Yeah I know, I use to have an account at IBMFCU (IBM Federal Credit Union) when I worked for IBM, but all their other services sucked and were way over priced. I bought my '95 Eclipse GST new through them. At the time, I got 8.5% as well. Friends of mine where telling me to do the same, but it wasn't worth my while since the banks I inquired from also told me as low as 7.5%(Chase) and 7.59%(People's First if I went conservatively on the credit analyzer function and came up with a platinum tier) for 60 months, and then they turned around and screwed me by offering me rates much higher after the credit report...and I have platinum and titanium cards (go figure? How many people do you know with a titanium card?).
Maybe I should have paid the membership fee to go back to the credit union and apply for the loan. But then that would play into whether it's worth it.
Credit Unions do offer great deals, but it probably isn't worth trying unless you already have a membership with them (check their membership fee to be sure).
I'd request the 6mo extension (or even better an extension for as long as it takes, 4mo) and get the '03. I'd think that they would probably add more things standard, and maybe even design a arm rest. Most car companies try to spice the deal up a bit year after year by adding in more options standard. Lexus' IS300 arm rest was designed and is being added to the IS300 on the 2nd production year (coming in September). I'm sure Acura will come up with one sometime.
As for the spoiler, I think it's the new car design that takes from the spoiler. The RSX has the center brake light on the upper rear of the trunk, which would be just below the spoiler. I've seen Mustangs with brake lights on the trunk(factory) and on aftermarket spoilers, and it just looks tacky and out of place.
As for the subwoofer. The subwoofer is just to compact to do a great deal of good, and it probably was out of their cost bracket to improve the efficiency. I don't think this will change. The system overall is good, just not great. I am going to add an self-amplified Bazooka Bass Tube from Crutchfield for $400. These things are amazing (and small)! I currently have one on my Eclipse. I can't even begin to explain the enhancements it gives (and I used to be a car stereo installer). As an example, it can power other side-by-side non-powered subwoofers (the factory one) with cleaner sound and have a fuller effect (in fact, it's recommended for the best sound). I'll let you know how mine comes along. My Eclipse practically won competitions with it (factory system + one Bazooka).
Finally, the brakes. Well, there isn't any excuses, but I think they wanted to reserve the best braking for the Type-R. I also don't think they'll do much here in the future. I figured out why the braking sucks relative to huge rotors. They went cheap on us, they aren't utilizing the whole rotor, the caliper and brake pads don't reach the entire inner radius of the brake rotor. Relatively speaking, it's like a donut with a hole the size of an orange. What were they thinking... Aftermarket?
And a GOOD credit union charges no fees. I'm a member of Navy Federal Credit Union and Truliant. Both have free membership and free(except for interest) loans. Navy Federal is as no cost as they come. Truliant has high fees on the ATM cards.
...Nice try. You might consult the same road test data to see that the WRX out-weighs the RSX by 300+lbs.
Gee...do you think that might make a difference?
Just imagine how bad the RSX's braking distances would be if it weighed 3100lbs.
NEWS FLASH:--AWD doesn't do a damn thing for shorter braking distances (I'm amazed that this is not general knowledge), but it sure does let a WRX chew up FWD cars on any surface.
Oh really? Just imagine how GOOD the WRX would brake if it weighed 300 lbs less?
No offence, but cold, hard, objective testing data tell the tale. The cars have similar braking performance. Period. If weight is the penalty of the WRX's average braking performance, then Subaru should have given the car bigger & better brakes.
Now, having said that, both cars exibit minimal braking fade which is far more important for spirited driving and aggressive braking. I suspect that both cars would do better with more aggressive tires.
Does anyone know how the headroom is in the RSX? I'm 6'3" and am wondering if I'll even fit in the thing. Headroom is a big issue, not leg room since I like to sit close to the steering wheel.
"but it sure does let a WRX chew up FWD cars on any surface".
It's apparent you 're completely overtaken by the WRX and think the world of it. This has caused you to make several incorrect/inaccurate statements like the one above. Show me a WRX that is able to beat a Type-R in SCCA autocross racing (they 're both in G Stock class). I have a '99 GSR with a slightly (moderatetly, nothing major) modified suspension (I believe you 've owned a GSR.. or 2) and I have WRX's for breakfast at every auto-x event I race. On this last event, I had 2 WRX racers come up to me and congratulate me on my runs. I ran about 2-3 seconds better than them and the course was only about 33-39s long! 2-3 secs in such a small course is a HUGE difference! One other modified WRX (CSP class, I 'm in a DSP which is a slower class!) was about 1.5sec slower than me! That was a modified WRX! Please, you 're making the WRX out to be some supercar and it is not. In a tight course with fast transitions & slaloms, where light good handling cars dominate, the 3100lbs WRX struggles to compete. The SCCA North Eastern Divisional championships are this coming weekend (3-day event) in upstate NY. I won't be attending because I don't take the sport this seriously and it's only a hobby for me, but I heard a lot of WRXs signed up. I 'll let you know once it's over how far behind the first few (FWD) winning cars (probably Type-Rs, Preludes & TTs-AWD though) the WRXs were..
'99 Integra GSR '06 Civic LX coupe '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
I totally agree with the above. I've been consistently hearing that on the local auto-x events the Type Rs (and even GSRs) run circles around the WRXs.
I guess the better handling and lighter weight give the Integra the advantage.
Also, in my opinion AWD vehicles are quite over-rated when in comes to accelerating in a corner. It is true that they can accelerate better in a corner, but if you need to accelerate in the middle of the corner then you obviously don't know what you are doing as you must have entered the corner too slowly.
I must admit, though, that the WRX seems like a better daily car, as the power is available earlier in the RPM range. You need to be a race driver (almost!) to get any power out of the Integra.
Show me a comparably-equipped WRX driven by someone with your racing experience, and I'll show you some taillights.
I never claimed the WRX is a supercar. But you have to admit that it runs with some pretty expensive iron, even in stock form. Based strictly on a performance/cost ratio, it's a tough act to follow.
As far as AWD and cornering goes, the technique of "slow in, fast out" still applies. The benefit of AWD is that there is no power lost to wheelspin when accelerating out of a corner. Only a mid-engined, rear-drive car does it better (due to that configuration's low polar moment), but it's a much tougher technique to perfect in one of those.
Thanks for your response, mitsugst. At the very least, I will inquire with my Acura dealer and ask if they extend leases and if so, what they would charge to extend my lease. (I would expect a drop in monthly payment since the car would be 3 years old at that point.) I would hope that by '03, Acura fixes some of those "bugs" (oversights) and perhaps make it look like a more aggressive coupe. And I hope that the '03 Celicas and Eclipses tweak their vehicles (faster engine, better handling, etc.) to compete w/ the RSX-S.
My beef with the RSX-S is that, as a couple others have noted, they force feed you some of these luxury items. I don't see leather as a compelling requirement for comfortable driving. And if they're going to spend the money on a subwoofer, they might as well put in one that works, instead of that cheap Bose sub (which I thought was an oxymoron). They could have easily left it out and lowered the MSRP by a couple hundred $.
I am a subscriber to Crutchfield's mag, and I see that Bazooka as something that would give my music some much-needed thump. We Integra drivers know that our factory speakers are an embarrasment on the low end. But beware, I've heard that Bazookas are fairly unreliable; so much so that a couple local stereo shops have discontinued carrying them. It seems that you found a nice sub for your Eclispe. If you shop around on the Web, you might find the same model of that 10" Baz sub for something closer to $300 than $400.
As for the spoiler, I personally think it looks nice if the brake light was integrated right on the spoiler. I can see what you mean about tacky double brake lights, but the Integra's spoiler/brake light is well done. And speaking of spoilers, does anybody think that the underbody spoilers do much for the RSX or other cars in general?
"The benefit of AWD is that there is no power lost to wheelspin when accelerating out of a corner. "
The size of the contact made by any car's tires with the road is about the size of a postcard, give or take some centimeters. When accelerating out of a corner, you *will* lose some grip, AWD or not. As a result, wheelspin does occur, even if it's a minute value. And while that doesn't handicap the WRX's ability, your claim that no power is lost to wheelspin is erroneous. Having only a quarter or a half of the rubber (or even less) gripping the road can only do so much to help the WRX accelerate from a corner. And that is where the superior handling and lighter weight of the type-R becomes an advantage.
Unless, of course, your WRX's tires are completely tread-free and wide like those of race-cars, and your center of gravity is very low.
Not sure if this is the right place to post this question, but here goes: I'd like to modify my 2001 Civic coupe with the same control-link front suspension that the new RSX has - is this doable, and how would I go about it (and how much would that kind of thing cost)?
Actually, the new Civic handles pretty well on it's own, but I'm interested in how much I can make it perform like the RSX, since the RSX is based on the new Civic.
I didn't really care for the leather, either. Cloth is just fine for me. It's not worth the extra cost to have leather (not for me at least). I had to take it as it was with the leather, since I wanted the type-S (yeah, they "force fed it").
As for the Bose subwoofer. It's a gimmick, they could have made the system just as good with some better speakers and no subwoofer. I feel that the overall stereo system is just as clean and great sounding as my Eclipse (with just as much bass). The only difference is that you could crank the Eclipse's Infinity system even louder, but as you go any louder than the level of the RSX's, you'd get some distortion and scratchyness. Sometimes you don't mind the distortion, sometimes you do. I think Acura's intent was to eliminate that, and that's why it doesn't go very loud. maybe they could re-program the head unit and allow for some distortion. You know, 3-series BMW's had the same complaints. BMW fixed the complaining customers stereo's on request, and programmed them on the fly (I believe they swapped some components out that where pre-done). I was thinking of getting a 3-series, and that was my main problem, but then they came out with a fix for those complaining... but then the RSX came out!
As for the Bazooka, same thing, distortion is allowed to come through. Therefore, it's unreliable, and sounds bad at times. That's the way bass tubes work, though. They rely on distortion to up the bass response by dampening out the sound of distortion and giving more thump (the Bazooka does it beautifully). This is fine, as long as you don't thump it forever and eventually blow it. I haven't done it till this day. This is why the Bazooka matched up beautifully to the Eclipse's Infinity system, both allowed for distortion at the upper end. Many friends of mine have complained about blowing both their Infinity speakers and their Bazooka. "Come on, get a clue guys," i'd tell them, "If you pump out distortion, you risk spitting out voice coils... Just don't do it, for too long."
I think Acura and BMW would rather be known for clean and quality sound, than systems that blow themselves to pieces. I would like the option to tune it myself (not governed)... but then again, I don't mind having a keen ear, and some common sense, as to when to give up.
As for the underbody spoiler (a.k.a. side cladding, ground effects, body kit), I think it's personal taste. Sometimes it can be done tastefully (95-99 Eclipse, some people like 00' and 01' Eclipses), and sometimes it can be tacky (Pontiac anything). I personally like the underbody spoilers on the RSX. I just got mine put on this weekend. I have it all decked out now, and the fog lights go on next (I'll post a picture soon). If you go on to www.acura.com, RSX, and go to "build your own," you can see the effect on the fly as you make the selections for the specific pieces (front, side, rear, wing spoiler). I like it.
Talking about Eclipses again (sorry, I just loved my '95 GST, still do, and I can't help it), the bottom of the line ones looked terrible without the underbody effect. The fully loaded ones, like mine, were the real lookers. I think certain underbody spoilers can make a big difference.
P.S. If anyone is interested in an '95 Eclipse for hotrodding, etc., mine had no modifications, garaged, for $8400 obo. Delivery anywhere in the US, is under $400 through auto-carriers.
3 Type-Rs got 1st,2nd & 3d place in the SCCA Solo II NorthEastern Divisional championships at Rome, NY (I know a couple of them from other H/A forums). Solo II is autocross racing so everyone knows what I 'm talking about. WRX (to my surprise) came in 4th but it was almost 2 secs behind the 1st Place Type-R. 1-2 secs on a 43-45 sec. course is a BIG difference. This was in G-Stock where all the cars are stock except for very minor mods and all the cars had Race tires on (it's noteworthy to mention that the ITR 15" tires were like 1/2 the size of the WRX 18" tires!!!). Anyway, Diploit is right. On the turns, the WRX has much body roll and doesn't look any better than the RS 2.5's. If what himiler said is true, then the RS 2.5 should be kicking a*s in G Stock for a long time now.. but that never happened. A 170hp stock GSR will almost always beat a 165hp stock RS 2.5 in G Stock. Because curb weight, body roll, tire contact with the ground all still count when you 're cornering. WRX's (and RS 2.5) also have serious understeering as well and push and plow on the turns. Look at a Type-R race at an auto-x event right after a WRX, and you 'll see the difference how fast the Type-R takes the turns and stays in its place and even oversteers (the tail comes out) like a RWD car on sweepers and regular turns. Some people I guess think AWD automatically means better handling, NOT true! Even all the RS 2.5's in Street Touring and Street Prepared classes (not stock, same class I 'm in) cannot come near my times. These are modified Subaru 2.5's just like my GSR, and some of them have more suspension mods than I do. They 've all been racing 2-3yrs just like I have and I 'm no divisional or national champ (just a local one) so our experience is the same. I 'm not talking a difference of a few tenths of a second either but whole seconds.. Look at BS (B Stock) class. A 130hp mid '90s Miata will have WRXs for breakfast. It does 0-60 in 9.3 secs vs 5.8 in the WRX, it doesn't have AWD and it has 100hp less than a WRX.. They why does it beat the mighty WRX & Type-R in auto-x? Gee, I don't know, maybe because it weighs 1,000lbs less and handles better than the other 2? I 'm sorry if I sound sarcastic but I get in this mood when people that don't race, argue with people that do, and talk out of their nose, just because they 're fascinated with a car..
'99 Integra GSR '06 Civic LX coupe '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
"I 'm sorry if I sound sarcastic but I get in this mood when people that don't race, argue with people that do, and talk out of their nose, just because they 're fascinated with a car.. "
I take offense to that! LOL
I don't do any 'real' racing. When I was younger I used to race my friends on the empty highways, but now that I've grown (and so has my insurance premium), I no longer do it. But my 'racing' was nowhere near what you saw in "the Fast & the Furious." Our cars were stock and we'd just go in a straight line for miles at around 100 mph.
You drive yours to make a living, but you don't care about the WRX's lousy gas mileage? How can you make a living when all your $$ get sucked down at the gas pump?
When was that? Everytime I come here, there's always 1 post concerning the RSX, and 5 other posts that: 1) Compare it to another car, 2) Personal attacks, 3)Experiences at the race track and how the RSX's new suspension cannot theoretically hold up, 4)Why the RSX has leather (could it be because it's an Acura?)...that's all I can recall.
diploid is again right.. So who are RSX owners here? Tell us what you like and don't like about your car! Based on your comments I 'll decide whether to get one in a year or so. BTW, I have 3 cars. '99 GSR for racing/wknd fun, '01 EX coupe for my long commute (3 days old) and '01 Altima to drive the family around, well mainly wife's car. Just sold my '97 Civic DX HB with 140k mi. on it in under 24hrs after I listed it (had at least 60 serious inquiries & people were offering more for it!). Never broke down once with that car and never had to do a repair besides maintenance! I just hope this new Civic will serve me just as well. Back to the RSX.. who wants to sell me their stock suspension for my Civic? It should fit right in since they have the same configuration. I 'd probably have to wait a while to find used RSX shocks & springs because I don't think there are any aftermarket parts for the RSX yet.. BTW, the new EX has much improved mid-range torque & power. Even in 5th gear it moves pretty well and C&D said it's seconds faster than the old EX in top gear (5th) acceleration. Ok, back to the RSX!! :-)
'99 Integra GSR '06 Civic LX coupe '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
I was there the 2nd or 3d day it went on line.. I wouldn't say the busiest forum.. I know a couple of Honda/Acura forums that have way more posts than clubrsx. RSX is just one car. The other have the whole honda & acura line..
'99 Integra GSR '06 Civic LX coupe '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
Acura.com says 87 octane can be used in the Base RSX. The brochure states 91 or higher for both the Base & the Type-S. Which source is correct? Thanks!
I agree w/ a lot of your points. I've always had cloth interior vehicles but have driven and ridden in vehicles w/ leather. Leather may *arguably* look nicer, but it's harder to maintain, and can burn your skin when exposed to the summer sun (especially the black/charcoal leather). Cloth never heats up to an uncomfortable temperature, and provides just as good comfort.
I was seriously looking into getting a subwoofer system for my current '99 Integra LS since its bass response is somewhere between bad and embarrassing. I thought about a Bazooka or something similar. Then I was talked into going for something more upscale (obviously the auto audio salesmen will do this, but my trusted friends also suggested it). Upscale as in getting a separate amp, custom box, and high end 12" speaker (Bazookas max out at 10"). I thought about it, and then figured, with less than a year to go before I have to return my leased vehicle, I'll just save the system for the new car. If I get an RSX, I'll have to give the Bazooka another consideration seeing that it's worked out well for you. What a shame that Acura raised the cost for an apparently worthless Bose sub.
Yes, the underbody/carriage spoiler looks good. I remember seeing a parked Integra Type R shortly after I got my LS that was all decked out. And it was a looker! But according to acura.com, the dealer will charge about $900 for the side and front bottom spoilers. I'll have to see it in person and see if the fancy plastic will improve the RSX's relatively conservative styling. For those who drive such vehicles w/ underbody spoilers, does it affect your driving over potholes and speedbumps? How much of a clearance is there from the pavement to the spoiler?
You got the underbody spoiler installed by the dealer? Are you putting in the fog lights yourself or also having the dealer put it in? According to acura.com, the fog lights are a rip off. Well, they don't quite say it, but they're charging something like $500. I want to be taken for a ride by the vehicle, not its dealership. If you haven't already had it done, try to have an auto audio person put in the fog lights instead of Acura. Just my opinion. I look forward to seeing your "decked out" RSX since most of its pics on the Web don't show fog lights, spoilers, etc.
Looking back at the 300+ messages posted to the board, I'm baffled as to the number of RSX vs. WRX posts. The two vehicles are so different! One is a FWD coupe; the other is an AWD sedan. Instead, how does the RSX compare w/ some other vehicles in its class? Here are a few other cars I'm considering for next spring (all 2002 models): Celica GTS, Eclipse GT (V6), Cougar (V6), Stratus R/T, and maybe even the Focus SVT (even though it's the ugliest car in this bunch).
Simply from appearance/styling, I like the Celica, Eclipse, Cougar, RSX (only seen pictures so far), Stratus, and then the Focus, in that order. I plan to test drive these coupes early next year and post my opinion (for what it's worth) on this board and/or on my Web site. Moderator, does Edmunds plan on doing a thorough 2002 coupe review once the other makes reveal their 2002 cars? I, for one, would find the experts' opinions very valuable. Thanks.
I bought an RSX Type S two weeks ago, after test driving the Prelude, WRX, and Eclipse GT. My last car was a Plymouth Laser RS Turbo with auto trans. About 4 weeks ago, the Laser's turbocharger failed at 124k, and it trashed the engine. So I had to make up my mind on my next car quickly. I prefer the exterior of the RSX over the others, plus the WRX's interior would have been a step down compared to my previous car. Acura's high reliability rating is important to me, since I plan to keep the car at least 7 years. I wanted the 200hp Type S, so I had to decide that I could learn to drive a 6-speed in commuter traffic. When I test-drove the Type S, I found it was easy to shift. I've driven the Type S over 1,000 miles, and I'm very happy with it -- it's fun to drive, once out of the traffic. The only option I got was wheel locks. The other options seem overpriced to me. I bought a silver windshield shade to prevent the black interior from getting too hot.
I was at BlockBuster on Saturday and when I came out there was about seven people gathered around my car (In Austin, TX). As I approached I hit the door unlock, the lights flashed, and as they flashed the crowd backed away. Comments given: "I hear there was only one Type-S in Austin, is this it!" "It looks really good, do you know when Acura is getting more?" "How long have you had it?" "How much was it?" "Are the dealers hiking up the price as Honda does for their high demand cars?" "Did you get any options, what does it come with?" "I saw a RSX race a modified civic, and it killed it!!!" "I heard it was faster than my Eclipse Turbo." As this guy was sitting in his.
I had a big grin on my face, and told them that mine was the second. The first was black, and mine (being the second Type-S) was the only red Type-S, when I got it (the 31st of July). I told them the 23,650 dealer price, and the around 25,500 after all taxes and fees (with mandatory vin etching) price. I then told them that there is no dealer gouging (hike up of the price), about a one - two month waiting list, and many are being sold. I also got no options, although I bought my spoiler and body kit afterwards, and this is when they said "I can't even tell that they are separate from the body."
Finally, I bragged how I own a Turbo Eclipse as well(which is for sale), and that this was indeed faster; smoother though with less kick (not having a turbo).
I saw a black one on the highway in Utah last week... I almost didn't recognize it.
I really like the performance and interior of this car, but I still couldn't get over the exterior appearance (perhaps it'll grow on me).
One weird thing was that on the road, this car seemed *much* taller (esp. in terms of ground clearance) than I anticipated. But, perhaps, that was just me.
I've owned a 2000 Celica GT-S since its release, and have had a great time with the car. When my wife bought her new 2002 Acura RSX type-S (Blue) shortly after the release date I went on edmunds and furiously tried to defend my Celica on town hall. Stating the fact that I own both cars and did not feel that the Acura was any better than the Celica. Well, my wife is now getting fairly upset with me because I am always trying to drive her car. The Acura is a wonderful day to day hatchback with an incredible ride, much nicer interior, and lots of power in the lower RPM. I love the car! Any suggestions on how to get my wife to trade cars with me?
The Celica can play her music a bit louder... One passed me today, as I was parking, with the stereo real loud. Plus people might notice her a little easier since it is more eye catching. So just tell her:
"But, you look so good in it!" "Not only that, NSYNC sounds so much better in the Celica, you're missing out!"
I really like the Acura RSX, but.. the regular coupe only has 160 HP. I think that is just a little under powered. The S-type is great, with 200 HP, making it one of the best engines for its market segement, but its offered exclusevly in manual. I tried driving manual a couple of times, and I just can't get a hang of it. Because of this I will most likely have to get the RSX.
Also, getting the RSX w/ leather and w/ auto, makes its price go up to almost as high as the RSX S-type (which already has leather, etc..). So with the price differnce of around $1,000, I would really want the extra 40HP the s-type has to offer.
Does anyone have any ideas if there is an auto option planned for the RSX for '03? Or any comments about driving manual?
They were probably already sold and just waiting to be picked up :f
dealers actually do that. I remember I went looking at the Honda Odyssey and the salesman told me that the ones on the lot were already sold, *but* he could arrange for me to have it if I could put more $$$ down...
amelen-- My last car was an automatic, and I had limited experience with a manual. I wanted to test-drive the Type S, so the sales rep drove it to a large, empty parking lot so I could try it in a no-stress situation. Then I took it out on the highway. It was much easier to shift than the WRX! I think it's a great car to learn manual on. I've had my car nearly 3 weeks, and drive it to work in stop-and-go commuter traffic. There's a stoplight on a large hill on my way home, and for the first 2 weeks I detoured around it, but now I can do it. If I can learn it, you can, too!
Cool.. How long did it take you to get used to manual? Also, now that you got used to it, would you say its better than auto?
It would be good if Acura would at least offer auto as an option for the S-type.. Because the RSX (not s-type) is clearly underpowered compared to some of its other competitors..
The RSX is one of the easiest manuals to drive, try it and see. I tried teaching my girlfriend how to drive my eclipse turbo, and she had a really tough time. After she understood the concept of how it all works (in the eclipse), her gripes were that it was hard to push the clutch in and pushing the shifter in the different gates (the slots that the shifter has to slide into to get a gear) was difficult, time consuming, and a hassle. Then, once she got the hang of it (sort of), she drove the type-s and thought it was a world of difference. Her gripes no longer held true, she though the clutch was easy to press (not push), the shifter practically falls into the gates instead of having to push, and she really enjoyed it rather than being passive about what the car is doing. Some people on clubrsx.com have even complained that selecting 6th gear and reverse is a bit challenging because you actually have to put a little pressure on these to get them in. Most people on this board would laugh at that (most people on that board are less car enthusiasts, and more just looking for some answers to the new car experience).
Here's some more pros of driving a manual, over an automatic: 1. Better gas mileage from being a more efficient transmission. 2. Easier passing, since you don't have to wait for the transmission to engage more power (you select it as you need it by selecting a lower gear). 3. Less maintenance. You almost never have to change the transmission fluid or filter (most manuals go for 100k miles without the need, some indefinitely). 4. Less reliability issues. Transmission problems rarely plague manuals (unlike the automatics). 5. Less risk of costly repairs due to abuse. If you abuse the transmission you only need to replace the clutch, which is like a brake job. Unlike the automatics, which, if abused, need a total replacement. 6. Less weight. Which translates to more power, better handling, better weight balance front and rear, more load capacity, better braking, better acceleration, and of course better fuel economy due to better efficiency(already stated). 7. Once you get the hang of it, it feels more responsive, better feeling of what is going on underneath, better control of "aggressive driving"/"low fuel economy"(high rev shifting) VS. "passive driving"/"best fuel economy"(low rev shifting), and of course it just feels more sports car like (you'll understand when you get the hang of it, my girlfriend now can't get enough like most people). 8. It makes more sense in today's economy to drive a vehicle that is more efficient. 9. The Europeans make due with over 90% of all vehicle being manual transmission vehicles. You want to be more European like?.. then do what they do. 10. Finally, the Type-S can only be had with a manual, so manuals can't be all bad if the Type-S is promoting them.
Those extra 40HP come on well into the revs on the Type S. Autos usually shift sooner than that and therefore would seriously hurt performance. I'd be willing to bet that a manual 160HP RSX would be faster than an auto 200HP Type S. You are not getting a bigger engine (same 2.0L in both) with the Type S, therefore, unless you are willing to rev to the redline in the Type S, the difference in power between the two engines is insignificant.
It's highly unlikely that an auto will be offered in the Type S anyway.
Comments
Maybe I should have paid the membership fee to go back to the credit union and apply for the loan. But then that would play into whether it's worth it.
Credit Unions do offer great deals, but it probably isn't worth trying unless you already have a membership with them (check their membership fee to be sure).
I'd request the 6mo extension (or even better an extension for as long as it takes, 4mo) and get the '03. I'd think that they would probably add more things standard, and maybe even design a arm rest. Most car companies try to spice the deal up a bit year after year by adding in more options standard. Lexus' IS300 arm rest was designed and is being added to the IS300 on the 2nd production year (coming in September). I'm sure Acura will come up with one sometime.
As for the spoiler, I think it's the new car design that takes from the spoiler. The RSX has the center brake light on the upper rear of the trunk, which would be just below the spoiler. I've seen Mustangs with brake lights on the trunk(factory) and on aftermarket spoilers, and it just looks tacky and out of place.
As for the subwoofer. The subwoofer is just to compact to do a great deal of good, and it probably was out of their cost bracket to improve the efficiency. I don't think this will change. The system overall is good, just not great. I am going to add an self-amplified Bazooka Bass Tube from Crutchfield for $400. These things are amazing (and small)! I currently have one on my Eclipse. I can't even begin to explain the enhancements it gives (and I used to be a car stereo installer). As an example, it can power other side-by-side non-powered subwoofers (the factory one) with cleaner sound and have a fuller effect (in fact, it's recommended for the best sound). I'll let you know how mine comes along. My Eclipse practically won competitions with it (factory system + one Bazooka).
Here:
http://www.crutchfield.com/cgi-bin/S-UyRO9CzmPcU/ProdView.asp?s=0&c=3&g=51000&I=204RS10AHP&o=M&a=0
Finally, the brakes. Well, there isn't any excuses, but I think they wanted to reserve the best braking for the Type-R. I also don't think they'll do much here in the future. I figured out why the braking sucks relative to huge rotors. They went cheap on us, they aren't utilizing the whole rotor, the caliper and brake pads don't reach the entire inner radius of the brake rotor. Relatively speaking, it's like a donut with a hole the size of an orange. What were they thinking... Aftermarket?
Gee...do you think that might make a difference?
Just imagine how bad the RSX's braking distances would be if it weighed 3100lbs.
NEWS FLASH:--AWD doesn't do a damn thing for shorter braking distances (I'm amazed that this is not general knowledge), but it sure does let a WRX chew up FWD cars on any surface.
No offence, but cold, hard, objective testing data tell the tale. The cars have similar braking performance. Period. If weight is the penalty of the WRX's average braking performance, then Subaru should have given the car bigger & better brakes.
Now, having said that, both cars exibit minimal braking fade which is far more important for spirited driving and aggressive braking. I suspect that both cars would do better with more aggressive tires.
It's apparent you 're completely overtaken by the WRX and think the world of it. This has caused you to make several incorrect/inaccurate statements like the one above. Show me a WRX that is able to beat a Type-R in SCCA autocross racing (they 're both in G Stock class). I have a '99 GSR with a slightly (moderatetly, nothing major) modified suspension (I believe you 've owned a GSR.. or 2) and I have WRX's for breakfast at every auto-x event I race. On this last event, I had 2 WRX racers come up to me and congratulate me on my runs. I ran about 2-3 seconds better than them and the course was only about 33-39s long! 2-3 secs in such a small course is a HUGE difference! One other modified WRX (CSP class, I 'm in a DSP which is a slower class!) was about 1.5sec slower than me! That was a modified WRX!
Please, you 're making the WRX out to be some supercar and it is not. In a tight course with fast transitions & slaloms, where light good handling cars dominate, the 3100lbs WRX struggles to compete.
The SCCA North Eastern Divisional championships are this coming weekend (3-day event) in upstate NY. I won't be attending because I don't take the sport this seriously and it's only a hobby for me, but I heard a lot of WRXs signed up. I 'll let you know once it's over how far behind the first few (FWD) winning cars (probably Type-Rs, Preludes & TTs-AWD though) the WRXs were..
'06 Civic LX coupe
'11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
'13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
I guess the better handling and lighter weight give the Integra the advantage.
Also, in my opinion AWD vehicles are quite over-rated when in comes to accelerating in a corner. It is true that they can accelerate better in a corner, but if you need to accelerate in the middle of the corner then you obviously don't know what you are doing as you must have entered the corner too slowly.
I must admit, though, that the WRX seems like a better daily car, as the power is available earlier in the RPM range. You need to be a race driver (almost!) to get any power out of the Integra.
I never claimed the WRX is a supercar. But you have to admit that it runs with some pretty expensive iron, even in stock form. Based strictly on a performance/cost ratio, it's a tough act to follow.
As far as AWD and cornering goes, the technique of "slow in, fast out" still applies. The benefit of AWD is that there is no power lost to wheelspin when accelerating out of a corner. Only a mid-engined, rear-drive car does it better (due to that configuration's low polar moment), but it's a much tougher technique to perfect in one of those.
My beef with the RSX-S is that, as a couple others have noted, they force feed you some of these luxury items. I don't see leather as a compelling requirement for comfortable driving. And if they're going to spend the money on a subwoofer, they might as well put in one that works, instead of that cheap Bose sub (which I thought was an oxymoron). They could have easily left it out and lowered the MSRP by a couple hundred $.
I am a subscriber to Crutchfield's mag, and I see that Bazooka as something that would give my music some much-needed thump. We Integra drivers know that our factory speakers are an embarrasment on the low end. But beware, I've heard that Bazookas are fairly unreliable; so much so that a couple local stereo shops have discontinued carrying them. It seems that you found a nice sub for your Eclispe. If you shop around on the Web, you might find the same model of that 10" Baz sub for something closer to $300 than $400.
As for the spoiler, I personally think it looks nice if the brake light was integrated right on the spoiler. I can see what you mean about tacky double brake lights, but the Integra's spoiler/brake light is well done. And speaking of spoilers, does anybody think that the underbody spoilers do much for the RSX or other cars in general?
The size of the contact made by any car's tires with the road is about the size of a postcard, give or take some centimeters. When accelerating out of a corner, you *will* lose some grip, AWD or not. As a result, wheelspin does occur, even if it's a minute value. And while that doesn't handicap the WRX's ability, your claim that no power is lost to wheelspin is erroneous. Having only a quarter or a half of the rubber (or even less) gripping the road can only do so much to help the WRX accelerate from a corner. And that is where the superior handling and lighter weight of the type-R becomes an advantage.
Unless, of course, your WRX's tires are completely tread-free and wide like those of race-cars, and your center of gravity is very low.
Civic coupe with the same control-link front suspension that the new RSX has - is this doable, and how would I go about it (and how much would that kind of thing cost)?
Actually, the new Civic handles pretty well on it's own, but I'm interested in how much I can make it perform like the RSX, since the RSX is based on the new Civic.
You just have to be in Canada to get them.
I had to take it as it was with the leather, since I wanted the type-S (yeah, they "force fed it").
As for the Bose subwoofer. It's a gimmick, they could have made the system just as good with some better speakers and no subwoofer. I feel that the overall stereo system is just as clean and great sounding as my Eclipse (with just as much bass). The only difference is that you could crank the Eclipse's Infinity system even louder, but as you go any louder than the level of the RSX's, you'd get some distortion and scratchyness. Sometimes you don't mind the distortion, sometimes you do. I think Acura's intent was to eliminate that, and that's why it doesn't go very loud. maybe they could re-program the head unit and allow for some distortion.
You know, 3-series BMW's had the same complaints. BMW fixed the complaining customers stereo's on request, and programmed them on the fly (I believe they swapped some components out that where pre-done). I was thinking of getting a 3-series, and that was my main problem, but then they came out with a fix for those complaining... but then the RSX came out!
As for the Bazooka, same thing, distortion is allowed to come through. Therefore, it's unreliable, and sounds bad at times. That's the way bass tubes work, though. They rely on distortion to up the bass response by dampening out the sound of distortion and giving more thump (the Bazooka does it beautifully). This is fine, as long as you don't thump it forever and eventually blow it. I haven't done it till this day. This is why the Bazooka matched up beautifully to the Eclipse's Infinity system, both allowed for distortion at the upper end. Many friends of mine have complained about blowing both their Infinity speakers and their Bazooka. "Come on, get a clue guys," i'd tell them, "If you pump out distortion, you risk spitting out voice coils... Just don't do it, for too long."
I think Acura and BMW would rather be known for clean and quality sound, than systems that blow themselves to pieces. I would like the option to tune it myself (not governed)... but then again, I don't mind having a keen ear, and some common sense, as to when to give up.
As for the underbody spoiler (a.k.a. side cladding, ground effects, body kit), I think it's personal taste. Sometimes it can be done tastefully (95-99 Eclipse, some people like 00' and 01' Eclipses), and sometimes it can be tacky (Pontiac anything). I personally like the underbody spoilers on the RSX. I just got mine put on this weekend. I have it all decked out now, and the fog lights go on next (I'll post a picture soon). If you go on to www.acura.com, RSX, and go to "build your own," you can see the effect on the fly as you make the selections for the specific pieces (front, side, rear, wing spoiler). I like it.
Talking about Eclipses again (sorry, I just loved my '95 GST, still do, and I can't help it), the bottom of the line ones looked terrible without the underbody effect. The fully loaded ones, like mine, were the real lookers.
I think certain underbody spoilers can make a big difference.
P.S. If anyone is interested in an '95 Eclipse for hotrodding, etc., mine had no modifications, garaged, for $8400 obo. Delivery anywhere in the US, is under $400 through auto-carriers.
WRX (to my surprise) came in 4th but it was almost 2 secs behind the 1st Place Type-R. 1-2 secs on a 43-45 sec. course is a BIG difference. This was in G-Stock where all the cars are stock except for very minor mods and all the cars had Race tires on (it's noteworthy to mention that the ITR 15" tires were like 1/2 the size of the WRX 18" tires!!!).
Anyway, Diploit is right. On the turns, the WRX has much body roll and doesn't look any better than the RS 2.5's. If what himiler said is true, then the RS 2.5 should be kicking a*s in G Stock for a long time now.. but that never happened. A 170hp stock GSR will almost always beat a 165hp stock RS 2.5 in G Stock. Because curb weight, body roll, tire contact with the ground all still count when you 're cornering.
WRX's (and RS 2.5) also have serious understeering as well and push and plow on the turns. Look at a Type-R race at an auto-x event right after a WRX, and you 'll see the difference how fast the Type-R takes the turns and stays in its place and even oversteers (the tail comes out) like a RWD car on sweepers and regular turns. Some people I guess think AWD automatically means better handling, NOT true!
Even all the RS 2.5's in Street Touring and Street Prepared classes (not stock, same class I 'm in) cannot come near my times. These are modified Subaru 2.5's just like my GSR, and some of them have more suspension mods than I do. They 've all been racing 2-3yrs just like I have and I 'm no divisional or national champ (just a local one) so our experience is the same. I 'm not talking a difference of a few tenths of a second either but whole seconds..
Look at BS (B Stock) class. A 130hp mid '90s Miata will have WRXs for breakfast. It does 0-60 in 9.3 secs vs 5.8 in the WRX, it doesn't have AWD and it has 100hp less than a WRX.. They why does it beat the mighty WRX & Type-R in auto-x? Gee, I don't know, maybe because it weighs 1,000lbs less and handles better than the other 2?
I 'm sorry if I sound sarcastic but I get in this mood when people that don't race, argue with people that do, and talk out of their nose, just because they 're fascinated with a car..
'06 Civic LX coupe
'11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
'13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
I take offense to that! LOL
I don't do any 'real' racing. When I was younger I used to race my friends on the empty highways, but now that I've grown (and so has my insurance premium), I no longer do it. But my 'racing' was nowhere near what you saw in "the Fast & the Furious." Our cars were stock and we'd just go in a straight line for miles at around 100 mph.
I drive mine to make a living, so I'm more interested in what works in the "real world" of street-compound tires, rain, and snow.
Arguing with you about racing was never my intent because, frankly, I couldn't care less.
I hope that your mood improves.
BTW, I have 3 cars. '99 GSR for racing/wknd fun, '01 EX coupe for my long commute (3 days old) and '01 Altima to drive the family around, well mainly wife's car.
Just sold my '97 Civic DX HB with 140k mi. on it in under 24hrs after I listed it (had at least 60 serious inquiries & people were offering more for it!). Never broke down once with that car and never had to do a repair besides maintenance! I just hope this new Civic will serve me just as well.
Back to the RSX.. who wants to sell me their stock suspension for my Civic? It should fit right in since they have the same configuration.
I 'd probably have to wait a while to find used RSX shocks & springs because I don't think there are any aftermarket parts for the RSX yet..
BTW, the new EX has much improved mid-range torque & power. Even in 5th gear it moves pretty well and C&D said it's seconds faster than the old EX in top gear (5th) acceleration. Ok, back to the RSX!! :-)
'06 Civic LX coupe
'11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
'13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
it's the most active forum I've seen in years. Stop on by to chat/argue/BS about acura's latest masterpiece, the RSX
I wouldn't say the busiest forum.. I know a couple of Honda/Acura forums that have way more posts than clubrsx. RSX is just one car. The other have the whole honda & acura line..
'06 Civic LX coupe
'11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
'13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
RSX Type S: compression 11.0:1 91 octane
Brochure is a misprint.
I was seriously looking into getting a subwoofer system for my current '99 Integra LS since its bass response is somewhere between bad and embarrassing. I thought about a Bazooka or something similar. Then I was talked into going for something more upscale (obviously the auto audio salesmen will do this, but my trusted friends also suggested it). Upscale as in getting a separate amp, custom box, and high end 12" speaker (Bazookas max out at 10"). I thought about it, and then figured, with less than a year to go before I have to return my leased vehicle, I'll just save the system for the new car. If I get an RSX, I'll have to give the Bazooka another consideration seeing that it's worked out well for you. What a shame that Acura raised the cost for an apparently worthless Bose sub.
Yes, the underbody/carriage spoiler looks good. I remember seeing a parked Integra Type R shortly after I got my LS that was all decked out. And it was a looker! But according to acura.com, the dealer will charge about $900 for the side and front bottom spoilers. I'll have to see it in person and see if the fancy plastic will improve the RSX's relatively conservative styling. For those who drive such vehicles w/ underbody spoilers, does it affect your driving over potholes and speedbumps? How much of a clearance is there from the pavement to the spoiler?
You got the underbody spoiler installed by the dealer? Are you putting in the fog lights yourself or also having the dealer put it in? According to acura.com, the fog lights are a rip off. Well, they don't quite say it, but they're charging something like $500. I want to be taken for a ride by the vehicle, not its dealership. If you haven't already had it done, try to have an auto audio person put in the fog lights instead of Acura. Just my opinion. I look forward to seeing your "decked out" RSX since most of its pics on the Web don't show fog lights, spoilers, etc.
Simply from appearance/styling, I like the Celica, Eclipse, Cougar, RSX (only seen pictures so far), Stratus, and then the Focus, in that order. I plan to test drive these coupes early next year and post my opinion (for what it's worth) on this board and/or on my Web site. Moderator, does Edmunds plan on doing a thorough 2002 coupe review once the other makes reveal their 2002 cars? I, for one, would find the experts' opinions very valuable. Thanks.
"I hear there was only one Type-S in Austin, is this it!"
"It looks really good, do you know when Acura is getting more?"
"How long have you had it?"
"How much was it?"
"Are the dealers hiking up the price as Honda does for their high demand cars?"
"Did you get any options, what does it come with?"
"I saw a RSX race a modified civic, and it killed it!!!"
"I heard it was faster than my Eclipse Turbo." As this guy was sitting in his.
I had a big grin on my face, and told them that mine was the second. The first was black, and mine (being the second Type-S) was the only red Type-S, when I got it (the 31st of July). I told them the 23,650 dealer price, and the around 25,500 after all taxes and fees (with mandatory vin etching) price. I then told them that there is no dealer gouging (hike up of the price), about a one - two month waiting list, and many are being sold. I also got no options, although I bought my spoiler and body kit afterwards, and this is when they said "I can't even tell that they are separate from the body."
Finally, I bragged how I own a Turbo Eclipse as well(which is for sale), and that this was indeed faster; smoother though with less kick (not having a turbo).
Just to brag, later...
I really like the performance and interior of this car, but I still couldn't get over the exterior appearance (perhaps it'll grow on me).
One weird thing was that on the road, this car seemed *much* taller (esp. in terms of ground clearance) than I anticipated. But, perhaps, that was just me.
Stating the fact that I own both cars and did not feel that the Acura was any better than the Celica. Well, my wife is now getting fairly upset with me because I am always trying to drive her car. The Acura is a wonderful day to day hatchback with an incredible ride, much nicer interior, and lots of power in the lower RPM. I love the car! Any suggestions on how to get my wife to trade cars with me?
"But, you look so good in it!"
"Not only that, NSYNC sounds so much better in the Celica, you're missing out!"
Also, getting the RSX w/ leather and w/ auto, makes its price go up to almost as high as the RSX S-type (which already has leather, etc..). So with the price differnce of around $1,000, I would really want the extra 40HP the s-type has to offer.
Does anyone have any ideas if there is an auto option planned for the RSX for '03? Or any comments about driving manual?
dealers actually do that. I remember I went looking at the Honda Odyssey and the salesman told me that the ones on the lot were already sold, *but* he could arrange for me to have it if I could put more $$$ down...
My last car was an automatic, and I had limited experience with a manual. I wanted to test-drive the Type S, so the sales rep drove it to a large, empty parking lot so I could try it in a no-stress situation. Then I took it out on the highway. It was much easier to shift than the WRX! I think it's a great car to learn manual on. I've had my car nearly 3 weeks, and drive it to work in stop-and-go commuter traffic. There's a stoplight on a large hill on my way home, and for the first 2 weeks I detoured around it, but now I can do it. If I can learn it, you can, too!
Cool.. How long did it take you to get used to manual? Also, now that you got used to it, would you say its better than auto?
It would be good if Acura would at least offer auto as an option for the S-type.. Because the RSX (not s-type) is clearly underpowered compared to some of its other competitors..
Here's some more pros of driving a manual, over an automatic:
1. Better gas mileage from being a more efficient transmission.
2. Easier passing, since you don't have to wait for the transmission to engage more power (you select it as you need it by selecting a lower gear).
3. Less maintenance. You almost never have to change the transmission fluid or filter (most manuals go for 100k miles without the need, some indefinitely).
4. Less reliability issues. Transmission problems rarely plague manuals (unlike the automatics).
5. Less risk of costly repairs due to abuse. If you abuse the transmission you only need to replace the clutch, which is like a brake job. Unlike the automatics, which, if abused, need a total replacement.
6. Less weight. Which translates to more power, better handling, better weight balance front and rear, more load capacity, better braking, better acceleration, and of course better fuel economy due to better efficiency(already stated).
7. Once you get the hang of it, it feels more responsive, better feeling of what is going on underneath, better control of "aggressive driving"/"low fuel economy"(high rev shifting) VS. "passive driving"/"best fuel economy"(low rev shifting), and of course it just feels more sports car like (you'll understand when you get the hang of it, my girlfriend now can't get enough like most people).
8. It makes more sense in today's economy to drive a vehicle that is more efficient.
9. The Europeans make due with over 90% of all vehicle being manual transmission vehicles. You want to be more European like?.. then do what they do.
10. Finally, the Type-S can only be had with a manual, so manuals can't be all bad if the Type-S is promoting them.
It's highly unlikely that an auto will be offered in the Type S anyway.
Base Eclipse is 150hp.