Clavius

Haha yup.. the real reason behind why we own this car..
Roll up in a RSX.. "Oh hey is that a Civic?"
Roll up in a Rx-8 "Oh shyt its the Batmobile, maybe he's rich like Bruce Wayne."

I kid realy I do lol.. Honestly to me the Rx-8 has more of a total package deal. Has the looks, the feel, the handling, and yes power. Sure some scoff at its lack of it but honestly I think its lack of torque and overall "break neck" power if you will has kept me outa trouble along with many others. That and I'm not sure how diverse the RSX's age group is but I'm very surprised with the age range of owners our 8 has. Oh also you have less of a stereotype driving the 8 than say the RSX.

dillsrotary

the 350z is faster straight but the rx8.... aw **** wrong thread.

SlayerRX8

you forgot the TWISTIES!

LiL BenNy

test drive em... i drove both i own an 8 and drove my friend and cousins rsx... personally i love the 8.. but i feel the rsx has so much more potential (well atleast as of right now) but then again idont know much about cars... if autox is your thing i think the 8's better for you...

Raptor2k

Benny....pics of strakes?

9291150

Here's another example where cars that are routinely fractions of a sec faster than the 8 are proclaimed to be WAY faster, yet cars that are routinely slower than the 8 like the RSXS are judged to be "about the same."

Ike

And that's yet another example of you following me around and spouting off about something you have no clue about. Moostafa summed up pretty well the likely scenarios if these two cars were to race with roughly equal drivers.

9291150

Am I following you around, or are you just freak’n EVERYWHERE?

Listen sport, I don’t want to go look this up, but I’m pretty sure RSXS routinely were tested at 14.9 to 15’s, maybe one test at 14.5. The new si, same engine and weight as the RSXS, tested the same. Top speeds are just over 130 for the si, about 140 for the rsx. Every major mag has tested the 8 in the mid 14’s. Top speeds usually closer to 150.

See, if it was the other way around, you’d be all over it like a fly on ****…or Ike on a RX8 forum.

Ike

Ok Corky, get this through you head, I've explained it to you before. When talking about how fast a car is it refers to trap speeds, take away the traction factors and the RX-8 and RSX Type S are about the same. Many other people in this thread realize that, I don't get why you always get your panties in a bunch when another car is "about the same" or faster than the RX-8.

Huskyfan23

You are talking about the RSX Type S, right? Because the stock RSX doesn't even come close to the speed or power of the RX-8. RSX has been measured at a 0 - 60 time of 7.7, which is a lot more than a second worse the the RX-8.

RSX Type S is a good machine, and can compare speed - wise. Handling, though, the 8 would win hands down.

Nothing is more satisfying and FUN than taking a 90 degree corner at 40 and flooring it through the turn. Nothing.

CrazyRX88's

Hey Redline...

Have you given the new Si any consideration at all? I would've thought you'd be all over that considering you're a Honda fan.

The k20z3 is an AMAZING engine, check it out sometime.

BTW the top speed of the Si is 140ish. It'll take a long time to get there in 6th, but 129 in 5th is easily attainable.

IvanO

I just traded my '06 RSX Type S for a '06 RX-8. I owned the Acura for 11 months and I am a Honda nut (I road raced an '86 CRX Si and am now building a '94 Integra GSR). The stock RX8 is faster and out handles the RSX. Rear wheel drive + Rotary is a lot easier to drive fast than Front wheel drive + VTEC. Hope this helps.

Ivan

YT1300

VTEC is fun, for a while, but it does get old. I don't know why, though - screaming redline, lunging power, that sort of thing. iVTEC smooths it out a bit, but it's high RPM twiddling at its finest. Rotary is different, simply put.

The handling is fine in both the Type S and the 8, and it depends on what you like - FWD or RWD. In most track situations it will come down to the driver. However, I'd wager that in longer courses with long straights the 8 would pull away eventually.

type59

my friend has a types and i have a 8. i came from a 96 prelude vtec. i miss vtec everytime i sit in my friends car but when it comes down to it. i love my 8. engine smoother and not unexpected jolts from vtec. but the honda do come with better reliabity and maintainence. also, im getting 17.5 mpg on a good day he gets 26 mpg constantly.

wouldnt trade the 8 though...till the s2000 replacement comes out. =)

RedlineXtreme8

yea i was lookin' at the Si, comparing and all the good stuff but i just cant get off the rsx.

bikes2cars

Quote: ok guys so listen to this, some of you may know that honda is discontinuing the rsx. Which pisses me right off. I am a huge honda fan. and with the discontinuation i started looking for other possibilities and of course im feelin the 8. i dont own either obviously and the reason i am a part of these forums is to gain some knowledge of the cars first. but i have a question for you guys, fully stock, which would win, rx8 or rsx. i cant think of it because looking at it, i see the 8 with more hp but the rsx with 2.0L and almost the same hp. anyway, just makin' car convo


The 2 litres of the Honda doesn't, really, mean anything. Nothing at all! You gotta wrap your head around the concept that Rotary is not equivalent to Piston! 15Liters of Piston does not equate to 15lLiters of Rotor. Apples & Oranges, bro.

Forget everything you've read in the brochures! Numbers on paper are only relevant when you are a professional driver and can drive consistently to within hundredths of a second all day-every day. They're only important for "my dick is bigger than your dick" contests. Test drive both cars! I mean drive the crap out of them!

When you say "what would win?" That is a very loaded question! Almost naive. Win in what? 1/4 mile, mountain trail, top speed, 0-60, 60-80, 80-100, 100-120, pie eating contest? Second of all, who's driving? Same person, me vs. you, me vs. my grandmother, your grandmother vs. my grandmother? Get the picture? Another thing, are you buying a car to say "mine would beat yours on paper/popular opinion in X type of race!"

Find out what you are looking for first! Then you'll know which car is better for you!

Hej

+1

Elara

Guys, please be polite. No one's crossed the line too badly yet, but I can see it's heading that direction pretty quickly.

tmak26b

Huh, the automatic RX-8 is way more fun below 5K than a RSX Type S below 5K

9291150

Because I know better sparky. You read far too much into ¼ mile trap speeds, and if I see another thread of yours on it I’ll puke, yet so many here who can’t think for themselves just line right up.

Yes, a ¼ mile trap speed can be an indicator of how hard a car pulls once rolling, but you seem to think that it is the only indicator - that a car that pulls slightly harder at 90-100mph will automatically pull harder at 100-110, or 120-130.

All mags have tested the 8 at low 95/96mph traps, shifting at redline as a rule. If you actually drove an 8, you’d know that the shift into 4th at redline feels like driving into wet concrete, it takes a couple of moments but then its back onto decent power. This is what kills the 8’s trap speed in the quarter. Cars with more torque aren’t as exposed to this, nor are cars that have the fuel consumption issues of the 8 that I’m sure has influenced gear ratio selection. As a former kart racer, you must have played with rear sprockets sizes to suit particular tracks, I still have a set in the garage to use with my sport bike. Yet you don’t get it. Aerodynamics and weight are other factors, but this thread getting long enough.

If it’s all about the ¼ mile trap, I’m sure the same magazine testers could be getting 98mph speeds simply by using the 8’s over-rev capability. It’s not talked about here, but the renesis’ 500rpm over-rev is 2-3 times higher than most cars. When I use 9500rpm in that same 3 to 4 shift, that wet concrete feeling disappears. Bike guys know this, as many bikes have over-rev capability to allow their riders to stay on the powerband…I had a 600cc that redlined at 13800rpm but allowed me to shift at 14500.

Again, I know the 8 is no rocket, buy why all the effort to make it sound even slower than it actually is? Maybe if I couldn’t keep up with my buds and their supposedly faster cars I’d believe you, but that hasn’t been the case.

supergoat

To me it's very simple.

Do you want to live with a glorified econobox for the next few years, or do you want to have a bonafide sports car for the next few years.

It's the reason I'd never own a WRX, EVO, RSX or any other hopped up econocar as my main car. It'd be a fun second car, but not as my primary means of transportation. DOn't get me wrong, I'm not trying to downplay those cars at all, just not for me.

Ike

There's no reason this shift into 4th gear in the 1/4 in a stock RX-8, so that kinda shoots your theory...

No effort to make it slower than it is, simply pointing out the fact that the RX-8 and RSX are about the same speed wise once rolling. I don't get why that is such a hard pill for you to swallow...

C&D RSX Numbers
Zero to 60 mph: 6.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 16.6 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.9 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.9 sec @ 95 mph

C&D RX-8 numbers
Zero to 60 mph 6.6 sec 5.9 sec
Zero to 100 mph 17.5 sec 16.0 sec
Zero to 130 mph 36.6 sec 34.8 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph 7.4 sec 7.2 sec
Standing 1/4-mile 15.1 sec 14.6 sec
@ 93 mph @ 96 mph

RSX numbers from MT or R&T
0-30 mph 2.32 s
0-40 mph 3.78 s
0-50 mph 4.88 s
0-60 mph 6.82 s
0-70 mph 8.45 s
0-80 mph 10.88 s
0-90 mph 13.39 s
0-100 mph 16.06 s
0-110 mph 20.64 s
0-120 mph 25.58 s
0-130 mph 31.82 s

Notice the 0-130 times compared to the RX-8. Are you honestly going to keep arguing that I'm off base by saying they're about the same to at least 130mph? Now stop being such a fanboi and grip reality. In fact in this case the RSX is clearly faster, but I've seen faster times for the RX-8 though I think it was the preproduction car mags were testing.

CarAndDriver

RIP RSX. Acura's going upscale and is going to leave the boy racer and entry level folks driving Hondas. It was about time. It really doesn't help sell $45K+ RLs when a potential buyer pulls up next to tacky Acura bling on wheels.

dillsrotary

9291150

Wrong again. Third gear redline is 88-92, a shift to 4 in the 8 is a must in the ¼. Unless you use the over-rev capability of 500rpm, which no magazine test uses. So my point completely sticks.

Otherwise, as for stats, I’m almost as stubborn as you, so in this case let’s try to compare apples to apples no? Same magazine to same magazine.

Let’s start with Car & Driver;
RX8
0-60 5.9 (6.1)
0-100 15.8 (15.9)
0-130 33.5 (34.8)
¼ 14.5@96
RSXS
0-60 6.4
0-100 16.6
0-120 27.4
¼ 14.9@95
Conclusion; 8 was faster by .05 at start, and time intervals still grew 60-100.

Now Motor Trend;
RX8
0-30 2.1
0-40 3.2
0-50 4.5
0-60 6.0
0-70 7.9
0-80 10.2
0-90 13.1
0-100 16.9
¼ 14.49/95.47
RSXS
0-30 2.7
0-40 3.9
0-50 5.3
0-60 7.0
0-70 9.2
0-80 11.9
0-90 15.2
0-100 n/a
¼ 15.32/92.41
Conclusion, the 8 was faster by 1 sec. at the start, and intervals were faster everywhere else.

And Road and Track;
RX8
0-20 1.3
0-40 3.1
0-60 6.1
0-80 10.1
0-100 16.1
¼ 14.6/95.6
RSXS
0-20 1.6
0-40 3.7
0-60 6.7
0-80 10.8
0-100 16.6
¼ 15.0/94.9
Conclusion, the 8 was faster by .06 at start, and intervals were faster everywhere except 80-100 by .02, as per my point re. the 3-4 shift.

I won’t even get into the fact that the 8 has a higher top speed, usually by 10mph, which should also suggest pull at speed.

So you and someone else here were originally saying that the RSXS would pull on an 8 at speed - not "even" as you are saying now. I’m still waiting for the evidence of either.