Deception of 0-60 mph
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
From: Toronto
Deception of 0-60 mph
0-60 can be very deceiving, you are reaching a RATE of speed, not a distance. I will use acceleration times & distances from Road & Track to illustrate this point:
RSX Type-S Oct-01
0-60 mph, 6.7 s
0-100 ft, 3.3 s
0-500 ft, 8.4 s
C230 Jan-02
0-60 mph, 7.6 s
0-100 ft, 3.3 s
0-500 ft, 8.6 s
Notice that while the Type-S was almost a full second faster to a RATE of speed of 60 mph, it was not really faster to distances of 100 & 500 ft. In a race, it does not matter if the other driver reached a RATE of speed of 0-60 mph faster if they did not actually reach a distance faster.
It took 8.4 s to reach 500 ft, so the almost 1 second 0-60 advantage was part of the time. Basically, from the time the "race" started, the C230 stayed w/ the Type-S neck & neck through the first 500 ft & 8.X s, despite the Type-S reaching the Rate of speed of 60 mph almost a full second faster.
1/4 mile times & trap speed are more indicative of a car's acceleration than 0-60 mph, which is simply reaching a RATE of speed faster & not a distance, & can be quite deceiving as illustrated above. However, 1/4 miles may not accurately reflect short & low speed races.
RSX Type-S Oct-01
0-60 mph, 6.7 s
0-100 ft, 3.3 s
0-500 ft, 8.4 s
C230 Jan-02
0-60 mph, 7.6 s
0-100 ft, 3.3 s
0-500 ft, 8.6 s
Notice that while the Type-S was almost a full second faster to a RATE of speed of 60 mph, it was not really faster to distances of 100 & 500 ft. In a race, it does not matter if the other driver reached a RATE of speed of 0-60 mph faster if they did not actually reach a distance faster.
It took 8.4 s to reach 500 ft, so the almost 1 second 0-60 advantage was part of the time. Basically, from the time the "race" started, the C230 stayed w/ the Type-S neck & neck through the first 500 ft & 8.X s, despite the Type-S reaching the Rate of speed of 60 mph almost a full second faster.
1/4 mile times & trap speed are more indicative of a car's acceleration than 0-60 mph, which is simply reaching a RATE of speed faster & not a distance, & can be quite deceiving as illustrated above. However, 1/4 miles may not accurately reflect short & low speed races.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,924
Likes: 1
From: Sitting behind thing freakin desk of mine. Dreaming I was playing my Taylors, and driving my Benz. Long Live The VRAA!!!!!!
C230 Sports Coupe
Some car makers will purposely make the gears in some cars specifically for 0-60 times. BMW is synonymous with doing it. Look at "most" of their cars. They hit 60mph at 6300rpm in 2nd gear. Most of it is a marketing factor to say hey our 0-60 is lower than yours. One car I know alot about is the new 330i performance edition. Its got 235hp and 222lbft . They put a 6speed in it, and changed the rear gear, and raised the rev limiter so it would hit 60mph in 2nd gear, versus cars like the Benz that will have to go into 3rd to get 60mph. The RSX-S is the same way. yes faster to 60mph, but like you said its not much faster overt the distance. of course a pulley will change things up.
hehe
hehe
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,750
Likes: 0
From: Peoria IL
2003 MB C230 coupe
Originally posted by TimmyC230boy
Some car makers will purposely make the gears in some cars specifically for 0-60 times. BMW is synonymous with doing it. Look at "most" of their cars. They hit 60mph at 6300rpm in 2nd gear. Most of it is a marketing factor to say hey our 0-60 is lower than yours. One car I know alot about is the new 330i performance edition. Its got 235hp and 222lbft . They put a 6speed in it, and changed the rear gear, and raised the rev limiter so it would hit 60mph in 2nd gear, versus cars like the Benz that will have to go into 3rd to get 60mph. The RSX-S is the same way. yes faster to 60mph, but like you said its not much faster overt the distance. of course a pulley will change things up.
hehe
Some car makers will purposely make the gears in some cars specifically for 0-60 times. BMW is synonymous with doing it. Look at "most" of their cars. They hit 60mph at 6300rpm in 2nd gear. Most of it is a marketing factor to say hey our 0-60 is lower than yours. One car I know alot about is the new 330i performance edition. Its got 235hp and 222lbft . They put a 6speed in it, and changed the rear gear, and raised the rev limiter so it would hit 60mph in 2nd gear, versus cars like the Benz that will have to go into 3rd to get 60mph. The RSX-S is the same way. yes faster to 60mph, but like you said its not much faster overt the distance. of course a pulley will change things up.
hehe
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,924
Likes: 1
From: Sitting behind thing freakin desk of mine. Dreaming I was playing my Taylors, and driving my Benz. Long Live The VRAA!!!!!!
C230 Sports Coupe
Originally posted by truelove
and in the end the real race is who's driving an Acura and who's driving an MB. the MB wins every time no matter who crosses the finish line first.
and in the end the real race is who's driving an Acura and who's driving an MB. the MB wins every time no matter who crosses the finish line first.
Super Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
From: Houston, TX
2002 C230 Coupe Black/Charcoal C5 C7 Auto
well i agree that a souped up CRX or Civic is still in the end a pos. But BMW 3s and even the RSX type-S are very nice cars which are in the same league as our c230coupe. Now most "street racing" I've done (and seen) go beyond 60mph (usually about 90-110+mph) so really now a day it'll be nice to know 0-100mph times and optimize for that. Of course, I think manuf. still have to say 0-60 (or ~62mph for Euro 0-100km) for i think not to seem like encouraging ppl. to go over speed limit. They usually say its for HWY passing and safety
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,750
Likes: 0
From: Peoria IL
2003 MB C230 coupe
Originally posted by tberry
well i agree that a souped up CRX or Civic is still in the end a pos. But BMW 3s and even the RSX type-S are very nice cars which are in the same league as our c230coupe. Now most "street racing" I've done (and seen) go beyond 60mph (usually about 90-110+mph) so really now a day it'll be nice to know 0-100mph times and optimize for that. Of course, I think manuf. still have to say 0-60 (or ~62mph for Euro 0-100km) for i think not to seem like encouraging ppl. to go over speed limit. They usually say its for HWY passing and safety
well i agree that a souped up CRX or Civic is still in the end a pos. But BMW 3s and even the RSX type-S are very nice cars which are in the same league as our c230coupe. Now most "street racing" I've done (and seen) go beyond 60mph (usually about 90-110+mph) so really now a day it'll be nice to know 0-100mph times and optimize for that. Of course, I think manuf. still have to say 0-60 (or ~62mph for Euro 0-100km) for i think not to seem like encouraging ppl. to go over speed limit. They usually say its for HWY passing and safety
i love the look of the RSX. they're not very common around here at all. 3ers are very common. everyone and their mom has one.
Trending Topics
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,924
Likes: 1
From: Sitting behind thing freakin desk of mine. Dreaming I was playing my Taylors, and driving my Benz. Long Live The VRAA!!!!!!
C230 Sports Coupe
Originally posted by tberry
well i agree that a souped up CRX or Civic is still in the end a pos. But BMW 3s and even the RSX type-S are very nice cars which are in the same league as our c230coupe. Now most "street racing" I've done (and seen) go beyond 60mph (usually about 90-110+mph) so really now a day it'll be nice to know 0-100mph times and optimize for that. Of course, I think manuf. still have to say 0-60 (or ~62mph for Euro 0-100km) for i think not to seem like encouraging ppl. to go over speed limit. They usually say its for HWY passing and safety
well i agree that a souped up CRX or Civic is still in the end a pos. But BMW 3s and even the RSX type-S are very nice cars which are in the same league as our c230coupe. Now most "street racing" I've done (and seen) go beyond 60mph (usually about 90-110+mph) so really now a day it'll be nice to know 0-100mph times and optimize for that. Of course, I think manuf. still have to say 0-60 (or ~62mph for Euro 0-100km) for i think not to seem like encouraging ppl. to go over speed limit. They usually say its for HWY passing and safety
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)
Verdad Gallardo
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,750
Likes: 0
From: Peoria IL
2003 MB C230 coupe
Originally posted by TimmyC230boy
...Would you rather cruise at 120 in an RSX-S or a Benz?
...Would you rather cruise at 120 in an RSX-S or a Benz?
there is a really nice new stretch of interstate around where i live. when i go about 100 on that stretch, it seriously feels like i'm not touching the ground. i've never felt a smoother ride in my life. i would love to take that stretch in an S-class.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by TimmyC230boy
Some car makers will purposely make the gears in some cars specifically for 0-60 times. BMW is synonymous with doing it. Look at "most" of their cars. They hit 60mph at 6300rpm in 2nd gear. Most of it is a marketing factor to say hey our 0-60 is lower than yours. )
Some car makers will purposely make the gears in some cars specifically for 0-60 times. BMW is synonymous with doing it. Look at "most" of their cars. They hit 60mph at 6300rpm in 2nd gear. Most of it is a marketing factor to say hey our 0-60 is lower than yours. )
I must admit I do prefer the longer 1st and second gears though, I would rather have a 5-speed again.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
From: Toronto
Originally posted by truelove
i love the look of the RSX. they're not very common around here at all. 3ers are very common. everyone and their mom has one.
i love the look of the RSX. they're not very common around here at all. 3ers are very common. everyone and their mom has one.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,750
Likes: 0
From: Peoria IL
2003 MB C230 coupe
Originally posted by vyse
...You must live somewhere without a substanial Asian population...
...You must live somewhere without a substanial Asian population...
central illinois. i see alot of BMWs driven by the 30-something crowd and TONS of mustangs/camaros/firebirds driven by the high school/white trash crowd. we have a ton of civics too, but usually driven by girls or moms.i've seen something like 3 RSXs, but they could have been the same one since they were all silver.
EDIT: ah ha, i just realized why we don't have many RSXs around here (or acuras for that matter). no Acura dealership in peoria.
Last edited by truelove; Apr 3, 2003 at 12:35 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
From: Toronto
That's a good thing! Being Asian myself, I hate it when some guy next to me in a Civic revs his little naturally aspirated Civic CX without a muffler trying to get me to race. It makes Chinese people look bad, not to mention it makes the cops stereotype against Asian teens. Or even worst are those rich kids who drived riced-out MB and BMWs with some ricer exhaust and huge aluminium wing.
Almost a Member!
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
It amazes me sometimes
It amazes me that some of you guys continue to justify the C-coupe's performance deficit vs the competition.
The fact that you keep comparing a 30k car to a 23k shows some insecurity on your part. You did not buy your car to be a drag racer, so why do you always keep trying to massage the figures. The fact is that an RSX is faster than a C-coupe in a straight line and in the turns. Along with that, the RSX is just as nicely designed inside, costs more than $5k less, handles better, and makes more hp without forced induction. I can see how that might make you insecure. But you bought the c-coupe for other factors as well.
The fact that you keep comparing a 30k car to a 23k shows some insecurity on your part. You did not buy your car to be a drag racer, so why do you always keep trying to massage the figures. The fact is that an RSX is faster than a C-coupe in a straight line and in the turns. Along with that, the RSX is just as nicely designed inside, costs more than $5k less, handles better, and makes more hp without forced induction. I can see how that might make you insecure. But you bought the c-coupe for other factors as well.
Originally posted by J P
0-60 can be very deceiving, you are reaching a RATE of speed, not a distance. I will use acceleration times & distances from Road & Track to illustrate this point:
RSX Type-S Oct-01
0-60 mph, 6.7 s
0-100 ft, 3.3 s
0-500 ft, 8.4 s
C230 Jan-02
0-60 mph, 7.6 s
0-100 ft, 3.3 s
0-500 ft, 8.6 s
Notice that while the Type-S was almost a full second faster to a RATE of speed of 60 mph, it was not really faster to distances of 100 & 500 ft. In a race, it does not matter if the other driver reached a RATE of speed of 0-60 mph faster if they did not actually reach a distance faster.
It took 8.4 s to reach 500 ft, so the almost 1 second 0-60 advantage was part of the time. Basically, from the time the "race" started, the C230 stayed w/ the Type-S neck & neck through the first 500 ft & 8.X s, despite the Type-S reaching the Rate of speed of 60 mph almost a full second faster.
1/4 mile times & trap speed are more indicative of a car's acceleration than 0-60 mph, which is simply reaching a RATE of speed faster & not a distance, & can be quite deceiving as illustrated above. However, 1/4 miles may not accurately reflect short & low speed races.
0-60 can be very deceiving, you are reaching a RATE of speed, not a distance. I will use acceleration times & distances from Road & Track to illustrate this point:
RSX Type-S Oct-01
0-60 mph, 6.7 s
0-100 ft, 3.3 s
0-500 ft, 8.4 s
C230 Jan-02
0-60 mph, 7.6 s
0-100 ft, 3.3 s
0-500 ft, 8.6 s
Notice that while the Type-S was almost a full second faster to a RATE of speed of 60 mph, it was not really faster to distances of 100 & 500 ft. In a race, it does not matter if the other driver reached a RATE of speed of 0-60 mph faster if they did not actually reach a distance faster.
It took 8.4 s to reach 500 ft, so the almost 1 second 0-60 advantage was part of the time. Basically, from the time the "race" started, the C230 stayed w/ the Type-S neck & neck through the first 500 ft & 8.X s, despite the Type-S reaching the Rate of speed of 60 mph almost a full second faster.
1/4 mile times & trap speed are more indicative of a car's acceleration than 0-60 mph, which is simply reaching a RATE of speed faster & not a distance, & can be quite deceiving as illustrated above. However, 1/4 miles may not accurately reflect short & low speed races.
Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: Ontario, Canada
C230 Coupe 2002
Comparisons
I have been reading these posts and must say that I bought the C230 Coupe for what it is. A rear driver, with a manual tranny, a hatch for interior SPACE, 192hp/200lbs of torque @ 2500 rpm, a big sunroof, looks, it felt good to drive and it handled not to bad. The understeer is gone since the rear AMG sway bar has been installed. The fact that it is a Mercedes is just a bonus. The price was also a factor. Nothing with these features came close. The front drivers are not my cup of tea. The WRX doesn't have the looks. The BMW for the price only gives you 174hp/178lbs of torque @ 3500 rpm. Torque is the importent number at rpm(power) The BMW also is a sedan, not a hatch with access to the SPACE in the rear. Also, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I also looked at the IS 300, but a 4 door sedan( NOT ) By the way, I knew what I bought was not a Hot Rod, that is why I say I bought it for what it is. I just hope the reliability factor is on mu side !!!
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,753
Likes: 0
From: York, PA
2003 C230K Sport Coupe, 1986 190E 2.3
Just because it has more Hp than the coupe does not mean it has more torque. Or that it is better in any way. I bought my MB because I wanted it over the others. I looked at the BMW, there are a ton here, the RSX, too small and there are a few to many as well. The new 350Z and G35 Coupe, was not too impressed. I went with the Benz as it was the best bang for the buck. If I wanted pure straight line speed and accel, I would have went with a Mustang, if I wanted handling and power the 350Z or Infiniti would have been the choice. German engineering an power the BMW, but I wanted style and comfort as well as some power so the MB was ther choice.
Super Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
From: Houston, TX
2002 C230 Coupe Black/Charcoal C5 C7 Auto
Re: Comparisons
Originally posted by TonyG230
I have been reading these posts and must say that I bought the C230 Coupe for what it is. A rear driver, with a manual tranny, a hatch for interior SPACE, 192hp/200lbs of torque @ 2500 rpm, a big sunroof, looks, it felt good to drive and it handled not to bad. The understeer is gone since the rear AMG sway bar has been installed. The fact that it is a Mercedes is just a bonus. The price was also a factor. Nothing with these features came close. The front drivers are not my cup of tea. The WRX doesn't have the looks. The BMW for the price only gives you 174hp/178lbs of torque @ 3500 rpm. Torque is the importent number at rpm(power) The BMW also is a sedan, not a hatch with access to the SPACE in the rear. Also, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I also looked at the IS 300, but a 4 door sedan( NOT ) By the way, I knew what I bought was not a Hot Rod, that is why I say I bought it for what it is. I just hope the reliability factor is on mu side !!!
I have been reading these posts and must say that I bought the C230 Coupe for what it is. A rear driver, with a manual tranny, a hatch for interior SPACE, 192hp/200lbs of torque @ 2500 rpm, a big sunroof, looks, it felt good to drive and it handled not to bad. The understeer is gone since the rear AMG sway bar has been installed. The fact that it is a Mercedes is just a bonus. The price was also a factor. Nothing with these features came close. The front drivers are not my cup of tea. The WRX doesn't have the looks. The BMW for the price only gives you 174hp/178lbs of torque @ 3500 rpm. Torque is the importent number at rpm(power) The BMW also is a sedan, not a hatch with access to the SPACE in the rear. Also, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I also looked at the IS 300, but a 4 door sedan( NOT ) By the way, I knew what I bought was not a Hot Rod, that is why I say I bought it for what it is. I just hope the reliability factor is on mu side !!!
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
From: Toronto
Re: It amazes me sometimes
Originally posted by autobarn
It amazes me that some of you guys continue to justify the C-coupe's performance deficit vs the competition.
The fact that you keep comparing a 30k car to a 23k shows some insecurity on your part. You did not buy your car to be a drag racer, so why do you always keep trying to massage the figures. The fact is that an RSX is faster than a C-coupe in a straight line and in the turns. Along with that, the RSX is just as nicely designed inside, costs more than $5k less, handles better, and makes more hp without forced induction. I can see how that might make you insecure. But you bought the c-coupe for other factors as well.
It amazes me that some of you guys continue to justify the C-coupe's performance deficit vs the competition.
The fact that you keep comparing a 30k car to a 23k shows some insecurity on your part. You did not buy your car to be a drag racer, so why do you always keep trying to massage the figures. The fact is that an RSX is faster than a C-coupe in a straight line and in the turns. Along with that, the RSX is just as nicely designed inside, costs more than $5k less, handles better, and makes more hp without forced induction. I can see how that might make you insecure. But you bought the c-coupe for other factors as well.
2. The point of my thread was that 0-60 mph times can be quite deceiving about how fast a car actually is over the time it takes to go from 0 - 60 mph. Did you see the part where I wrote "I will use acceleration times & distances from Road & Track to illustrate this point"? I did not say I was using it to show the C230 K was as fast, if you read more carefully you would've seen that.
I was merely using the 2 cars as reference points to back up my statement that 0-60 mph times can be deceiving, the 2 cars could've been other cars. The point was not that the C230 K was about as fast over 500 ft, but rather an example of the deception of 0-60 mph times.
Super Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
From: Houston, TX
2002 C230 Coupe Black/Charcoal C5 C7 Auto
Re: Re: It amazes me sometimes
Originally posted by J P
1. I do not own a C230 K, nor any Mercedes-Benz for that matter. I'm a BMW owner.
2. The point of my thread was that 0-60 mph times can be quite deceiving about how fast a car actually is over the time it takes to go from 0 - 60 mph.
1. I do not own a C230 K, nor any Mercedes-Benz for that matter. I'm a BMW owner.
2. The point of my thread was that 0-60 mph times can be quite deceiving about how fast a car actually is over the time it takes to go from 0 - 60 mph.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta, GA
C230 coupe 6sp
I drove a 3 series BMW, an RSX-S, and the C-coupe, and there was one thing that especially impressed me about the coupe. It is very quiet inside. R&T measured 69dB at 70mph which puts it in very elite company. The RSX was 73dB and I think the BMW was 71. Since dB is measured on a log scale, every 10dB doubles the noise level. This was very evident in the RSX which had a lot of road noise, and the doors sounded like tin cans when you shut them. The BMW had a lot more wind noise than the coupe. Since I like really quiet cars, this was important to me. The RSX rode like my Dakota R/T which made it handle better than the coupe, but it was harsh. The BMW handling was spot on, but I think my coupe with the AMG sways is just about the perfect balance between handling and comfort for a daily driven street car. If only MB's quality and service were better, I would be happy with this car.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 1
From: The blue white rock, third out.
2002 C230 Coupe(M111)
Re: It amazes me sometimes
Originally posted by autobarn
It amazes me that some of you guys continue to justify the C-coupe's performance deficit vs the competition.
The fact that you keep comparing a 30k car to a 23k shows some insecurity on your part. You did not buy your car to be a drag racer, so why do you always keep trying to massage the figures. The fact is that an RSX is faster than a C-coupe in a straight line and in the turns. Along with that, the RSX is just as nicely designed inside, costs more than $5k less, handles better, and makes more hp without forced induction. I can see how that might make you insecure. But you bought the c-coupe for other factors as well.
It amazes me that some of you guys continue to justify the C-coupe's performance deficit vs the competition.
The fact that you keep comparing a 30k car to a 23k shows some insecurity on your part. You did not buy your car to be a drag racer, so why do you always keep trying to massage the figures. The fact is that an RSX is faster than a C-coupe in a straight line and in the turns. Along with that, the RSX is just as nicely designed inside, costs more than $5k less, handles better, and makes more hp without forced induction. I can see how that might make you insecure. But you bought the c-coupe for other factors as well.
On the street, the race is not against the stop watch. And you don't get a half dozen runs to get your fastest time, and no one sits waiting at the light with the RSX 'idling' at 5500RPM. The torque of the Coupe allows it to roll off the line with some authority, unlike the non existent low end of the Acura. Race some cars, you'll be surprised not only how close the ones you lose are, but how many you actually beat. Ive taken the RSX-S in stop light to stop light drags- and the WRX won't pull on you after the launch. The WRX enjoys a similar strange street advantage over many cars that should kill it in a drag race...its AWD system makes lauching painless...its hard to mess it up unless you bog completely.
Sounds silly, but its true. At anyrate, I didn't buy it because I wanted to race.
I look at this way...I bought the Coupe for what it was...a strikingly styled, well built rwd coupe, with a 6 speed, torquey supercharged engine, awesome glass roof, and a well designed interior. After owning it for awhile, I've come to love the car for other reasons as well. I would have loved this combination even without the MB star. I test drove the RSX and the RSX type S, the Celica, the BMW 3 series, the Mini Cooper S, the G35, the A4, the SVT Focus and Mustang, and many others before I got my coupe. I knew what I was buying.
BTW, the RSX Interior isn't even close to as nice as the MB. It feels(and looks) exactly like what it is...a fast, very expensive Civic.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,145
Likes: 0
From: Ohio
2010 C300 4matic
Re: Re: It amazes me sometimes
Originally posted by Outland
On the street, the race is not against the stop watch. And you don't get a half dozen runs to get your fastest time, and no one sits waiting at the light with the RSX 'idling' at 5500RPM. The torque of the Coupe allows it to roll off the line with some authority, unlike the non existent low end of the Acura.
On the street, the race is not against the stop watch. And you don't get a half dozen runs to get your fastest time, and no one sits waiting at the light with the RSX 'idling' at 5500RPM. The torque of the Coupe allows it to roll off the line with some authority, unlike the non existent low end of the Acura.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,924
Likes: 1
From: Sitting behind thing freakin desk of mine. Dreaming I was playing my Taylors, and driving my Benz. Long Live The VRAA!!!!!!
C230 Sports Coupe
Matt, I have raced many a S2000 and if they don't launch at 7000 they are no more than a civic. Now get them into VTEC range and they come alive, but when not in VTEC is crappy i think. If you get a S2000 to race you from a standstill where the driver of the S200 makes a normal, no rev high and drop, starting technique it will be a close race.
The WRX only wins because of the AWD. But as my race the other night proves, AWD doesnt help once your already going 80mph.
The WRX only wins because of the AWD. But as my race the other night proves, AWD doesnt help once your already going 80mph.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,597
Likes: 0
From: San Francisco, CA
1996 C36 AMG, 1995 Volvo 850 Turbowagon
hmm...from the same mag.
rsx type-s
0-100 mph: 18.0
1/4 mile: 15.2@92.7
braking 60 mph: 146
braking 80 mph: 260
skidpad: 0.82
slalom: 66.8
mpg: 27.1
c230 sports coupe
0-100 mph: 19.9
1/4 mile: 15.7@88.9
braking 60 mph: 132
braking 80 mph: 234
skidpad: 0.78
slalom: 61.7
mpg: 20
but yes...rsx is just a hyped up civic, as is the es300 is a hyped up camry. rode in ls430...quiet, yes. but it still soaked up the road a way a japanese car would. just doesn't feel quite right, nothing like the s430. still have to hand it to mb for having such a solid chassis that when u slam the door, it gives a nice solid thud . plus, u stop faster when something happens up front.
rsx type-s
0-100 mph: 18.0
1/4 mile: 15.2@92.7
braking 60 mph: 146
braking 80 mph: 260
skidpad: 0.82
slalom: 66.8
mpg: 27.1
c230 sports coupe
0-100 mph: 19.9
1/4 mile: 15.7@88.9
braking 60 mph: 132
braking 80 mph: 234
skidpad: 0.78
slalom: 61.7
mpg: 20
but yes...rsx is just a hyped up civic, as is the es300 is a hyped up camry. rode in ls430...quiet, yes. but it still soaked up the road a way a japanese car would. just doesn't feel quite right, nothing like the s430. still have to hand it to mb for having such a solid chassis that when u slam the door, it gives a nice solid thud
. plus, u stop faster when something happens up front.
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Cars
rsx-s
whoever said the rsx-s has better handling is on crack. My friend had a rsx-s and put intake removed resonator did all this **** to it. And I drove it all the time, if you dont keep it in vtec you lose a whole bunch of ground racing. The handling....JUNK, you launch the car and it hops all over the place like a frog, it loses its tale in corners too easy and at high speed the stability is very questionable. He totaled it because of this so called handling. After driving his car I was glad I had my benz, at first glance i was impressed, but there's absolutly no passenger room, no cornering stablilty and no class. My friend now drives a 3000GT VR4 boosting 28lbs, not a bad transition from the rsx, although not quite as sufisticated, its a beast!
