanese Honda website. The Civic Type-R has a 215ps (pferdestarke, DIN-hp) 2.0l and 17"ers with 205/45 tires. The Integra Type-R has 220ps and 17"s with 215/45 Z-rated tires. Those cars are equipped so closely I'm amazed Honda bothers to market both.
#169 of 523 Real world RSX vs My GTI
Oct 18, 2002 (9:48 am)
I had the opportunity to go up against an RSX-S in my modified 1.8t GTI. ingoco comments about torque are accurate. I raced an RSX-S with a few mods at the track last Wednesday night. My modified 1.8t (235 lb ft of torque) blew the RSX's doors right off, it wasn't much of a race at all. I'll find the slip that recorded our times on it and post them - the difference was amazing. The RSX-S wasn't stock either - it had an aftermarket intake and exhaust and maybe some other mods - I tried to talk to the guy but he didn't have time for me
#170 of 523 Hey hamproof...
Oct 18, 2002 (11:38 am)
So Anonymousposts is a "she" ?? HAHA. You're killing me Seriously, I thought I was the only one labelling her biased. She seems to live and breath Honda....... a true Honda groupie ! The danger with that is no one will take her opinions seriously.
But back to the subject...I read in MT that Acura gave Honda the permission to sell a 200hp Civic. This should be a better performing car. It's still a buzz bomb though, i.e. no torque. But should be fun on the flats. Keep it under $20K and it might do well. The reason is that the Neon SR-T will be out soon with a 0-60 time of less than 6 secs and a price tag under $20K. Now, you can brag about Honda reliability and resale value all you want. But I suspect the younger crowds don't care since they're not brand loyal.