Acura RSX (All years/types)
pocahontas
Member Posts: 802
Here's a direct link to Edmunds.com's (2001 New York Auto Show coverage) article of the 2002 Acura RSX. Please return here to post your comments. Thanks! ;-)
Pocahontas
Host
Hatchbacks/Station Wagons Message Boards
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The upswept beltline at the C-pillar on the RSX makes for a pretty big blind spot, wouldn't you say? Also, the dash is much higher across the base of the windshield than in the current car. Looks kind of like a DSM coupe. And the wheels? YAWN! And please, don't even get me started on the McStruts in the front.
Other than these gripes, I generally like the car and will probably replace my '98 GS-R with a Type-S, unless a WRX wagon should happen to fall from the sky into my garage. I briefly considered the '02 Civic Si until I saw that it's made in Swindon, England. Anybody remember Sterling? No thanks!
This is going to cross the car off many lists unless people fail to notice during their 5 minute test drives.
The older Integras did not have center consoles either. Not a problem if you keep your hands on the wheels. On the other hand, I hardly ever use arm rests even for 4+ hours of driving.
Re:Civic Si--
Perhaps my comparisons to Sterling were unfounded, but I know from experience that the '91 Civic hatch I owned sure was screwed together better than my '98 Civic hatch. Japan vs. Canada production. Give me choice between a Honda/Acura made in Japan or anywhere else, and I'll always go with the one made in Japan.
And no center armrest either? If there's no dealer-installed accessory, you can count me out, too! Hello, Subaru store?
They give you a false sense of security.
I think that what the whole molding issue boils down to is a continuing trend of "de-contenting" vehicles. My '87 Prelude had interior lights that slowly dimmed to off when you shut the door, and I had a '89 'Lude that had a lighted ring around the driver's-side keyhole, so that it was easier to find in the dark. Hell, even the little pull-down change bin was lit.
Now you can only find these small touches on the luxury ($$) makes.
Granted, these things have nothing to do with a car's road-going performance, but they sure do make the ownership experience more satisfying.
Then again, why should I care? I have to buy a new car every 30 months! The hardest part is figuring out which one to buy.
Tom
I think nit-picking it about lack of body side mouldings or whether it holds 3 people in the back seat are a little off base.
If that's your main concern, look at an Accord or Camry.
The styling is tepid, but that might make it "age" better than the Cougar, Eclipse or Celica. It's certainly not a "flavor-of-the-month" design. Definately could use another character line, though. Maybe something to give the wheel arches some unity. The car looks like it's up on tip-toe.
The previous-generation Civic coupe styling was a nearly-obvious copy of the previous BMW 3-Series coupe, particularly when viewed from the rear-3/4 angle. No wonder it looks better than the new Civic coupe.
Lets see how badly they 'll screw this one up..
'06 Civic LX coupe
'11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
'13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
The WRX is a moot non-issue, that can be easily dismissed as any threat.
Understand that any buyer (myself included) that shops the RSX for performance will be cross-shopping the WRX. For buyers more interested in styling, such as those in the secretary pool, the WRX won't even show up on the radar.
And yes, Acura is obviously trying to move the car upmarket (climate control, standard leather on Type-S, richer interior). But I'm not interested in paying extra for features I don't want or need. If the performance doesn't justify the cost, I'm not interested. only1harry makes an excellent argument on this point.
davem2001: What hurts more--sticking your thumb in, or pulling it out?
One of the biggest turn offs for the WRX is the extremely crude and bone-jarring highway ride.
The noise and violent ride will make it extremely tiresome as a daily driver.
I suppose if it is only going to be used as a weekend toy to go screaming down winding mountain roads for fun, it would be an ok car for that purpose, but not for daily driving.
performance you *have* to cross shop the WRX
(among others) but don't put the WRX above the
RSX just because it's "roomier". I've been in
a WRX and it has less room, front and back, than
my Civic coupe. I've described the car in other
settings as a "2 seater sedan".
If factors other than sheer performance (if
that's all you care about shouldn't be shopping
a sport coupe) enter your buying equation, like
quality (build and materials), comfort, features,
reliability or resale value than the RSX *kills*
the WRX.
Subaru will produce 10,000 WRX's this year--hardly a "miniscule" number. And if you're talking about a "daily driver", come live here in Syracuse with our 170 inches of snow every winter, and then see which car will get you around easier.
Your conclusion that the WRX is "not really an option" when compared to the RSX may be what you'd like to believe, but I'm doubtful that it is correct.
Wordman93: I am sure the highway manners of the RSX will out-class those of the current Integra by a far sight. Pretty much anything would be an improvement, really. AutoWeek mentioned that the Type S is so quiet at full throttle that it's "nearly unnerving, more so than the noise of the Integra." That would be nice.
ranald: If I were only shopping for performance, I'd drive a (GOD FORBID) Z28. The interior appointments in the WRX are a major step-up from what's in the current Integra. And, as you might not be aware, Subarus are renowned for their reliability, longevity, and build quality.
I don't think that the RSX will "*kill*" anything other than some of the expectations that have been created around it.
I don't know if I 'd want a 4cyl. 200hp car to be quiet. I like the noise my GSR makes and I like it even better after I put a Cold Air Intake in it. Makes VTEC much more noticeable and sounds like a Type-R at 6K RPM and up. Quiet to me translates into boring. If it were a V6 or flat 6, or V8, yes by all means it should be a lot more quiet. I guess Honda should be congratulated by making a high output naturally aspirated 200hp 4cyl. motor stay quiet under hard acceleration but I don't know if I 'd like that. This on the other hand most likely means that the Intake and exhaust are restrictive and with some aftermarket parts you can make the car scream and get some decent power gains. I'm sure it has lower compression too although I don't know any of the specs, which means it should be a good candidate for a blower. Current GSR can only take a small turbo or small boost without doing anything to the motor (with a worked motor the GSR motor is capable of up to 600+whp with 30lbs of boost). Most GSR owners with a decent turbo and boost (12-24lbs) usually have done major head work and even replaced the pistons on top of ignition, fuel pump, VAFC, etc. It would be nice to throw a decent size turbo on the RSX without having to spend an extra $4-5K on the motor. We 'll see. This is one nice thing the RSX has going for it. A good base HP and I bet is a good candidate to be blown for those who drag race or do track events. Take the Turbo out of the WRX and what do you have left? A 3,000lb car with 160-170hp maybe? Add a turbo to a current stock GSR with only 5-6lbs of boost and you 'll get about 220whp (about 260bhp). Bye bye WRX. So make no mistake about it. If you compare the 2 cars on equal ground (both turbocharged), even the current GSR will take a WRX with a small cheap turbo and you 'll still have money left over.
It is by no means a great feat for Honda to produce a quiet n/a 200hp 2.0L motor as is the 195hp 1.8L ITR (but not so quiet). So if you examine both RSX & WRX carefully, you 'll see that they 're quiet different. One has good power by means of turbo with AWD but is of modest quality to keep price down, and the other is of higher technological achievement but with a little less power and more luxury and quality materials. Maybe that's the way we should look at them. I could be wrong but how else do you explain the price of the WRX (kind of low) and that of the RSX (if it's high)? Shouldn't the phrase "you get what you pay for" apply here?
'06 Civic LX coupe
'11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
'13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
As for aftermarket turbos, throw a $3000 turbo on a WRX, and you're talking about ~350bhp. The big problem with forced induction on a front-driver like an Integra/RSX is getting the power to the ground.
I need to make a correction to the numbers I posted regarding interior noise levels of the WRX and MB C-Class at 70mph. Those numbers were the measurements taken durring full-throttle acceleration. The 70mph cruising number for the WRX is actually 73dB. Sorry for the error.
The Integra interior is very dated, but IMO the
WRX is not much of an improvement. I didn't care
for it when I was in the car, to me it looks
really cheap. Again, IMO the RSX interior is
attractively understated, almost elegant.
And no, I am not aware of Subaru being renowned
for reliability, longetivity or build quality.
In fact, from everything I've read and heard, and
from the one Subaru in the family, compared to
Honda or Toyota they are downright cheap and
shoddy and require fairly frequent and extremely
expensive repairs.
'06 Civic LX coupe
'11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
'13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
I suppose that I should have qualified who in particular find Subarus rewarding to own: their owners. It's a case of one liking what one likes (enough to buy it.) No suprise there. I must impart, however, that my 2.5RS is proving to be more reliable than the '98 Civic DX hatch that it replaced. In less than one year, the Civic suffered a split along one of the seams of its plastic(!) radiator (causing a total coolant loss), a failed Honda CD player, many interior rattles & buzzes, and 3 interior trim pieces that broke in normal use. In 10 months of owning the Subaru, I have experienced ZERO problems.
Proof enough for me.
magazines, hang out on car sites, and listen to
brother-in-law the Subaru driver. Subaru may not
be on a par with Honda or Toyota, but they're no
Chrysler. And I hear they're better than
Mitsubishi.
himiler: You're right, of course it's all subjective. I guess it's too hard to resist the
urge to butt in with "if you're sensible (i.e.
you value the same things I do, heh) you should
buy ".
The motor doesn't burn a drop of oil and sometimes I go 4,000mi. before changing it again. The factory battery is still in it.
My GSR is not quiet up there but with 25k mi. on the odo and racing it religiously for 7 mos out of the year (real racing, not street racing) it hasn't presented any problems. It is a dedicated weekend race car now and just this weekend I destroyed a WRX which by the way was my 2nd one so far this season out of 2 that I 've encountered auto-x racing with me. Everyone at both racing events was also saying that there was way too much hype about this car and noone was impressed with it like when the Type-R came out or other cars.. It just didn't look good out there on the course. The WRX had way too much body roll, its tires were squealing like crazy and it just couldn't tackle the course with speed and agility and lost traction too easily. And don't believe the commercials you see on TV where they show the WRX going like 100mph through some country roads. That car is probably the Japanese version and most likely has race tires on and upgraded suspension. Come out to the local races and see your great WRX get humiliated by cars that cost less. Don't get me wrong. No doubt it's a fine car but it's not what people have pumped it up to be which is like a super car. It's not.
'06 Civic LX coupe
'11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
'13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
You might want to keep a watch out for the STi version, though, when it arrives in 2002.
Since this is the RSX forum, I thought somebody might be interested to learn that my local dealer says that they are "frustrated" by the lack of marketing support from Acura. He said that there has been significant interest in the car (due to auto mags), but he's only able to take phone numbers from potential buyers. Word-of-mouth on the car is positve, but people are surprised that there is no factory literature available yet, and none is expected until mid-June. In the meantime, he said that he's "concerned" about losing sales.
Bummer for Acura.
The lack of center armrest is going to turn off many buyers.
Doesn't that just give you a warm feeling all over?
Of course, it'll only be a matter of time before the new Civic is the tuner's platform of choice, and then the RSX will be a greater target yet again.
TT my dealer again today. Acura is bringing all their sales/service people to a big RSX introduction in early June. I think he said it was going to be held in Texas. He just rec'd the announcement this AM. There are now some 1-page pamphlets at the dealers, but there's still far more info available on the Web.
'06 Civic LX coupe
'11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
'13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
Heres Edmunds.coms First Look of the Acura RSX, by Erin Mahoney. What do you think?
Thanks for your comments. ;-)
Pocahontas
Host
Hatchbacks / Station Wagons Message Boards
'06 Civic LX coupe
'11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
'13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
The comments are generally favorable, though, except for the (IMO unjustified) digs at the styling. So the RSX is not tacky, trendy or flashy, get over it. (The looks of the current gen Celica will not age any more gracefully than the previous gen's 'porpoise' look.)
The only comments on the front suspension are that it saves space (true, and nice to point out), that it's not as easy to modify as the old double wishbones (true, it couldn't be *easier*), and that it might not appeal as much to the 'youth market' (true cause it's a little harder to slam the car). All fair.
Overall while this is nothing new it's good to see the publicity. I think more people read Edmund's than the specialist Honda-Acura sites.
'06 Civic LX coupe
'11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
'13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
Since they are owned by Honda, maybe Honda decided they did not the competition and they the Accord and Civic and doing well enough???
Just an idea.