RX8 and the New Civic
05-06-2008, 04:20 PM
#126
Greensboro's Finest
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Motor Trend did it in 6.3....
again I'm not saying the Si is faster than the RX-8.
My point is that the Civic gets a bad rep because its called a Civic. That's all I'm arguing here.
again I'm not saying the Si is faster than the RX-8.
My point is that the Civic gets a bad rep because its called a Civic. That's all I'm arguing here.
Last edited by RojoOcho; 05-06-2008 at 04:22 PM.
05-06-2008, 07:53 PM
#127
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems that some owners are still living under a rock if they think RWD is invincible.
Examples:
Best Motoring they had that one run where the RX-8 lost to a... yup a fwd civic...
I recall watching some super touring and the realtime/comptech integra would give the 3 series bmw's a good run for the money (and to think the grand daddy of FR platforms).
So explain how these outcomes are even possible? And let's not forget how much more embarrassing that gap is when rwd is losing to fwd on a wet track.
Examples:
Best Motoring they had that one run where the RX-8 lost to a... yup a fwd civic...
I recall watching some super touring and the realtime/comptech integra would give the 3 series bmw's a good run for the money (and to think the grand daddy of FR platforms).
So explain how these outcomes are even possible? And let's not forget how much more embarrassing that gap is when rwd is losing to fwd on a wet track.
Last edited by F22C1; 05-06-2008 at 07:55 PM.
05-06-2008, 07:59 PM
#128
Super-impreza!
iTrader: (-1)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: SoCal/NY
Posts: 746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but the civic you are speaking of was nowhere near stock and was a VERY well built EG. Hardly a fair comparison to this civic Si.
The comptech integra is also a heavily modified beast, you are comparing apples to oranges.
Just stop posting and taking best motoring to heart, unless you actually understand what the program is actually about.
The comptech integra is also a heavily modified beast, you are comparing apples to oranges.
Just stop posting and taking best motoring to heart, unless you actually understand what the program is actually about.
05-06-2008, 09:26 PM
#131
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Da Hills of Va
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never test drove the new ones i do know that i test drove i believe a 2002 or a 2004 i think it was a 2002
anyways it was a red one with 15K miles and it was selling for 28K$!!!!!!!
Leather seats.. me my a friend and the sales person test drove it and OMG that thing had a ton of torque it put you back in your seat even with all that weight lugging it down it still accelerated with ease
i can imaging it with just one person in there
quick little thing
anyways it was a red one with 15K miles and it was selling for 28K$!!!!!!!
Leather seats.. me my a friend and the sales person test drove it and OMG that thing had a ton of torque it put you back in your seat even with all that weight lugging it down it still accelerated with ease
i can imaging it with just one person in there
quick little thing
05-07-2008, 12:02 AM
#133
Wanna be 8 owner
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Beach, California
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05-07-2008, 01:07 AM
#134
Music and Cars!!! :)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too would buy an MS3 over an SI, but only if I was looking for it as my both daily driver and enthusiast fun car combination. I'd have to trust in the Civic more in long term reliability, and of course true cost to own, which would be far less. Those SI's retain their value incredibly, and of course the tuner market for them is expensive sure, but very very available to make very big gains.
05-07-2008, 05:55 AM
#137
is adjusting valve lash
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: hollywooood!
Posts: 1,060
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i am on the same boat as rojo ocho on this subject. i also have lived in both worlds of these car makes being compared.
and i truly see some of even the best ignorance of people on here.
the truth is: its a sports car, WE WANT MORE POWER! no matter how you look at it. and is it sad we have to compare to a civic SI? and yes, they are catching up. and perhaps surpassing.
and where has being RWD vs. FWD being the winner in ALL cases?
don't get me wrong here, HONDA offers premium technology on their cars. they too are a strong company with F1 racing passion. so don't think they are out to make slow cars, or why would people be buying them? (+they are more reliable...)
MAZDA offers premium rotary technology, and the only company to offer rotary powerplants so far... but face it, we want that 16X e-shaft and housing in our cars! (stop lying, you know you want it so you can be just as rice and go pwn some civic vtec owners u f*ing hypocrite)
the bottom line is: you know damn well honda makes very fine piston car examples. and FWD/RWD has nothing to do with superiority, so as to the "apples to oranges" that i hear being tossed around by whoever uses it... treat the drive platform the same. ITS ALL DRIVER!
wonder why civic may be the faster car?
yes, it may have something to do with its drive line lay-out that you call inferior...
you see, FWD have less drive-train loses due to its lack of drive-shaft.
8's has to combat that with a light weight carbon shaft... but we still have bigger gear box, heavy diff, etc.
we don't always win. even those damn piston honda's are spinning at 9K rpm's and they do so w/o burning any oil.
with so many meaningless comparison's going on. i think the underlying reason is that we are utterly waiting for something of a better design and of more power/torque, perhaps the 16X. even turbo...
til then, that'll shut people up on the comparisons.
and please, spare the "go get a civic si then". because i'm asian in so-cal, that might be the only flaw with owning a honda... due to its bad rap and the harassment that comes from law enforcement and stupid high school kids alike.
so thats why i own a RX-8. its a mature car. there, you do win!
and i truly see some of even the best ignorance of people on here.
the truth is: its a sports car, WE WANT MORE POWER! no matter how you look at it. and is it sad we have to compare to a civic SI? and yes, they are catching up. and perhaps surpassing.
and where has being RWD vs. FWD being the winner in ALL cases?
don't get me wrong here, HONDA offers premium technology on their cars. they too are a strong company with F1 racing passion. so don't think they are out to make slow cars, or why would people be buying them? (+they are more reliable...)
MAZDA offers premium rotary technology, and the only company to offer rotary powerplants so far... but face it, we want that 16X e-shaft and housing in our cars! (stop lying, you know you want it so you can be just as rice and go pwn some civic vtec owners u f*ing hypocrite)
the bottom line is: you know damn well honda makes very fine piston car examples. and FWD/RWD has nothing to do with superiority, so as to the "apples to oranges" that i hear being tossed around by whoever uses it... treat the drive platform the same. ITS ALL DRIVER!
wonder why civic may be the faster car?
yes, it may have something to do with its drive line lay-out that you call inferior...
you see, FWD have less drive-train loses due to its lack of drive-shaft.
8's has to combat that with a light weight carbon shaft... but we still have bigger gear box, heavy diff, etc.
we don't always win. even those damn piston honda's are spinning at 9K rpm's and they do so w/o burning any oil.
with so many meaningless comparison's going on. i think the underlying reason is that we are utterly waiting for something of a better design and of more power/torque, perhaps the 16X. even turbo...
til then, that'll shut people up on the comparisons.
and please, spare the "go get a civic si then". because i'm asian in so-cal, that might be the only flaw with owning a honda... due to its bad rap and the harassment that comes from law enforcement and stupid high school kids alike.
so thats why i own a RX-8. its a mature car. there, you do win!
05-07-2008, 11:58 AM
#142
gas kilometerage
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: vancouver bc
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They banned the use of the rotary engine in Le Mans after the 787B, otherwise Mazda would win the damned thing every year.
The worse gas-mileage of the rotary didn't matter because the engine itself was much more reliable to be run at high RPMs for a long time, and the car was capable of having a bigger tank of gas because the engine was smaller.
Think about it: the four-rotor engine is only double the size of ours. Compare to the 6.0L V12's that the competition was running, the 787B was hell of lighter and still put out a LOT of power.
If they were still running them these days, it would probably be a quad-turbo 26B-MSP (based on the Renesis as opposed to the older 13B-REW), and I wouldn't be surprised to see 600-700 HP out of it.
The worse gas-mileage of the rotary didn't matter because the engine itself was much more reliable to be run at high RPMs for a long time, and the car was capable of having a bigger tank of gas because the engine was smaller.
Think about it: the four-rotor engine is only double the size of ours. Compare to the 6.0L V12's that the competition was running, the 787B was hell of lighter and still put out a LOT of power.
If they were still running them these days, it would probably be a quad-turbo 26B-MSP (based on the Renesis as opposed to the older 13B-REW), and I wouldn't be surprised to see 600-700 HP out of it.
05-07-2008, 02:13 PM
#144
Registered
They banned the use of the rotary engine in Le Mans after the 787B, otherwise Mazda would win the damned thing every year.
The worse gas-mileage of the rotary didn't matter because the engine itself was much more reliable to be run at high RPMs for a long time, and the car was capable of having a bigger tank of gas because the engine was smaller.
Think about it: the four-rotor engine is only double the size of ours. Compare to the 6.0L V12's that the competition was running, the 787B was hell of lighter and still put out a LOT of power.
If they were still running them these days, it would probably be a quad-turbo 26B-MSP (based on the Renesis as opposed to the older 13B-REW), and I wouldn't be surprised to see 600-700 HP out of it.
The worse gas-mileage of the rotary didn't matter because the engine itself was much more reliable to be run at high RPMs for a long time, and the car was capable of having a bigger tank of gas because the engine was smaller.
Think about it: the four-rotor engine is only double the size of ours. Compare to the 6.0L V12's that the competition was running, the 787B was hell of lighter and still put out a LOT of power.
If they were still running them these days, it would probably be a quad-turbo 26B-MSP (based on the Renesis as opposed to the older 13B-REW), and I wouldn't be surprised to see 600-700 HP out of it.
05-07-2008, 03:58 PM
#146
is adjusting valve lash
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: hollywooood!
Posts: 1,060
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They banned the use of the rotary engine in Le Mans after the 787B, otherwise Mazda would win the damned thing every year.
The worse gas-mileage of the rotary didn't matter because the engine itself was much more reliable to be run at high RPMs for a long time, and the car was capable of having a bigger tank of gas because the engine was smaller.
Think about it: the four-rotor engine is only double the size of ours. Compare to the 6.0L V12's that the competition was running, the 787B was hell of lighter and still put out a LOT of power.
If they were still running them these days, it would probably be a quad-turbo 26B-MSP (based on the Renesis as opposed to the older 13B-REW), and I wouldn't be surprised to see 600-700 HP out of it.
The worse gas-mileage of the rotary didn't matter because the engine itself was much more reliable to be run at high RPMs for a long time, and the car was capable of having a bigger tank of gas because the engine was smaller.
Think about it: the four-rotor engine is only double the size of ours. Compare to the 6.0L V12's that the competition was running, the 787B was hell of lighter and still put out a LOT of power.
If they were still running them these days, it would probably be a quad-turbo 26B-MSP (based on the Renesis as opposed to the older 13B-REW), and I wouldn't be surprised to see 600-700 HP out of it.
but you have to come to realize that our rotary engines are not at the very top of its developement stages. maybe in part of the example you just used.... its disqualification to compete in le mans sours research and developement for reliability and real world tests. failure boils down to the streets and we are the guinea pigs... does power loss and engine replacements ring any bells?
part of the reason i got my *** to a rotary forum before car purchase.... a lot could have changed since my rx-7. and this is a part of me that wants to tell the noobs to get a civic, because the maintenance nature of these rotaries just aren't for anyone...
but still am happy with my unique motor.
05-07-2008, 05:25 PM
#148
Registered
My 2005 RSX was an amazing drive. FWD and stock as, it carved up the roads. I had as much fun in that any I've owned. Turn in was sharp and driver feedback was wonderful Even a test drive of the Mini Cooper S was sweet.
The simple fact is there are different ways you need to drive a FWD, RWD and AWD car...they all have there pro's and con's. It's the driver that makes the difference.
The simple fact is there are different ways you need to drive a FWD, RWD and AWD car...they all have there pro's and con's. It's the driver that makes the difference.
05-07-2008, 06:56 PM
#149
n00b post whore
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts