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)



  • eggparmeggparm Posts: 14
    GS-R, yes; Type R, no. I test drove the GS-R before I decided to buy my 95 Prelude 6 years ago. I did not struggle between these two cars 'cos the differences were very clear. In a simple fast cornering test, in Integra I felt the car was pulled by the front end real hard at turn in, while in Prelude the car felt more balanced, stable, and quicker with less body lean and apparently less understeer (the car moved and FELT LIKE, I repeat, FELT LIKE a rear-drive, and my Type SH is even better!!!). The Type R sure got more muscle but it still rides on Civic's chassis. I am not saying Integra or RSX is bad but in reality they are just not as sophisicated as Prelude in the handling department. You know both are Honda cars and I speak for nobody.
  • chem123chem123 Posts: 272
    but the Type R rides on a Civic chassis? You didn't really mean to say that, did you?
  • fxashunfxashun Posts: 747
    They're the same car.
  • chem123chem123 Posts: 272
    The Honda Civic and Acura Integra Type R are the same car?
  • fxashunfxashun Posts: 747
    the civic and integra share the same basic chassis. The new Civic and RSX also share the same platform.
  • I test drove an RSX 6 speed and both impressed and a bit disappointed. First of all I am a 53 year old who still drives manual transmission cars. I'm not the fat guy in the Lincoln Navigator. I think the manual transmission on the RSX is one of the best I've ever tried. Smooth, low effort and precise. I only wish that other manufacturer's (including BMW) would either learn Honda/Acuras secrets or pay as much attention to design as they do. I also thought the handling was excellent and I love the hatchback. It makes a small car so much more useful (better use of space). Two characteristics disapoint me. No. 1. Whats with the 13 gallon gas tank? I think this may be the smallest gas tank on any current car sold in the USA (except for the hybrids). Even with over 30 mpg the cruising distance on this car is too short for my tastes. Its very inconvienent to have to search for gas stations on a long trip too much. No. 2 (and this is related). Why can't 6th gear be taller? Its generally not needed for strong accleration (downshift to 5th dummy). And 3000 rpm at 65 mph gets pretty old after a few hours. Lets use some common sense with gear ratios and stop catering to the auto mags and boy racers for good press and word of mouth. Some people drive manuals because they want a good sports touring machine, not a just a hot rod always at high rpm.

    One man's opinion.
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    Over in the WRX vs. RSX forum, they're comparing acceleration times for the Type S with the WRX.

    What are they expecting? That a 200hp FWD car should actually be faster than an AWD car with 227hp turbo?
  • beowulf7beowulf7 Posts: 290
    That's very disappointing to hear that the RSX-S's 6th gear is still at a high RPM like the Integra's 5th gear. I thought the 6th gear was supposed to bring the RPM down another notch (at least 400-500 RPM). I'm @ 3500 RPM doing 75 MPH on the highway in my Integra. joe&carol2 is right, that on a long trip on the highway, it can get annoying (that is, if the loud road noise doesn't annoy you first!).

    I agree with joe...2 completely. If you want to accelerate, drop it down a gear or 2 and become rev-happy. But if you want a pleasant, quiet, non-speeding-ticket-inducing cruise, the top gear should keep the car quiet. Does anyone know how the Celica GTS' and M-B C230 6th gears sound & RPM at when doing 70-75 compared to the RSX-S' top gear?
  • kartezkartez Posts: 48
    I accept a lot of other manufacturers can learn a lot from Honda. Just wondering, what do you think BMW should learn from Honda? I always thought BMW transmissions are pretty good (I assume you were talking about transmissions).

    On other issues of design and manufacturing of large scale production cars, I think the German manufacturers are better than most other Japanese brands including Honda (at least on most of the issues like interior and exterior design, ergonomics, luxury, build quality, use of materials). On top of all these, most of the cars are fun to drive . Only areas I think the Germans are behind Honda are long term reliability and price. (Note: my definitions: build quality - Proper installation of components, tighter gaps between panels etc. Reliability - probability that a car or its components will not experience a breakdown, mechanical or otherwise, over a period of time. )

    May be I am partial to German cars. Would you please elaborate on what you think other manufacturers should learn from Honda?

    I agree with you 100% on hatchbacks.
  • I have also driven the Celica GT-s and the MB C230. The Celica is very much like the RSX. At 3000 RPM you are going about 66-67 mph (again they are not making good use of 6th gear in my estimation). The C230 is much different (which i give them huge credit for). Maybe its the autobahn influence. At 3000 rpm in 6th you are going between 75 and 80. I check this characteristic for all cars I test drive. Write your local congressman (err car manufacturer) if you think my view point is correct.
    Now on a note of frustration with car shopping in general. The C230 gearing is much to my liking but both the RSX and Celica (yes its very good) have much better shifting and clutches.
    The C230 clutch engages like an on/off switch. Makes it difficult to down shift smoothy. And no, all you boy racers, it should not take all your concentration to match revs or double clutch to do this on a routine basis in a supposidly refined automoble.
  • Well BMW is a wonderful engineering company. But honda seems to take a more balanced approach. Especially in ergonomics. All most all people who buy Acuras or BMWs in the long run will care more about the ergonomics than the next tenth of a second in 0-60 time. Honda and Acura manual transmissions are light effort, precise and easy to both downshift and upshift in a smooth enjoyable manner on a windy country road. BMW is very good also but not quite as good. They emphasize ultimate performance (I guess speed of shifts) a bit more. Most people will never use that. And Honda and Acura get within (I'm just intuitively guessing here) 90 - 95% as good in a more enjoyable fashion.
    In my earlier post I was not trying to blast BMW. I was trying to blast Nissan, Toyota (all except the Celica), MB and Audi. All of whom could learn something from Honda in the manual tranmission category. Makes me wonder if their engineers test drive other manufacturer's models to see what is possible.? Or are they only concerned about their automatic customers.? I'll get off the soapbox now. :)
  • chem123chem123 Posts: 272
    I'll have to go check on it but I think that 6th gear in the RSX-S is the same as 5th in the RSX. The rations, I think, are closer from 1-2-3 in the Type S for better acceleration. Please correct me if wrong.
  • Yes thats correct. Top gear is the same for both the 5 and 6 speed (and same rear end ratio). One point I am trying to make is that Acura did not take the opportunity to make 6th gear a bit taller. I of course would even like the 5th gear on the 5 speed to be taller.
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    I've never owned a German car because they're always expensive when cross-shopped with the Japanese makes. And maybe it's because those cars were designed for Europe's taste, but I really don't like the boxy looks on some of the cars (I know, they're roomier that way). I prefer the sleek, sharp angles and creases of the Japanese cars and even some American cars.
  • fxashunfxashun Posts: 747
    Have never been lauded for ergonomics. Maybe design and looks but all those look alike buttons with strange pictures on them have never been called great ergonomics.
  • beowulf7beowulf7 Posts: 290
    For the first time a couple days ago. Unfortunately, it was making a turn at an intersection where I was stopped. And there was a slow-[non-permissible content removed] car in front of me, so I didn't get a good look (Type S or not). But from what I saw of it as it made a turned and I passed it, it had a decent appearance. It probably looks better in person than in the mags and Web. The tail lights are distinctive (that's what drew my attention to it).

    Now I've got to test drive it. I need patience since I still have about 9 months to go on my current lease. I wonder what this message board will be up to by next May in terms of the cumulative messages posted.
  • kartezkartez Posts: 48
    Apparently, everyone thinks of switchgear when somebody mentions ergonomics. But its much more than than that.

    Most important aspects of ergonomics are the seat and steering wheel position. Germans are masters when it comes to this. Doors also play a part in ergonomics. And when I mean ergonomics, I mean both the driver and passenger ergonomics. I will accept that Honda's (Japanese in general) have simple and functional switchgear design although the switchgear of Integra was not upto usual Honda standard. I also found Integra wanting when it came to seating for driver and passenger. While its good to have floor level seating in terms of driving dynamics, I hated it when I sprained my lower back. Even before I sprained my back I could not sit in the seats for long during long trips. I just hope the RSX has better seating.

    fxashun - My friends that drive Benzes and BMWs have never complained about confusing switchgear in their cars. They say it took them time to learn the features. But once they learned it they say they never had a problem with the controls.
  • fxashunfxashun Posts: 747
    I guess if I paid all that money for initial cost, upkeep, insurance, and actual $ in depreciation I wouldn't complain either. Most Hondas and Toyotas don't need 2 or 3 manuals to read before you can even change the temperature setting on the climate control. And most models of Hondas have been lauded for not only the "feel" of the switches but also the placement and ability to use them without a Ph.D. and the driving position is great too. I'm not saying every Honda is perfect but then again not every German car is either.
    The interior of a 3 series Bimmer does not fit my 6'6" frame as well as a Civic but to others it fits like a glove. And the seat to wheel to controls position is like a trademark nearly all Hondas share. Accord, Civic, Prelude all "drive like Hondas". I don't fit the S2000 but I also don't fit the Z3 very well either. The interior of the Z3 does not look or feel like the $30k vehicle it is in. And the interior of the 5 series LOOKS great but when I drove it I had to pull out the manual to figure out what the bank of look alike buttons did. It's not intuitive or logical in thier placement.
  • kartezkartez Posts: 48
    My experience with Honda products is limited to Civic, Accord, TL and Integra. The Integra was a 94 model and both the seating position and steering wheel position were not the best IMO. But it was much better than the other Honda models. Having said that, the switches in Civic, Accord and TL were much easier to use than the Integra. While some may say this is just my opinion, it applies to what you say as well. So let us just call this as limitations of the user and not turn this into a German vs Japanese forum.
  • crikeycrikey Posts: 1,041
    The price was based on a zip code in Orlando, FL.
  • chem123chem123 Posts: 272
    I completely agree that the top gear in all gearboxes--whether 5 speed or 6 speed--should be as tall as possible. I don't know about you guys, but I am not looking to accelerate much when I shift into 5th. The big question: Why don't automakers take advantage of an insanely tall last gear to boost their mpg ratings? Is it mechanically unsound to do this? I've always wondered...
  • mitsugstmitsugst Posts: 41
    I think the important issue is the "Range in Miles."

    Here's a comparison I did for a few cars that can be seen as competing vehicles(in descending order, info from edmunds EPA numbers):

    Range in Miles (City/Highway)
    Comaro Z28 319/470 <-------BEST
    Celica GT-S 334/464
    Eclipse GT 328/459
    Subaru WRX 318/429
    RSX Type-S 317/409 (Integra GS-R was 330/409, RSX base is 327/499)
    IS300 Auto 315/403 (much better city than GTI)
    VW GTI VR6 290/406
    Mustang GT 279/388 <-------WORST

    Looks like RSX-S comes in mid-pack.

    I guess they figured that if you want a real cruiser, get the CL-S which gets 327/499 (which is better than any of the above).

    If we could only have it all.......
  • beowulf7beowulf7 Posts: 290
    RSX drivers, how is the factory CD player stereo? I'm not necessarily asking about the sound and quality of the stereo's amp and speakers (mitsugst described it for the Type S version). I'm asking about the features of the actual unit. The Integra had a decent unit, but with one extremely annoying and glaring flaw. The CD player only showed what track it was playing, but didn't list the running time. For example, you could be in the middle of a 10 min. track, but with the Integra's unit, you wouldn't know how far in the track you were - until it ended. Did Acura finally figure out how to list the running time in the CD player (Type S' Bose or whatever comes with the base)?
  • Its perfectly mechanically sound. The top gear on most automatics is very tall (including the RSX). Lets hope appropriate design engineers read these forums and at least see what real customers want. "Get on the tall gear bandwagon". A new slogan?
    But this also brings up another point. Why don't car websites have links for feedback. Most don't. Why don't they want to know what people think of their cars? Asking those that have already bought is not good enough. It seems to me that its important to know why potential customers (test drivers) DID NOT BUY.
    To many idiots running market research out there.
  • mdrivermdriver Posts: 385
    They don't offer feedback because they already have enough of it by logging on to sites like this one.

    The RSX does not have a super tall 5/6th gear because it would make climbing inclines at highway speeds difficult. This is still only a 2L engine, and at slower RPMs, is no more powerful than any other 2L.
  • mitsugstmitsugst Posts: 41
    I agree, but I think you are referring to torque (low torque in 6th at low RPMs). No torque, no constant pulling power (at one speed). No horsepower, no constant acceleration power (these are relative to the change in speed). That's just the way I look at it (and I might know a thing or two being an Engineer).
    This weekend I took the Type-S up and around some hills in the Texas Hill Country. I couldn't stay in 6th to save my life, I had to drop to fifth in order to get enough power to climb the hills. I never had this problem when I had a 205 torque, 210 hp turbo 2L. And when I dropped gears in that, I really shot up the hill. This is also reflected when I load the vehicle down with some friends (or when I use to tow a trailer).

    It's funny you mention the running time on the CD tracks, I just noticed this problem last night. I really haven't played around with it much, but I did notice this annoyance. I'll play around a bit to see if you can select it somehow.

    P.S. I just hit 1000 miles on my Red Type-S last night (it's now 1000 miles and/or 3 weeks old), and everywhere I stop, people stop and gather to ask me about it.
  • I disagree. You would be able to cruise just fine even with 2 liters. If you are going up a relatively steep incline (and I mean steep) or need to pass agressively, downshift to 5th. This is exactly what automatics do!!! I want to be able to operate the same way. I just want to make the decisions.
  • fxashunfxashun Posts: 747
    1.6L runs below 3000 rpm at 60 mph and cruises up and down hills at 70-80mph in cruise with no problem. I think 100 mphis right around 4000 rpm I don't remember where 70-80 mph is. Not too much acceleration mind you but I don't have to break cruise though.
  • mitsugstmitsugst Posts: 41
    You have to remember that some people get really annoyed by having to change gears at every over-pass/hill they come to. I'm sure someone had to make the call, at some point in time, as to what the final ratio should be to keep those people from being annoyed and other people from being disturbed by having to refill the tank.

    Torque gives engines flexibility, unfortunately we're confined.
This discussion has been closed.