nsx engine?

[Guest]

the rsx type s will beat the prelude in every comp u put them in hands down.

[Flowcus]

Expecially looks... I really would like an RSX Type-S. I have heard of them putting down 300whp at 6psi on a certain turbo kit... cant remember which one.

[theoblivious]

OH DUDE TELL ME WHERE YUOE FOUND THAT. should i look at SLS for some turbo charging customization. my friends point me in that direction

[seanjohn]

RSX typeS > Prelude

In EVERY aspect

Its simple

[Guest]

yah.. but still a swap from a 3.0 to a 3.2 (CL) your looking at like 8000-12000 for the swap... putting on in a rsx is just rediculous.. instead of wasting your money on that why dont you buy me ZEX or something..

[AaronJ]

RSX type S owns preludes from every angle. The only thing a prelude is good for is a donor car for the engine to stick into an EF.

And preludes handle like shit, noseheavy pigs.

[AcesHigh]

RSX-S > Prelude VTEC....

Bullshit. Bring your RSX. Although the K20 is indeed technologically superior, H22A makes up in displacement. Yes there is understeer, but guess what. All FWD have some degree of understeer.

[out there]

my gf has a prelude s (f22 :(), and with nearly 200k on it, it still handles better than a lot of cars that i've driven

[My NOva]

ur only prob. with the rsx type s is a lot of lag , its boost is good at about thirty. on but there is plenty of room for h22a built w/300 whp with out turbo

[out there]

i thought the discussion was about stock vs stock?

[My NOva]

out there wrote:
i thought the discussion was about stock vs stock?
how am i suppose to mine isn't stock?

[seanjohn]

AcesHigh wrote:
RSX-S > Prelude VTEC....

Bullshit. Bring your RSX. Although the K20 is indeed technologically superior, H22A makes up in displacement. Yes there is understeer, but guess what. All FWD have some degree of understeer.

What about a prelude would make it faster??? Weight...no, thats not it. Power, no....thats not it either! Straight line or twisties, the prelude would get it's ass absolutely beat. Preludes are overpriced, overweight, 15 second cars with the worst transmission Honda ever put in a car next to the 3 speed STD tranny.

[Guest]

seanjohn wrote:
What about a prelude would make it faster??? Weight...no, thats not it. Power, no....thats not it either! Straight line or twisties, the prelude would get it's ass absolutely beat. Preludes are overpriced, overweight, 15 second cars with the worst transmission Honda ever put in a car next to the 3 speed STD tranny.

right on the worst trannys ever but not on 15sec car i have heard of guys running mid 14s on just a h22 and some minor mods

ps.. if u have a RSX lets race

[out there]

according to a couple of sites i've seen, the jdm h22 has only 205hp. so...

[seanjohn]

spoolude wrote:
right on the worst trannys ever but not on 15sec car i have heard of guys running mid 14s on just a h22 and some minor mods

ps.. if u have a RSX lets race

I hear a lot of shit, but until I see it I won't believe it. Obviously you have a prelude, and I'm definitely not knocking it...its not a bad car, but the point is that stock for stock an rsx is better in pretty much every category than the prelude. Now if they only made them in 4ws ( :rolleyes: ) !

[Guest]

wut kind of numbers dose a non vtec rsx make?

[My NOva]

spoolude wrote:
wut kind of numbers dose a non vtec rsx make?

Innovation propels the RSX in a few ways, starting with its engine. Its "intelligent" Variable Valve Timing and Lift Electronic Control (i-VTEC) is even more impressive than its first incarnation, the powerful VTEC engine.

In the RSX, i-VTEC helps the responsive 2.0-liter, DOHC engine put out 160-horsepower, while in the RSX Type-S, the engine is pushed to a robust 210-horsepower. Remarkably powerful? Yes. And uncommonly fuel efficient, affording both engines with Low-Emission-Vehicle (LEV-2) ratings and an 110,000-mile service sticker
NOt track numbers but it should help http://www.acura.com/models/model_perf_engine.asp?module=rsx RSX
Type-S
Engine Type
Aluminum Alloy 16-Valve, DOHC, i-VTECTM Inline 4-cylinder
Displacement (liters)
2.0
Horsepower (SAE net)
160 bhp @ 6500 rpm
210 bhp @ 7800 rpm
Torque
141 lbs-ft @ 4000 rpm
143 lbs-ft @ 7000 rpm
Redline
6800 rpm
8100 rpm
Compression Ratio
9.8:1
11.0:1
Fuel Injection
PGM-FI Multi-Point Injection
Emissions
LEV-II CARB

[theoblivious]

ya dude my dad has an rsx im itching to see how fast it is. Apparently my complete exhaust kit non turbo with a test pipe gets beaten off the line but then it keeps up with the rsx for acceleration. though undoubtly the rsx has more potential than the gsr. yeah id be up to race though its a really touchy clutch for starts, ill most likely burn the wheels first few times.

kenn

[24valvenotak]

theoblivious wrote:
ya dude my dad has an rsx im itching to see how fast it is. Apparently my complete exhaust kit non turbo with a test pipe gets beaten off the line but then it keeps up with the rsx for acceleration. though undoubtly the rsx has more potential than the gsr. yeah id be up to race though its a really touchy clutch for starts, ill most likely burn the wheels first few times.

kenn

I think "more potential" depends on the amount of money you have to burn..id rather drive a boosted gsr then a stock rsx.

[theoblivious]

its a type s