RX8 and RSX
11-05-2006, 03:25 PM
#51
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: FT.Bragg NC
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would just get the S2000 if you like honda. The RX-8 is probally one of the best stock handling cars out on the market. Mazda is really good about building well balanced cars. Personally I would stick around see what people do with the RX-8 thought. People are just now really starting to tap in to the power of the 13b R. Go to the performance section of this forum and you will find some articles on new turbos coming out. The RSX is cool and I use to own and integra in high school, but trust me RWD cars are way more fun. So if Your a big honda fan Get a S2000. I would If I could afford to have two cars.
11-05-2006, 04:32 PM
#52
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 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.
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.
1.) Magazines absoluetly will use every bit of RPMs available in a gear, do you honestly think they won't take a car past redline that is given to them to beat the **** out of.
2.) The C&D RX-8 you give numbers for was a preproduction car. The numbers I cited were for a production car and the second set of numbers was after the car had a bunch of miles and was broken in.
3.) Your Motor Trend RSX is the older version with less HP
4.) Do the math on your R&T numbers. 40-100 where traction would not be a factor the RSX was .1 QUICKER. Which oddly enough is ABOUT THE SAME.
5.) I'd love for you to show me where I said the RSX would pull on the RX-8 in this thread. All I said was they were about the same and you've had sand in your vagina ever since.
6.) Just stop the stupid argument, I've proven pretty clearly that after traction is no longer a factor the two cars are pretty close.
P.S. Next time you want to compare mag to mag maybe at least use production cars and current models...
11-06-2006, 09:51 AM
#53
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgetown
Posts: 1,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
1.) Magazines absoluetly will use every bit of RPMs available in a gear, do you honestly think they won't take a car past redline that is given to them to beat the **** out of.
2.) The C&D RX-8 you give numbers for was a preproduction car. The numbers I cited were for a production car and the second set of numbers was after the car had a bunch of miles and was broken in.
3.) Your Motor Trend RSX is the older version with less HP
4.) Do the math on your R&T numbers. 40-100 where traction would not be a factor the RSX was .1 QUICKER. Which oddly enough is ABOUT THE SAME.
5.) I'd love for you to show me where I said the RSX would pull on the RX-8 in this thread. All I said was they were about the same and you've had sand in your vagina ever since.
6.) Just stop the stupid argument, I've proven pretty clearly that after traction is no longer a factor the two cars are pretty close.
P.S. Next time you want to compare mag to mag maybe at least use production cars and current models...
2.) The C&D RX-8 you give numbers for was a preproduction car. The numbers I cited were for a production car and the second set of numbers was after the car had a bunch of miles and was broken in.
3.) Your Motor Trend RSX is the older version with less HP
4.) Do the math on your R&T numbers. 40-100 where traction would not be a factor the RSX was .1 QUICKER. Which oddly enough is ABOUT THE SAME.
5.) I'd love for you to show me where I said the RSX would pull on the RX-8 in this thread. All I said was they were about the same and you've had sand in your vagina ever since.
6.) Just stop the stupid argument, I've proven pretty clearly that after traction is no longer a factor the two cars are pretty close.
P.S. Next time you want to compare mag to mag maybe at least use production cars and current models...
Ok, I’ll try again;
1.) Nonsense. C&D has described their testing procedures, they always shift at redline. R&T clearly indicate shiftpoints in all their tests – “maximum speed in gears” - always at redline. Don't know about MT, but I’ll assume they are the same since their times always tend to be a little more conservative.
2.) A RX8 "preproduction" car in the summer of 03? You are quite the conspiracy theorist. Even if so, it could just as easily be too slow or too fast. Regardless, other mags duplicated the numbers from that test, including C&D. So what’s you point?
3.) No. It’s the current generation RSXs - the ’02 model. It did have 10 less HP, but was slightly lighter too. Regardless, it’s the only full test of theirs I’ve seen.
4.) Yes, as I said, in that one very selective example the RSXs was close to the 8. How bout the other examples?
5.) You’re so full of it. In an earlier thread you said “Moostafa summed up pretty well the likely scenarios” where he said the type S would “walk away” once rolling. You agreed with “walk away”, not “even” as you are now implying.
6.) All you’ve proven is that you can be quite shifty with the facts, creative with your interpretations, and very gifted with the ‘ole about face.
Plus, has anybody realized how dumb this argument is…“So without the RWD the Honda would be as fast.” How many cars would suddenly be as fast as a stock Evo if it didn’t have AWD? Oh, never heard that one.
Ps. Sand in my vagina eh? Gotta love a cyber space tough guy!
Last edited by 9291150; 11-06-2006 at 10:24 AM.
11-06-2006, 10:51 AM
#55
Mon May 29 2006
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario
Posts: 711
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sorry about your exp in this forum not all of us are dicks:P, I have loved this car the moment i took this car for a test drive i was also looking for either a honda S200, BMW Z4, Nissan 350Z i test drove all of them but none of them made me feel the way my 8 does, its just so fun to drive, whenever i have a rough day at work i always smile when quitting time is almost here cause i kno i am goin to drive home in my 8, its your choice so i suggest a test drive that should give you an idea
11-06-2006, 11:14 AM
#57
I bomb atomically
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ike and the phone number, cut it out you pussies. You're scaring the children.
Ike click this: https://www.rx8club.com/profile.php?...ignore&u=23147
phone number click this: https://www.rx8club.com/profile.php?...=ignore&u=2391
This will make it a better world for all of us.
Ike click this: https://www.rx8club.com/profile.php?...ignore&u=23147
phone number click this: https://www.rx8club.com/profile.php?...=ignore&u=2391
This will make it a better world for all of us.
11-06-2006, 12:17 PM
#58
DGAF
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 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.
Arguing Ike is like playing tennis with a wall. Don't hijack the thread.
By the way, I don't know of any cars that redline at 3000 rpm...
11-06-2006, 12:26 PM
#59
I personally never saw a Honda I liked. The S2000 is nice but it's that whole Honda thing.
Correction I saw a nice Honda riding Mower at Home Depot but I prefer the John Deere.
Honda is the personal favorite of Consumer Reports NOT Car and Driver.
I drove an RSX back in 2000, it was funish but the interior was awful plastic-icky, just reminded me of a Neon. I ended up leasing a v6 passat. The fit and finish even on the Jetta was so far superior it was silly. The shifter on the passat was like butter. The RSX felt oh-so-cheap. The RSX torque and oversteer were not fun. Hopping the tail end out on the 8 just brings a smile to your face. Go drive the 8 then get back to me on the RSX.
That said, the interior of the 8 left me with my draw dropped and rushing home to drag my wife back to the dealer. We took a used VR out with the red leather interior and were sold. I couldn't take the red leather(screams traffic ticket) so ended up with BB with gorgeous black and tan (isn't that a beer, how bad is that) interior.
DIE HONDA DIE DIE DIE
Correction I saw a nice Honda riding Mower at Home Depot but I prefer the John Deere.
Honda is the personal favorite of Consumer Reports NOT Car and Driver.
I drove an RSX back in 2000, it was funish but the interior was awful plastic-icky, just reminded me of a Neon. I ended up leasing a v6 passat. The fit and finish even on the Jetta was so far superior it was silly. The shifter on the passat was like butter. The RSX felt oh-so-cheap. The RSX torque and oversteer were not fun. Hopping the tail end out on the 8 just brings a smile to your face. Go drive the 8 then get back to me on the RSX.
That said, the interior of the 8 left me with my draw dropped and rushing home to drag my wife back to the dealer. We took a used VR out with the red leather interior and were sold. I couldn't take the red leather(screams traffic ticket) so ended up with BB with gorgeous black and tan (isn't that a beer, how bad is that) interior.
DIE HONDA DIE DIE DIE
Last edited by Smileynh; 11-06-2006 at 12:31 PM.
11-06-2006, 12:31 PM
#60
turbo'd w/ excellence
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah if ur gonna go honda/acura.. go s2000.. a used 03 s2k with good milage on it like 20k miles will run u the same price as a fully loaded RSX type S... s2k is faster straight line, better handling, and if u like convertables its another plus for you.. the rx8 handling is unmatched by any car IMO.. with exceptions to high end exotics porches etc.. yet the gas bill will crush ur wallet.. insurance will be cheaper though.. but.. maintenence on an 8 .. lots of problems have occurred.. fortunatley for some people nothing has happened.. yet to others all sorts of weird stuff happened to their 8's.. pinging sounds, warped brake rotors, broken sun visors, flooding of engines.. numerous things... honda engines are easy to work on and cheap to fix if necessary.. also they run forever.,.. on my 95 integra LS it has 115k miles and still going strong running perfectly.. my friends 95 civic has almost 200k miles and runs like its brand new... also.. check to make sure that there are mechanics around your area where you live that are familiar and good with rotary engines.. i know that mazda has the warranty.. but if something happens where mazda cant fix it or wont do it bc of a warranty void or an expired warranty.. you want to have a mechanic around that knows what hes doing
11-06-2006, 12:34 PM
#61
turbo'd w/ excellence
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rglbegl
The RX8 wins every time. You cant get no play drivin an rsx. You just get laughed at. Now roll up in an RX8, now you are turning some heads. Who cares which is faster, the mazda gets the chicks. 
good point =] thats why i got an 8.. well..not the only reason why.. but one of em haha..
my friend has an 06 type-s black on black , lowered, tints, rims, .... he still gets head turns and chicks.. but .. not as many
11-06-2006, 12:42 PM
#62
turbo'd w/ excellence
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
u gotta also think about price too... 05-06 type S is around 24k? ... the brand new 07 rx-8 starts at high twentys.. 27-28k.. add delivery, tax , tag , title, and all that other bull and ur lookin at around or a lil over 30k for a base model 6MT rx8 fresh from the dealership.. a used rx8 is a diff story bc the resale value on em arent great at all.. u can get a 04-05 for anywehre between 18k-25k.. but u gotta take into consideration that it was driven by someone else.. and you dont know how they drove the car.. they could have abused it or not changed the oil when its was supposed to or do other stuff to it.. the recalls and everything.. w/e that was done..you just gotta realize that it was someone elses car and you dont know how well they maintained it.. because dealerships can say "runs mint or runs brand new" but you dont know that for sure.. dealerships say that so u just buy the car.. they are swines. sharky car dealers.. i hate em
11-06-2006, 12:49 PM
#63
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 1,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RX-XSIV
good point =] thats why i got an 8.. well..not the only reason why.. but one of em haha..
my friend has an 06 type-s black on black , lowered, tints, rims, .... he still gets head turns and chicks.. but .. not as many
my friend has an 06 type-s black on black , lowered, tints, rims, .... he still gets head turns and chicks.. but .. not as many
11-06-2006, 12:56 PM
#64
I bomb atomically
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RX-XSIV
u gotta also think about price too... 05-06 type S is around 24k? ... the brand new 07 rx-8 starts at high twentys.. 27-28k.. add delivery, tax , tag , title, and all that other bull and ur lookin at around or a lil over 30k for a base model 6MT rx8 fresh from the dealership.. a used rx8 is a diff story bc the resale value on em arent great at all.. u can get a 04-05 for anywehre between 18k-25k.. but u gotta take into consideration that it was driven by someone else.. and you dont know how they drove the car.. they could have abused it or not changed the oil when its was supposed to or do other stuff to it.. the recalls and everything.. w/e that was done..you just gotta realize that it was someone elses car and you dont know how well they maintained it.. because dealerships can say "runs mint or runs brand new" but you dont know that for sure.. dealerships say that so u just buy the car.. they are swines. sharky car dealers.. i hate em
Where are you getting your figures from? A base RX8 manual starts at 24458...
add sport package for 1700 more..
11-06-2006, 02:09 PM
#66
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 9291150
Ike, you’re wearing my down man. I gotta start ignoring you like 99% of the guys on this site. Nobody is as committed as you, how can I possibly compete. I actually have a job, family, hobbies…
Ok, I’ll try again;
1.) Nonsense. C&D has described their testing procedures, they always shift at redline. R&T clearly indicate shiftpoints in all their tests – “maximum speed in gears” - always at redline. Don't know about MT, but I’ll assume they are the same since their times always tend to be a little more conservative.
2.) A RX8 "preproduction" car in the summer of 03? You are quite the conspiracy theorist. Even if so, it could just as easily be too slow or too fast. Regardless, other mags duplicated the numbers from that test, including C&D. So what’s you point?
3.) No. It’s the current generation RSXs - the ’02 model. It did have 10 less HP, but was slightly lighter too. Regardless, it’s the only full test of theirs I’ve seen.
4.) Yes, as I said, in that one very selective example the RSXs was close to the 8. How bout the other examples?
5.) You’re so full of it. In an earlier thread you said “Moostafa summed up pretty well the likely scenarios” where he said the type S would “walk away” once rolling. You agreed with “walk away”, not “even” as you are now implying.
6.) All you’ve proven is that you can be quite shifty with the facts, creative with your interpretations, and very gifted with the ‘ole about face.
Plus, has anybody realized how dumb this argument is…“So without the RWD the Honda would be as fast.” How many cars would suddenly be as fast as a stock Evo if it didn’t have AWD? Oh, never heard that one.
Ps. Sand in my vagina eh? Gotta love a cyber space tough guy!
Ok, I’ll try again;
1.) Nonsense. C&D has described their testing procedures, they always shift at redline. R&T clearly indicate shiftpoints in all their tests – “maximum speed in gears” - always at redline. Don't know about MT, but I’ll assume they are the same since their times always tend to be a little more conservative.
2.) A RX8 "preproduction" car in the summer of 03? You are quite the conspiracy theorist. Even if so, it could just as easily be too slow or too fast. Regardless, other mags duplicated the numbers from that test, including C&D. So what’s you point?
3.) No. It’s the current generation RSXs - the ’02 model. It did have 10 less HP, but was slightly lighter too. Regardless, it’s the only full test of theirs I’ve seen.
4.) Yes, as I said, in that one very selective example the RSXs was close to the 8. How bout the other examples?
5.) You’re so full of it. In an earlier thread you said “Moostafa summed up pretty well the likely scenarios” where he said the type S would “walk away” once rolling. You agreed with “walk away”, not “even” as you are now implying.
6.) All you’ve proven is that you can be quite shifty with the facts, creative with your interpretations, and very gifted with the ‘ole about face.
Plus, has anybody realized how dumb this argument is…“So without the RWD the Honda would be as fast.” How many cars would suddenly be as fast as a stock Evo if it didn’t have AWD? Oh, never heard that one.
Ps. Sand in my vagina eh? Gotta love a cyber space tough guy!
2.) No conspiracy theory here, the car was rated at 250hp and they even mention that it's a preproduction car in the article.
3.) The 05-05 RSX is clearly faster than the previous MYs even if it does weigh more.
4.) If you look at all the examples of the current RSX compared to the RX-8 the they're VERY close to 130mph, I don't know why you have such a hard time with that.
5.) I never said even, I said about the same. Meaning it could go either way.
6.) Yeah, I'm the shifty one with the facts... I'm not the one using older slower versions of the RSX and preproduction pre retuned for emissions RX-8s.
It's a really dumb argument, and you're the one that started it after I simply said the RSX is about the same as the RX-8 in speed.
11-06-2006, 02:15 PM
#67
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by no dice
Where are you getting your figures from? A base RX8 manual starts at 24458...
add sport package for 1700 more..
add sport package for 1700 more..
11-06-2006, 02:40 PM
#68
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stock for stock, the RSX type S is not faster up to at least 120...
Mod for mod the RSX type S embarrases the 8. Intake, exhaust, Hondata will give 04 mustang GT's a run for their money. I was very close to getting a type S before the 8, however, the salesman thought I was a young punk who was only interested in a test drive and didn't take me seriously at all. He did me a favor. I drove to the Acura dealership with my friend when he bought a TSX and told him not to deal with that same guy. The look on his face was priceless, me in the shiny new 8 and my friend giving the commission to another salesman
Mod for mod the RSX type S embarrases the 8. Intake, exhaust, Hondata will give 04 mustang GT's a run for their money. I was very close to getting a type S before the 8, however, the salesman thought I was a young punk who was only interested in a test drive and didn't take me seriously at all. He did me a favor. I drove to the Acura dealership with my friend when he bought a TSX and told him not to deal with that same guy. The look on his face was priceless, me in the shiny new 8 and my friend giving the commission to another salesman
11-06-2006, 02:53 PM
#69
Registered
My brother had an 03 RSX-S and he had greddy ehaust, injen intake, kuhmo ecstas, struts, sways, and headers. We raced and he beat me once because I forgot to turn off the dsc and he fluttered the clutch from 6 or so while I did a very small drop from around three as well as chirping second. I had just a rb exhaust then. Raced him again with the Revi w/ ram air, the exhaust, no dsc, a drop from 4 and no chirping and smoked him by at least 3 car lengths. He said he had a lot better start than the time he beat me. Keep in mind though, this was an 03 so less power from factory and with just those mods he kept up well. I have driven it too and on a chilly night it is very quick. But once your past 105-107(to me) it really seems to slow down while the 8 keeps on accelerating.
11-07-2006, 05:24 AM
#73
Registered
I owned a 2004 Rx8 and sold it for various frustrations. Currently own a 2005 RSX (actually it's an Integra Type-S in OZ, but anyhoo).
I've owned 4 rotaries now, and objectively the RSX is just as fun as all of them, Rx8 included.
Dont let FWD fool you, Honda/Acura went out of their way to make an awesome handling car in FWD, and they succeeded. Yes, it is probably not as top notch in outright handling compared to the Rx8, but having owned both, I can tell you, it's bloody close. The RSX is extremely understated. To me, the RSX feels as quick, it pulls damn hard. It's a good feeling to be able to control fuel economy too: keep it under 5800 rpm and your'e sucking hardly any fuel, if you wanna have some fun wind it out 8300 and let it screeeeaam.
turn up the volume!
http://www.agoraphone.com/prerecorded/acura_prclip.html
I've owned 4 rotaries now, and objectively the RSX is just as fun as all of them, Rx8 included.
Dont let FWD fool you, Honda/Acura went out of their way to make an awesome handling car in FWD, and they succeeded. Yes, it is probably not as top notch in outright handling compared to the Rx8, but having owned both, I can tell you, it's bloody close. The RSX is extremely understated. To me, the RSX feels as quick, it pulls damn hard. It's a good feeling to be able to control fuel economy too: keep it under 5800 rpm and your'e sucking hardly any fuel, if you wanna have some fun wind it out 8300 and let it screeeeaam.
turn up the volume!
http://www.agoraphone.com/prerecorded/acura_prclip.html
