Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Acura RSX (All years/types)

1272830323383

Comments

  • himilerhimiler Posts: 1,209
    There wouldn't be a color/configuration issue if the spoiler were standard on the RSX-S, as it was on the GS-R.

    At any rate, a spoiler on the RSX ranks right up there on the "useful meter" alongside lighted windshield jets, coffee can tailpipes, and Altezza-style lenses. I didn't like the one my GS-R had, and didn't buy one for my 'Lude. I mean, really! When you see a Chevy Malibu with a spoiler, who exactly are you trying to impress?
  • beowulf7beowulf7 Posts: 290
    The Malibu and RSX are two diametrically opposite cars. True, the RSX isn't as "sporty looking" as its competition (Eclipse, Celica, '03 Tiburon, etc.), but it would still benefit from having a spoiler, especially a high (but not obnoxiously high) spoiler, as that found in the '03 Tiburon GT with an UltraSports Package and the mid-/late-'90s Eclipse GS-T. Too bad the RSX's optional spoiler no longer has the integrated tail light, as the Integra did. The Malibu, Camry, previous-generation Altima, and other conservatively-styled sedans look like a bad joke when equipped with the rear wing.
  • himilerhimiler Posts: 1,209
    People buy a spoiler for their Malibus for the same reason people buy 'em for their RSXs: they think it makes the car more "sporty."

    We're obviosly debating opinions here. The point is, the car doesn't need a spoiler, other than to try and look less like a Civic coupe.

    Functionally, it accomplishes nothing other than adding weight (I thought the point of looking fast was being fast). If you're looking for more performance from your RSX for the same $$ as the spoiler, chuck the stock rubber and buy some Dunlop SP5000 tires.
  • Thanks, Himiler for adding to my theory. It seems from what you're saying, that if you had your druthers you'd rather not have the spoiler. And of course, others prefer to have it. Soooo.. The decision is left to the owner, just like it should be. We don't need no stinkin' spoilers!!
  • beowulf7beowulf7 Posts: 290
    I meant to say "too bad the RSX's optional spoiler no longer has the integrated brake light" (not taillight). I realize the spoiler adds nothing functionally (unless you plan on going 300 mph where lift becomes a problem). A spoiler doesn't weigh much, does it? It's just a light piece of plastic, maybe 20-30 lbs. max. Fancy alloy wheels add more weight, as does a moonroof. You are right that spoilers are purely preferences; some think certain cars look good with them, others think they just add weight and degrade acceleration.
  • 'Cannibalize similar offerings?'
    I really don't see what similar offerings honda/acura has that would compete with a 4-door rsx. I'm definitely not buying a 4-door accord. The accord is too big, not sporty enough, and not a car you can buy with a 5speed unless you're willing to hurt resale value. And if the rsx sedan does take away from the civic sedan (which i don't think it would), wouldn't that be a good thing since the rsx costs more?
  • himilerhimiler Posts: 1,209
    Um, no. "fancy alloy wheels" actually represent a significant weight reduction over steel rims, that's why GOOD "fancy alloy wheels" tend to be lightweight and pretty expensive. Reducing unsprung weight always benefits ride and handling.

    And, no. I don't think that spoilers add weight, I know that they do.

    P.S.--If I could have bought my (non-spoilered) Prelude without a moonroof, I would have.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    IMO, Acura should offer a sub-25K compact sedan, probably with a small V6. And it might be one of those models that can help Acura grow later, but for now, they need to concentrate on their $35-50K offerings.
  • fxashunfxashun Posts: 747
    The sunroof has been standard on Preludes since at least 1983. I remember the advertisments talking about it.

    Also I require a sunroof on any car I own. I just gotta have one. On the moonroof issue I think those that don't want one are in a small minority. Especially on sporty cars.
  • beowulf7beowulf7 Posts: 290
    I meant wheels with rims are pretty heavy when compared to lighter (and smaller) wheels with plastic hubcaps. Of course the larger wheels with rims look much better.

    Too bad Acura forcefeeds customers moonroofs with the RSX. One reason why the late Integra Type R does not offer a sunroof/moonroof is because of the added weight, but the ITR is very performance-oriented; not meant for the masses. I heard that Acura even made air-conditioning as an option in the ITR.
  • fxashunfxashun Posts: 747
    Cars like the RSX are sold with moonroofs because I'm sure over 90% of them would be ordered with one anyway. The roof is optional on Lexus models but how often do you see one without one. And the resale on a Lexus without a roof is laughable. The ITR was a purpose built race car. The RSX in its current form is a sporty coupe and 90% or more of the people that buy one will want a roof opening.
    As we have seen Honda seems to now be going after the highest percentile buyer. MOST people that buy new Civics don't take it immediately to the tuner shop so the strut up front won't even matter. And MOST RSX buyers want a roof. It goes along with the "no options" line that all other Hondas have.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Honda's type-r models do not come with a/c. It is either an option or a no-cost option (i.e. get it or don't). They have almost no sound deadening, and weight savings almost anywhere possible (a reason why a/c equipped new ITR is about 170 lb. lighter than the RSX-S).

    Acura is not mass marketing RSX as it did with Integra a few years ago. Some people may want moon roof but no leather, leather but no moon roof, leather and moon roof; a choice of 5-speed manual, 5-speed automatic or 6-speed manual (Type-S) to go with all of the above options. Too many possible combinations applied over a targeted sales of only 25K cars per year.

    As for weight added by heavier wheels versus moon roof, one of them adds to the unsprung weight. And for improved performance, it would be desirable to have a lower unsprung weight. New ITR uses 17" rims (tires: P215/45/R17) but they may be lighter than the 16" (tires: P215/55/R16) used in RSX.
  • revkarevka Posts: 1,750
    Got any insights to offer on the Mini Cooper vs. Hyundai Tiburon vs. Acura RSX? Please join us in this new discussion. Thanks for your participation.

    Revka
    Host
    Hatchbacks & Station Wagons Boards
  • beowulf7beowulf7 Posts: 290
    Does anyone know the inside scoop on what Acura is changing (if anything) to the 2003 version of the RSX, and when it will be released? It would be much appreciated!
  • beowulf7beowulf7 Posts: 290
    Well, I didn't answer my question on what the 2003 Acura RSX will have, but I did a quick search on Google.com and unearthed the following:

    http://motioncars.com/autobuzz/articles12/honda_rsx.html


    This 4-door (technically 5 if you include the hatchback trunk) RSX resembles a Dodge Stratus sedan.

  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
  • i'm posting here for the first time because my friend is looking to get the RSX Type S and he wants it to be able to compete with a WRX. So overall, sorry if these questions have been covered already, but how's the handling? Any torque steer(although I know it doesn't have much torque), how are the brakes and reliabilty? Anyone know what kind of mods can be done to speed it up, and if so, how much could power be boosted? I'm no "ricer" but my friend wants to be ( but at least he would actually make performance mods and not just body mods...no offense to anyone like that)
    Thanks for your help.
  • toyotas1toyotas1 Posts: 134
    And the doors closed SOLIDLY! The seats were great, and the switchgear and transmission were just as smooth and natural as they could be! Loud around town, but GREAT on the highway! Easy ingress/egress. Needs a BUNCH of modifications: Tint, fog lights, "spirler", and 18" chrome wheels. Ride was firm (similar to the Maxima SE I tested earlier in the day). Probably will end u buying the Vibe 'cus it drives similar, is cheaper, and doesn't need as much cosmetics. And GM is giving the cars away!
  • fxashunfxashun Posts: 747
    Until I found out it had a axle on the rear of the FWD version and you can't get 4wd with the "good" engine. What were they thinking?
  • toyotas1toyotas1 Posts: 134
    The "thing" is not perfect, but once you sit inside it (I'm 6'4"), and drive it, and sit in the back seat of it (I fit, with room to spare), you will see that it is an AWESOME value! Skip the AWD and get the GT or base. A supercharger (from GM) is coming later this year. And it seems to be the cheapest car with NAV! Wish Acura would make THAT available on the RSX!
  • fxashunfxashun Posts: 747
    I have no use for NAV. I'd rather have the IRS.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Quite a few cheap cars in Japan have NAV available, but it unnecessarily adds 25-30 lb. on a car. And, it doesn't come for free.
  • toyotas1toyotas1 Posts: 134
    I live in Central Florida, where they just put streets......anywhere, so I need it. It's a lot safer than opening a map at 60MPH!! Pulling over wastes time, makes you late. I'd like my car to TRY to be smarter than me......
  • zoomzoom79zoomzoom79 Posts: 272
    where you are going before you get on the road though. That's what MapQuest is for. Operating the NAV system while driving isn't the safest thing in the world either and running into the car next to you will definitely take up more time than just stopping.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Posts: 865
    If you've ever used a good nav system, you realize that there isn't a more convenient thing in the world. (not that I would be willing to pay for one)

    If you program in your destination before you leave, you should never have to look at it while you are driving. (it auto-corrects if you miss a turn or something)
  • Completely agreed
    I wound't pay much extra for a nav system, but I've tried them out in a few cars and they work really well. I have never really like the idea of having a man that's about 3 foot long 2 foot wide either. Too much of a pain to unfold and find where you are.
  • fxashunfxashun Posts: 747
    Prints out on regular printer paper. Is always available. Is free. You don't have to buy a $20,000 car to get it.
    If you need NAV they make handhelds now and you can have NAV in all your cars.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Posts: 865
    Admittedly, Mapquest is a great service, however, NOTHING is better for the lazy driver than a good nav system. I don't have one, but after regularly riding in a few cars with them, I can't believe that I don't.
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    Please tell me where I can buy a $20,000 car with a NAV system.
Sign In or Register to comment.