ticklemedaly wrote:
that reflash was the key in unlocking a lot of the power. the intake (no longer on the car) and exhaust helped, but the reflash is what helps the most on these cars. only wish it was kpro instead of the hondata reflash for more control and tuning. im not doing anything else to the car (always wanted the comptech charger) but im moving to a more luxury car next. hopefully by fall.

edit: oh, and i swear these engines love the cold air. It feels like there is an extra 25 horseys when it is this cold. the damn thing just pulls hard as hell.

and your hondata IMG does nothing...supposed to lower intake temps by 5 degree's or whatever it is...but really it does nothing.

PSiedTSi wrote:
What he was referring to(I think anyway) is the ability of your car to hit mid 13's with the LACK of mods. Not everyone knows how well the K20 responds to mods. It seems a little stretch to me, but apparently they respond that well. What weighs more, an SI or RSX?

Yes, exactly what I was thinking. If you were to say it ran low 14's, I wouldnt have said anything, but you claimed mid 13. That is a stretch IMO. I did some research and with them mods you have, high 13 is NOT the norm.
I know every car is different, but for instance. When I was living up there a guy drove down from GF with his rsx-s with a supercharger on it. High 13's@100 trap speed.
So going with that, then telling us that you have a tuneand full exhaust and your running better times then he was?

PSiedTSi wrote:
What he was referring to(I think anyway) is the ability of your car to hit mid 13's with the LACK of mods. Not everyone knows how well the K20 responds to mods. It seems a little stretch to me, but apparently they respond that well. What weighs more, an SI or RSX?

the exhaust (header and catback), hondata intake gasket along with hondata #4 are among the best NA mods these engines like. Yes you can do others but for the value you arn't seeing too much of a gain with them unless going FI.

MSN Autos Curb weight for both cars:

2006 Civic SI: 2877
2002 RSX-S: 2767

camzaro28 wrote:
I think you are more worked up then me. All I did was call you out on it. You claimed to run a mid 13, then I asked for some proof.
mid 13 is 13.3-13.7.

i could understand if i was saying that i was in the 9, 10, or even 11's. 13's aren't that great of a time to brag about. unless it was a car that originally ran something near 20s, then i could understand.

camzaro28 wrote:
Ok, your link shows a RSX-s going 14.9.
Here is another link ( the best I could find ) with 20 something times from RSX's. Now to get that car into the " mid 13's " guys are using F.I. of every kind. I think there was 1 guy that claimed a 13.7 with cams and bolt ons, but I took a look at his timeslips, they didnt add up.
http://www.dragtimes.com/Acura--RSX-Drag-Racing.html

Congrats on taking the G35, I am not doubting that. But just because you buy the car and the previous owner tells you it ran " mid 13's " doesnt mean it has.

thats a 2005 at the 14.9, 3 cars above is 2002 at 14.8. majority of the 20sec RSX are just base model ones. Majority of FI owners are running 11-12 sec. Majority of owners who have done cams havn't seen much of an increase compared to the Hondata #4 with intake/exhaust. Only major increases in trap times owners experience are from any type of FI. Why are you so worked up on me "claiming" a second or so quicker than stock? I just dont undestand why.

LankorDie wrote:
I think.

If I have time I will dig it out, I havent seen the tape in a year or so. So back on topic, good job on kicking G35 ass.:icon_colors:

thanks! :icon_thumleft:

camzaro28 wrote:
you think, or you do?
I think.

If I have time I will dig it out, I havent seen the tape in a year or so. So back on topic, good job on kicking G35 ass.:icon_colors:

Congrats on taking the G35, I am not doubting that. But just because you buy the car and the previous owner tells you it ran " mid 13's " doesnt mean it has.

camzaro28 wrote:
Ah that makes sense, cuz the times smell like alot of BS.

what? shaving a second off the quarter isn't possible? im not bragging about doing 13s, i dont care. It really isn't that fast or good of a time. Im just surprised that i took the G so easily. and the car does low 15, high 14s easily stock, how hard is it to shave a second? it isn't hard to do that with any car. every car is different. i have a huge weight advantage over the G. doesn't take nearly as much HP/TQ to get me movin.

edit: 13's with these cars/motor is nothing to brag about. They are extremely common. Just check out the ClubRSX.com boards. 12/11 second and under is. how did this come about me being under fire?

edit: http://www.albeedigital.com/supercoupe/articles/0-60times.html
site that posts "stock figures" from recognizable publishing places that have tested cars for times. Listed time for STOCK 02 RSX Type-S 14.8 in quarter. This is printed material that I remember having from Car and Driver too.

camzaro28 wrote:
Ah that makes sense, cuz the times smell like alot of BS.

Woah brian!

ticklemedaly wrote:
that was years ago by the previous owner. ill never run it at the track myself (mostly due to wanting to sell it).

Ah that makes sense, cuz the times smell like alot of BS.

2.5RS wrote:
well, then thats there problem now isnt it? And the people that cant tell the difference, should be taken outside and beaten with a jellyfish....

agreed but i was just stating fact... some people may not

thurmanmerman wrote:
some people may not
well, then thats there problem now isnt it? And the people that cant tell the difference, should be taken outside and beaten with a jellyfish....

2.5RS wrote:
a blind man could tell the difference from the side...

some people may not