Seriously, that's the trademark of a German car ! Even Volkswagens close with a thud. Japanese cars close with a clatter, the sheetmetal seems to actually resonate!

 

Very true. My wife owned a Corrolla when we first started dating, at it made that 'twang' sound when you closed the door. So did my Accord. Fast forward 8 years, a friend of ours buys a new Corrolla, the doors make that exact same 'twang' when you close the door.

 

I didn't see anyone else here illustrate that. Are you trying to be funny?

 

foget bout it. You make a very good point. I've never thought of that before.

 

Did he mess with the suspension on this car? It sounds like he made some changes and didn't do it right. If a front wheel drive car is losing the back end that bad, then he probably had the back end set up too stiff, either with springs or sway bars. And this might also account for the poor high speed stability and for him totalling it.

 

Many of the Japanese cars seem to have very thin sheetmetal. I know especially with Toyota and Lexus, you can grab the door handles and push and the sheetmetal will move and flex. Try that on your benz and it won't budge.

 

Are these correct? 20 mpg seems really low. Glad to see our heavier C230 out-brakes the Acura, you see where MB focused on safety, not performance.

 

I can't speak for any other Lexus model or year, but my '95 LS400's doors thud very nicely. IMO it's a very well built car, but has a very different driving style.

Just my .02 cents from experience, keep up the discussion.

 

Look at the previous post. The RSX is 5mph faster through the slalom! 1/2 a second faster in the quarter! That is a HUGE difference! Obviously you guys can't see that. You guys can talk about clutch drops, street race variables all day long. It's obvious that factoring other variables like driver skill and technique will yield a different result. But we aren't comparing drivers or techniques. We are comparing the actual CARS! The FACTS are the FACTS. The RSX will kill a c230k in almost all performance categories.

And as for your suspiciously inaccurate post about how 'crappy' the RSX's handling is (which is contrary to every review I've read, and my own review of the car when I test drove it), I have to assume your friend (it's always a friend's car, isn't it? hmm...) isn't a very good driver, or tampered with his suspension. You don't sound like a bright guy, so I assume your friend is pretty dim as well. So this explains a lot.

 

how can you compare the c-coupe with s2000? By saying IF the s2000 isnt allowed to use vtec then the c230 will win is just stupid. Thats like saying if the c230 wasnt supercharged then the s2000 will win. Both cars have reason they are somewhat quick. A "normal" launch as you said is different for every car. If you take a way the 6500rpm clutch drop from an s2000 then you are handicapping the car and not letting it use its full potential. If you are gonna race a car, race it at its best. Dont pull any of this IF and BUT crap.

 

your assumptions on him tampering with the car are correct and incorrect at the same time. He did change his springs, however, this was because of the handling to begin with. And the springs didn't accomplish much of anything. And hey autobarnyard animal, you think test driving the car once can give you the same overall aspect on a car? amazing you drove it once, you must know everything about it! your some kind of genius! You must work at acura and build each one of these rice burners by hand. The genius sweat shop worker whose the expert on a car he doesnt have what do you consider handling a turning radius? there is nothing great about its handling, you want great handling the M3 is your example (e36) when compared to the real deal the rsx is just plane unsafe and unreliable, and thats what i've gathered from my experiences with the car. Maybe his car had a factory defect, who knows, it doesnt really matter now does it? Granted the C230's handling isn't that great on the track because of all these restrictions, but those restrictions keep you safe from harm. When my buddy's rsx got hit, his seat gave out. It reclined all the way back to a dentist chair position. Big deal chair malfunction right? the other car in the accident had its bumper settled 2 inches from his head in that position. My evaluation is unsafe

 

I was always afraid to put any pressure on the bodywork of my Accord

 

I have no interest in handicapping the S2000 to make the coupe sound faster. But if you were doing many races in a day, the S2000 would soon start losing because the clutch would not last very long. Sure, you can use its full potential, but why would you want to do that if you're gonna have to buy a new clutch. So in street racing situations, the coupe can probably win because most owners are not gonna start that hard. And the fact that the coupe can achieve a respectable time without a lot of clutch abuse means a lot to me.

 

here's the road and track article.. yeah, i was surprised at such a low mpg number. they must've gotten supercharger happy or something. heh.

yup...very true...gf's 2001 accord fender will bend if u press slightly. HOWEVER...take the w202...press the middle of the hood...it will BOW in (but bounce back too, something the fender on the accord didn't do)...donno if tha'ts the case on normal cars...c36 does that. the new w203 c320 doesn't do that no more.

 

Matt, I agree with what you are generally saying but some of your points are invalid. For example, if you do aggressive clutch drops on ANY car (not just the S2000), it will gradually start to wear out the clutch. The S2000 isn't a drag car and doesn't pretend to be, but if needed, it can execute a low 5sec run to 60 (with a high clutch drop). Also, keep in mind that the C230 needs to be brake-torqued to get enough power for an optimal launch. How many people will risk damage to their expensive auto tranny for the best 0-60 time? Not many. I'd rather replace a clutch in a car, than replace my entire auto tranny. There's more possibility of someone in his S2000 doing a fairly agressive launch than for a C230k driver to brake-torque his MB at 3000rpm.

 

Really? How about that front door "bubble" that occurs when you shut the doors? :p



tedypedy: please do not call names to your fellow members.

 

Nice to see this debate is still going.

In direct response if you won't brake torque your car you shouldn't be racing or even talking about 0-60 improvements. Just like any 4 banger, our car sucks below 3k rpm.

Are those numbers generated with the '02 or 03' C230K?
Are those numbers generated with the C7 wheel package?

Can I just add that I THINK the RSX is still, and will always be a piece of ****. I would gladly pay the extra beans to get the additional airbags, vehicle intelligence, safety, and quality in a benz, even the cheapest american market model. I have 27K on my car and I drive it like I stole it, I am on my third set of treads, going to need the fourth and getting close to my third service. Everything interior and exterior still looks like it fits. A friends RSX-S (yes a friends, why would I buy one?) has 17k and the body trim looks like ***, uneven panel gaps, spotted paint fade, and my personal favorite, ill alligned interior trim and the nastiest rattles I've heard in a late model car. His car is slowly falling to the abuse of north jersey and NYC roads. I spend more time in NYC with my car then he does.

We both have manual trans and when I launch with the ESP off (dyno-mode) I still jump out two car lengths on him while he hops, jumps, and dodges around like a monkey on crack trying to get off the line. And when he is cornering it feels like it is going to break free any second and often does. It feels cheap, unconfident, and dangerous to drive the car hard. I will not take a turn side-by-side with him because I know he'll break loose.

Last summer I watched some dimwit with a RSX-S lose control and rip the suspension from under the car with a high-curb divider trying to keep up with me around a nice set of turns, then crash into an off-duty cop's personal vehicle. I circled back to see if everyone was ok, sure enough the car had temp plates and a kid behind the wheel. Go Acura!

Also, supposedly we can expect up tp 200k out of our motors. If long-term is what you want, I'd settle for a slightly more expensive detuned car with a SC pushing a ~1/3 of what the other components could handle. I think we'll get a lot more for our money then any acura. Take the KLEEMANN lysholm experiment, 300hp out of the right SC. If you're willing to give up some of the MB smoothness, you end up with one tight, sharp hanling car. And even with the stiffest sways and a set of springs the ride is plush compared to the RSX.

I dont think it is our fault that we are comparing our vehicles to RSXs and eclipses, MB has them as competitors. What would you compare the car to? I tend to compare it to C240, 325s, A4s, etc. In that line up, we get more HP and perf per dollar, greater or equal safety, comfort, and greater integrity (except from other snob mb owners). I have leather, C7, metalic paint, etc. blah. I don't feel like I am missing much.

Why are we all so worried about 0-60 anyway? I'd rather be confident running my car at 90mph plus for long trips or the morning commute up CT Rt. 15 (some sick high speed turns) then 0-60 marketing times.

Cripes, just think about all the friggen strut braces required to actually get good handling out of those things. Springs, swaybars, a set of staggered S-03s and I can hang in the turns with my friends (there we go again with friends) stock E36 M3.

Sorry for the rant but this topic is crap. The RSX under ideal conditions is better then the C230K with 16" wheels and all-season tires. What is so fricken awe inspiring about this? Another good question is what are the gearing differences (trans and rear) btwn the two cars?

 

First off, I have to say some of your comments on the RSX were really funny. Secondly I think you might be misunderstanding some of the points I made.

1) you said that if you won't brake torque your car, you shouldn't be racing. I completely agree! But the same also applies to cars like an RSX or any car with a manual. If you aren't doing clutch drops, then you shouldn't be racing either. Someone mentioned that you can beat an RSX (or S2000) if they don't clutch drop. If they don't launch aggressively, then they aren't racing. Exactly as you put it as well. If you aren't brake-torqueing an auto, you aren't really racing either. I just wanted these other eejits to make fair comparisons.

2) despite your friend's car being a POS, the RSX is quite established in autocrosses. they usually come out on top of even WRX's. I havent seen a c230k autoX, so I can't comment on that. Perhaps your friend just has a lemon.

3) i have yet to read any reports of a MB supercharged engine lasting 200k miles. i don't think this would be an accurate statement to make, especially since anyone having over 100k on these supercharged 4cyl engines is unusual at this point in time.

4) you asked why we are all so worried about 0-60 times anyway. i'm not, but it was brought up by the originator of this post. i agree, just enjoy your cars for their different qualities, strengths, weaknesses. I was just commenting how there were some highly inaccurate statements about 0-60 times (like what i mentioned in #1).

5) fyi, the RSX Type S comes with all-season tires (just like the base c230k). Of course adding the c7 package improves handling (but not necessarily improve acceleration due to higher drag and more grip on launches), but adding a 17 wheel/tire package to an RSX will also yield improved handling.

 

Let me be the first to say I rev the coupe to 3000rpm, then feather it to 4000 or 4300rpm to launch my coupe There is a lower vmax when you are at a stand still so you have to let it drop, then try to time it so you are higher when it is time to let the clutch out. I don't drop the clutch, I let it out as much as I have traction. For the shifts, I keep the throttle down and stab the clutch just enough to switch gears. It is the easiest way to improve your times. Might be the worst thing for yer trans though. So, no, I don't think a monster rever should be forced to stall low for the launch. The coupe bogs like a pig if you just, drive away, I think anything else would too.

Not sure what to say about your impression that M111 motors haven't been around long enough to get those miles up. I think my eyes caught a glimpse of a SLK 230 Kompressor when I was still riding my BMX as main transportation, that would be >9 years, I might be wrong, but that would allow someone to get to 100k, 150k, and maybe 200K. At the rate I am going, 27k miles in under a year of ownership, I'll let you know how my M111 supercharger equipped car lasts.

Everyone I know that autoX has modded cars. They are all FWD and can e-brake steer into the turns. If you watch the professional autoX on SPEED, you'll quickly notice that FWD has an advantage there. Seems that AWD throttle drifting on lose dirt is harder then e-braking. They set the clutches differently based on the tracks, but typical setups my friends run are 55-60% rear, 40-45% front. My BMW xi was interesting harder to control on wet snow and loose dirt, never drove a WRX though.

I would like to see how things shake out in EMRA Showroom stock and street stock classes. SCCA competition will yield a better comparison as well. SCCA and Street Stock rules allow for certain modifications without bumping you up a class. I will be racing, time trialing only for now, with EMRA this year so long as I find a new job soon. Hopefully other C230 K owners will compete in these classes. Much safer then street racing, and much more fun. Insurance is shorta expensive though.

I will be competing against other ametuer drivers including RSX-Ss so I will be better able to discuss this comparison with more authority soon. All I know is that to date, no RSX has taken me off the line at a traffic light, nor has one been able to keep up with me at speeds on the hwy. There are rural routes we play on btwn Rt. 37 in Lakehurst, and Rt. 130 towards West NJ. Nice ascending and desending turns, high speed sweeping turns, and lots of smushed bugs on the windshield. There are more hondas and acuras and vw and cavilers and other POS wanna-be garbage clunking around Toms River NJ (hometown). Last summer my coupe was stock and I still did well goofing around despite the heat soak.

(funny commercial for the new honda accord, "Affordability is also in our heritage" Just what I was looking for. An inherently cheap car.)

 

I don't want to argue over this too much. Heck, I didn't even feel like reading some of these long posts. But what I'm basically saying is that the coupe can achieve some respectable times without a whole lot of wear on the clutch because of the low end torque. But the S2000 requires a much more aggressive launch which will not be able to be repeated many times without replacing the clutch.

I agree that in a race, the driver should be launching aggressively and a good S2000 driver can run pretty fast, but he MUST do this to get a good time. Whereas, a coupe driver does not have to be so hard on the car to get a decent time. The S2000 has a much higher difference in times between an aggressive launch and an easy launch than the coupe. That's all I'm trying to say.

 

Excellent post Matt. Your point is valid less only the clause here is that the original post is about 0-60 times. Best 0-60 times are gotten by beating the snot out of your clutch and pushing the car. Trust me, I would like to own an S2000 about as much as the RSX.

But if I can't ramble off 1000 character posts out of boredom and have people read them, is life really worth it any longer? Again sorry for the rant.

 

I would have to agree on the s200 deal. But just to remind everyone that the only reason that the s2000 has to dump the clutch so high in the range is one for him to launch with vtec activated and also because his redline is o about 9600 just about 3grand more than us. Plus the s2000 is about 10k more than any c coupe and the horsepower range is quite more than the kompressor. I find it hard to see why you would compare a coupe to an s2000 its not even in the same range. I dont think MB made the coupe to compare to all these jap imports in the street racing scene. Well as I see it thats where AMG comes along the only thing that AMG needs is to come up with a 6speed for the rest of the family. If my c36 wouldve had a manual tranny that wouldve been a killer combo. Well thats just my 2 cents.

 

"I still jump out two car lengths on him while he hops, jumps, and dodges around like a monkey on crack trying to get off the line. "
LOL
Monkeys on crack! Hey thats the name of my band!

SO if I smoke the monkey will I get high?
You got to smoke the monkey, see da monkey get smoked, monkey!

 

Yes the S2000 is faster. Is that what some of you wanted to hear me say? I'll still take my slower coupe for obvious reasons. 1) in the wreck I had, I was hit by an oil transfer truck doing 45mph. would you rather be in a coupe or a S2000 or RSX, hmmm let me think here....

I agree with Matt here. Yes the S2000 does have to launch much more agressively to have good times. If you lauch a S2000 like most normal stick drivers ( just above stall speed) your 0-60 times will be much greater than high 5's. Versus say a Camaro, Corvette, M3, M5, Mustang. They have the torque down low and don't have to get in a VTEC range. My Camaro would run the doors off just about any car on this site, key words just about But a Z06 would beat me off the line because of his gears. I had a 2.73 rear gear ( probably one of the lowest you will see) and a 4 speed auto, vs the Z06's 3.23rear and 6 speed manny.

Conclusion: THERE IS NO PERFECT CAR!!! There are trade-offs with everything. Sure with an H2 you can go up hills, but you can't take a corner like a Z06

 

You can say whatever you want, it's fine with me. But I might skim it instead of reading it completely. Although usually if I quote someone and reply, I usually read their whole post first.