Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Acura RSX (All years/types)

191012141550

Comments

  • only1harryonly1harry Member Posts: 1,140
    yes, I agree that the new ITR (RSX-R?) looks and means business but the current RSX-S that I saw on the highways a few times, looks a little blant & doesn't excite me much. It is growing on me though..
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    It grows on you.
  • diploiddiploid Member Posts: 2,286
    And it'll age well, too.
  • beowulf7beowulf7 Member Posts: 290
    I haven't seen many RSXs on the road, which is surprising considering they've been sold in the USA for over 4 months now. However, the ones I have seen are all sans spoiler. I happen to think tasteful rear wings add a lot to styling on most coupes and aerodynamic hatchbacks. For example, you rarely see an Integra coupe without a spoiler. What's the deal with the folks getting RSXs eschewing them? I know it's all personal preference, but I'm still a bit befuddled.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I didn't see the first RSX on road until last month, and then I visited an Acura dealership to see one in person. Couple of weeks ago, another RSX on road. Since then, I have seen three others (one may have been previously sighted since it had the same exterior).

    Honda has sold just over 3K of them in 2-3 months it has been on sale, and their targeted sales is only about 25K RSX (10K base, 15K type-S). So it is no more going to be sold in as much volume as the Integra did (excess of 60K units I believe).

    As for spoiler, the GS-R (coupe) came equipped with spoiler.
  • hirobynhirobyn Member Posts: 10
    Hi all,

    Has anyone test driven the automatic RSX? The dealerships by me only have manuals on site. So far I've driven two Type S's and loved them. But I was wondering if anyone had an opinion on the auto vs. manual RSX base model.

    If you've driven the automatic, how does the "sportshift" work?
  • diploiddiploid Member Posts: 2,286
    Leave it off!

    The so-called "enthusiasts" are already having a field day with the MacPherson struts and FWD, bringing in a spoiler will only give them more reason to laugh.

    Instead, Honda should just bump up the hp and torque ratings - that should calm some of the critics.
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    More power won't cure the lack of wishbones, or the tendency of FWD cars to torque-steer.

    I would have been willing to put up with the lack of a center armrest if only they hadn't ditched the wishbones. Too bad for Acura that my Prelude has both.

    And yes, leave the spoilers off. They just make the car more difficult to wash & wax.
  • dkneedsnwcrdkneedsnwcr Member Posts: 35
    the added weight, and the enticement of someone to rip it off your car.

    Of course, I don't know what I'm talking about, I keep my golf clubs in my car everyday (just too lazy to take 'em out). Nevermind all that other junk that I keep in there (i'm just really lazy).
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Himiler:
    I had a Prelude, and both of my current cars ('98 Accord and '00 Civic) have double wishbones. I was suspicious about the move to Mcpherson struts as a choice for front suspension. Well, it lasted until I test drove one through the same stretch I had taken a '99 GSR, pretty good stretch to test the handling capabilities of such a car. I was not disappointed. It is just feels like a better car now than the Integra ever was. Well, now if we would soon see the RSX-R taking the long journey across the Pacific.

    I've my concerns about the new ITR, given the specs (more torque, about the same weight, but very short gearing and large wheels). A lot of changes, but then, reviews have been favorable about the new version over the old. So I guess (and hope), my concerns would be unfounded.
  • 719b719b Member Posts: 216
    you guys act like if a car doesn't have double wishbone in the front it must handle like a yugo.
    i guess every other manufacturer that doesn't have double wishbones isn't even worth considering.
    not many choices left... is there?
    we might as well go back to the horse and buggy
  • periwonperiwon Member Posts: 15
    BMWs use struts in the front, and no one ever accuses them of poor handling. It's not so much the configuration (unless it's something like swing axles) as the geometry and tuning. Granted, since struts don't have as good a camber change curves as A-arms, in order to optimize handling you need to make the car pretty stiff in roll, and on a front drive car this can mean wheelspin in low speed turns, but it's not that big of a difference on a street car,
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    I'll never be convinced that taking a technological step backwards from wishbones to struts is a good thing. Honda did it for one simple reason: they say "Packaging Efficiency"--I say "money." Struts are cheaper, and the average Joe and Betty America will never have a clue as to what they're missing.

    Robertsmx--I too drove a RSX-S, but did not perceive a $3000 differnce in performance over the '98 GS-R I owned at the time. Honda is goofy not to make a LSD standard in this car.
  • dkneedsnwcrdkneedsnwcr Member Posts: 35
    What's the advantage of having an LSD?

    what's the advantage of Double Wishbone vs Struts?

    I'm yer average Joe Public always willing to learn, but not willing to go out and do all the necessary research. Just lazy.
    :)
  • tnjrobi1tnjrobi1 Member Posts: 41
    I'm looking to buy a new RSX Type S in the next six months and I'm thinking about adding the following accessories. The rear spoiler, fog lights, moonroof visor, wheel locks & splash guards. I'm worried about the spoiler, moonroof visor & splash guards adding wind noise and drag. Should I get these accessories or leave them off?
  • fxashunfxashun Member Posts: 747
    $3000 in extra refinement, solidity, engineering in the new RSX. It's much more substantial looking and feeling than the last Integra which felt kinda crude in comparison.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I was quoted a price of just under $20K for a '99 GSR (before I bought the Prelude), but that was not the MSRP. Integra GS-R stickered at about $22.5K.

    You may be right about saving $$$ by using struts. The world does it anyway. But when it can be made to perform as well, or better (as in this case, IMO), why not? Plus, better safety, smaller car with more room! Refinement, better stereo, better transmission, and better engine on top of it.

    LSD will add weight, and that has been a Type-R thing in the past, more useful on a track oriented car than a GT coupe that RSX-S is, or GS-R was. And it is there in the new Type-R.
  • uthinxuthinx Member Posts: 21
    Just for general interest here is the location of sales figures for sporty cars in the US. These figures are for Sept., Oct. are not yet posted. (Not a link but you know what to do.)

    http://www.autosite.com/editoria/asmr/svolsc.asp


    Now you know why you see so many Mustangs.

  • uthinxuthinx Member Posts: 21
    Okay it came through as a link without my having to do anything. Thanks Edmunds for easy posting setup.
  • only1harryonly1harry Member Posts: 1,140
    Nice link. Good info.
    The Integra never actually hit sales of 60k units/yr. The most g3 Integras were sold between '94-96 and that was close to 50,000/yr which is considered excellent (back then it was the same as BMW 3-series before they really picked up), especially for a sporty car. That would 've brought it into the top 7 on this list, if those sales continued today (I can't believe they consider the Intrepid a sporty car, I 've been in a new one, it felt & handled like a boat). Actually in '99 when I bought my GSR, Integra sales were at 33k/yr. Now I see in '00 YTD (9mos up to Sept.) the sales were 21.6k which would mean around 27k Integras were sold for the whole year. That is more than the 25k projected RSXs. Did Acura have more faith on the Integra than the RSX?
    Bear with me here.. If you look at the current September sales compared to last year's, the RSX sold about 30% more than the Integra did last year. So if this is true then the RSX should sell way over 30k units or at least more than the Integra did last year. It should be more than 25,000 target that Robert mentioned. Then again, last September of '00, Integra sales should 've been low because in Oct. the '01 Integra came out, where with the RSX, it's a new model and it's only the 3d month out, which may explain why the sales are so much higher in Sept. than last September's Integra sales.
    I think they should 've kept the name Integra. It would 've generated more sales, especially with all those Integra fanatics out there. I 'm just very surprised that Acura calculated that it would sell just as many or less RSXs than Integras. Their profit margin must be bigger for sure..
    BTW, did anyone notice the sharp decline in Celica sales? About 30% less this year!
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • fxashunfxashun Member Posts: 747
    that Acura knew the changes in the name and the car would estrange many of the Integra loyalists. It's not the same car that the Integra was. It's trying to bring it's model up to be taken more seriously.
    On the professional market analysts level the Integra was holding the Acura nameplate down with all the boy racers riding in dropped and cartooned out Integras. You wouldn't want to buy a $40,000 RL and see another Integra with a 4 foot high wing on it in the lane next to you.
  • beowulf7beowulf7 Member Posts: 290
    Joe, I personally like spoilers/rear wings, whatever you want to call them. Recently, I made an observation wherein fewer RSXs are equipped with this gadget than Integra coupes, and many on this board want to leave them off. I, on the other hand, think it really adds to the styling. So go ahead and get it as long as it doesn't block your rear view vision. You can even install the kit yourself like mitsugst did. (He wrote a how-to outline a few hundred messages ago.)

    I also like fog lights. Maybe it's b/c I'm relatively young (in my 20s), I like these gadgets (spoilers, fog lights, tinted windows, etc.). Not that I'm saying the older posters on this board don't like them b/c of age, but I digress. However, Acura will *rip* you off on fog lights. If memory serves me right, they'll charge you a few hundred dollars to put fog lights on the RSX, whereas any local auto accessories guy can put fog lights of *your* choice for less than half the cost.

    I don't know if the moonroof visor adds much value (monetary or pleasure). Yes, it adds to wind drag and noise. And I say leave the splash guards to the 18-wheelers. Just my opinion.
  • fxashunfxashun Member Posts: 747
    Rock chips and asphalt spatter look much worse than factory designed splash guards. Aftermarket ones suck though.
  • mistery33mistery33 Member Posts: 6
    i bought a rsx base model.one month later check engine light came on; i took it to the dealer who downloaded a new computer progam from acura and installed the new program in my car's computer. however, now the check engine light does not come on even when i start the car. any ideas about this? did acura just turn it off? am i at risk about the diagnostic chores of the original program? any one else have this problem? any or all information greatly appreciated. btw,i am a 53 yo man in cambridge, ma. and many of the observations on this site are informative, interesting info. thanks... the brakes do seem less than spectacular,has anyone had the car long enough to notice an improvement? thanks mistery 33
  • only1harryonly1harry Member Posts: 1,140
    I got the check engine light on my '01 Civic EX 1 month after I bough mine too. That's what we have to put up with when buying a new model first year out. Actually mine was legit. The code showed "evaporator canister leak"! This means gasoline was evaporating from somewhere. They had to drop the gas tank 5-6" and found a loose hose which had a little plastic clamp that didn't hold one of the hoses tight. They installed a screw type clamp that fixed the problem. Other Civics with the same exact error code have had a bad solenoid (canister) that would let gas escape. My last '97 Civic (2nd year out) had no problems until I sold it with 140k mi. on it. 1st year models are always a pain and I broke my rule never to buy 1st year out. I got a great deal on it ($200 over dealer invoice) but I think I 'll pay for it in other ways.
    Shouldn't be too bad though. I see what all my co-workers go through with their new Fords & Chevys and it's a horror show! In some cases the dealer can't even diagnose the problem! Intermittent stalling, air bag lights staying on, all kinds of recalls they have to bring them in for, etc. etc.
    My '99 Integra has 0 recalls but that 's 6th year out. Look at a Mustang model 3d year out. The same recalls and Technical bulletins are there throughout the years.
    I periodically go to nhtsa.com and look for service bulletins for all my cars so I know what to expect and make sure there are no major problems.. Take a look at the Mustang, Explorer & Expedition ones.. some are very funny like "windshield washer spraying by itself", wipers engaging on their own, etc.
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    Apparently, no one wants to buy the RL, period.

    robertsmx: Call me crazy, but I'd gladly throw out the added weight of the leather interior to get the performance benefit of a limited-slip differential. Chuck that lame Bose stereo, too, while you're at it. A LSD doesn't weigh much more than that silly "richbass woofer" in the spare tire. What a gimmick.
  • 2k2rsx2k2rsx Member Posts: 4
    Make sure that your gas cap is tightened properly. It should click about three times. Apparently the sensor that checks the pressure in the tank (used for vapor emmisions) is very sensitive.
    It takes one or two driving sessions for the light to shut off. If it stays on, call the dealer.
    Mine did it last week when a cold front came through (I never cranked the gas cap up until then)
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    And it may take a few trips to reset the indicator after you've closed the cap properly.
  • only1harryonly1harry Member Posts: 1,140
    Thanks guys but I probably knew that way before anyone on this board. That was the first thing I checked because I had that happen to me with my '97 Civic back in the winter of '97! A gas attendant (you can't pump your own gas in Jersey!) had only turned it just slightly and I had the light come on after only driving away a few miles with my '97 HB.
    Luckily I had read the entire manual when I bought the car and that was one thing that stuck in my head :)
    Anway, yes, I drove around with that light on in my '01 EX for 3 days (300mi). I tightened the gas cap many times, turning the engine on and off about 10 times and then finally called the dealer who after listening to what I had done, told me to bring it in asap.
    Just recently, the NHTSA posted this exact same problem I had with the clamp, as a RECALL (not TSB)! Now I 'm curious to see how long it will take them to mail me the notification..
    Did anyone see the Edmund's review of the '02 Civic Si? It sounds like it might have a better suspension that the RSX because they said it's supposed to have the Civic Type-R "tuned" suspension. That doesn't mean it's the same though, just tuned the same.. very ambiguous. Larger brake discs all around, etc. etc. Very heavy though, 2744lbs!! It's has the same RSX chassis but with a shorter wheel base which usually means better handling. We 'll see.. I don't expect it to be a sub-7sec. 0-60 car weighing that much.
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Heavy when compared to previous Honda hatchbacks, but looks like the emphasis was on chassis dynamics (handling) than on acceleration. Afterall, most Si's would be bought with aftermarket in mind. In the C&D preview, they seem to love the car, and impressed with the way the car handled at 130 mph on the Autobahn! Thats impressive. Most cars loosen up at 65 mph.
    Still, 0-60 may be about 7.5s.
  • rk922rk922 Member Posts: 22
    Hey guys, thanks for the useful info here so far.

    My question is which of the above transmission to get? Does anyone have the performance stats of both, like 0-60s, etc?

    Thanks in advance.
  • hirobynhirobyn Member Posts: 10
    I haven't been able to find an automatic to even test drive! I hope someone out there has and can enlighten us on the performance.
  • diploiddiploid Member Posts: 2,286
    I haven't read a single review where an RSX equipped with the automatic tranny has been tested.

    I think the automakers send out the various models for critical reviews, so they have the final say on which models to send out.

    Maybe that's why we may never see a review for an RSX with automatic transmission.
  • 2k2rsx2k2rsx Member Posts: 4
    I have the sportshift and am quite pleased with it. I bought the sportshift because I like the option of either "playing" in traffic or "dumbing down" when cruising on the highway...plus the kickdown on the auto is extremely effective when passing on the highway.

    The base model RSX also has a better torque curve than the type S...it peaks around 4K where as the Type S peaks somewhere up around 5 or 6K. But because it peaks early, I'm able to pop through the gears quicker..taking advantage of the torque curve.

    I don't plan on taking it to the track for actual speeds, but I can almost assure you that the base RSX with the sportshift is much quicker than the most people have given it credit for. Not only that, but for you performance enthusiasts out there,the base RSX has a lower compression ratio so it will be more conducive to turbo-charging...not that I plan on doing it, but the option is nice to have.

    To top it all off, I'm getting about 31 mpg in mixed driving(I drive 80 miles a day to and from work)....not bad for an automatic.
    :-)
    I love this car!
    ....although I kind of wish that it had traction control....I'm going to miss that in the winter.
  • rk922rk922 Member Posts: 22
    2k2rsx>

    Thanks for your feedback. Also wish to know if you tried the manual tranny as well and if so, why you didn't get it (what were the negatives)? How does the performance compare between the two?
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Actually the RSX-S and RSX engines have very similar torque curve under 5000 rpm, both generate about 95% of the peak torque right around 2500 rpm, but RSX-S engine maintains it further, with a slightly higher peak.
  • fxashunfxashun Member Posts: 747
  • uthinxuthinx Member Posts: 21
    http://www.autosite.com/editoria/asmr/svolsc.asp

    This link will take you to the sales figures for sporty cars for Oct. 2001. If you looked at last months you will find this even more interesting.
  • fxashunfxashun Member Posts: 747
    It's a non issue according to the graph. The lower end is almost identical. And the Type-S is much more linear.
  • 2k2rsx2k2rsx Member Posts: 4
    The torque output is almost the same, looks like about 10 ft lbs different....which really isn't that much....and it's a nice flat curve all the way up to 6K. But the base is more and that was the point that I was trying to make....and the base does take off nicely from a standing stop. Of course, all of that can be easily negated with the Type S by dropping the clutch at about 5k...my guess is that would more than even up the score. :-)
    It comes down to the reply by antrey...what is it that you want to do with the car. Drive around at 6K all of the time and also have the bragging rights of owning a type S. Or drive it like I do...it's by far the best/funnest commuter car I could imagine.
    And like I said before...because the compression ration is lower, a turbo will be an easy add on without having to tear the engine apart for lower compression pistons...
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    Uthinx: (Sales Figures)
    It looks like RSX is selling better than Acura planned for. Before launch, Acura had targeted 25K RSX sales per year, 15K being Type-S. Based on that figure, the pace is for 35K+ units per year.

    2k2rsx/antrey: (Torque Curve)
    Actually, I had printed the two graphs when I saw them first and drew lines to compare the outputs as well as I could. Both engines get about 135 lb.-ft at 3000 rpm. Between 3000 and 5000 rpm, the Type-S engine gains little, but base RSX gets to a peak of 141 lb.-ft at 4000 rpm (that would no more than 3-4 lb.-ft advantage over Type-S). However, around 5000 rpm, they are both same, and base engine is on the downward trend. The Type-S engine holds a little better (a small dip appears just before 5500 rpm) and then rises again to a peak of 142 lb.-ft, and holds that peak torque output to 7400 rpm, after that the torque curve sinks.
    The performance edge to base RSX would be only in first gear (first gear overall drive ratio is identical for base and Type-S models with manual transmission) and only between 3500-5000 rpm which corresponds to vehicle speed between 22 and 31 mph. The difference is almost negligible however as far as engine and gearing goes. However, base RSX is slightly lighter too.
    From second gear on, the RSX-S gearing gets tighter, and it would actually have an advantage on torque reaching the wheels in the same range of engine speed (3500-5000 rpm).

    2k2rsx:
    Don't take this as anything bad about the base RSX, since if I were to buy one today, I couldn't get RSX-S (unless it were my third car and wife wouldn't drive it being manual transmission only). For most practical purposes, and probably for later 'tweaks', base RSX may make more sense.
  • only1harryonly1harry Member Posts: 1,140
    See you 're thinking about it the wrong way. I bought the GSR in '99 and told my wife I was going to sell the '97 Civic. Of course the wife couldn't drive it because it's a 5-sp, but she had her own automatic sedan that she was content with.
    Then I started complaining about gas mileage (I was getting 30mpg with the GSR but didn't tell her that!), rough ride, noisy, etc. and told her I decided to keep the Civic because it was more economical, reliable & comfortable. I told her it wouldn't make sense selling the GSR because I 'd loose a ton of money, etc. and whala! I had a 3d car that was my "weekend car" and eventually made it into a dedicated auto-x race car. She eventually got used to it.. This coming winter/spring I 'm redoing the suspension with stiffer coilover springs so I can take it to the track for some road racing. Mainly race school and stuff, not competition. That usually requires a roll cage and I 'm not ready to ruin the interior yet :)
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I HAD TO replace my Prelude (manual) with Civic (auto), because my wife would prefer to be able to drive both. I couldn't keep it for even a year! Now that both of my cars are paid off, I'm thinking about my 'monday car', and S2000 is high on the list.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Member Posts: 5,525
    I just realised that RSX and RSX-S have identical overall drive ratios in their top two gears (4-5 and 5-6 respectively), which means that RSX-S would not have shorter gearing than the base version. Base RSX being lighter, and with a rising torque curve (compared to a flat torque curve in RSX-S) should be slightly quicker in top gear/top-two gear passing abilities.
  • nitromaxnitromax Member Posts: 640
    No sweat on the earlier comments. I just really wanted to let some people know about the Sportshift...and that the base RSX is not as much of a slouch as they may be led to believe. For me though, I didn't buy the RSX for performance. I bought it because I was traveling 500 miles a week and my Explorer was killing me on gas mileage. I was looking for a commuter vehicle that is great on gas and able to make my commute fun. ( the Honda Insight or others like it would not be very fun)
    I essentially doubled my miles per gallon by buying the RSX and am now saving about $150 per month in gas. The insurance is slightly higher because trucks (the Explorer is considered a truck) tend to get lower premiums. I now spend $25 more per month for insurance, but the gas savings easily negate that.
  • only1harryonly1harry Member Posts: 1,140
    I can't believe you sold the Prelude for an auto Civic! What a big difference especially for an enthousiast like you.
    If it were up to my wife we 'd be driving a Hundyai Triburon, a Cavalier and a big gas guzzling SUV. You have to be diplomatic about it, and clever.. My wife usually just looks at the color of a car and that's her determining factor! Every 3-4yrs I have to sit down and explain to her, the market value, gas mileage, engine, reliability, resale value, ownership costs, etc. I brainwash her for a few days and then buy the car.
    Anyway go for the S2K if you can! If not, the RSX-S is not a bad car, or wait for the RSX Type-R. As a happy GSR owner the next gen. Type-R seems to be the logical step for me, if it makes it to the US. The S2K is a bit impractical for me right now as I enjoy taking a Sunday drive with my wife & son in the Integra (soften up the shocks first) when the weather is nice and when I 'm not racing. I 'm not crazy about convertibles either although I haven't entirely scratched the S2K entirely off my shopping list. It's a remarkable car that outperforms Bimmers and base Boxters that cost thousands $$ more.
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • revkarevka Member Posts: 1,750
    from the Hatchbacks board over to the Coupes, Convertibles, and Sports Cars board. That means it will reside on both message boards. Hope you enjoy discussing this subject with participants from both of these boards. Happy Motoring!

    Revka
    Host
    Hatchbacks / Station Wagons / Women's Auto Center Boards
  • revkarevka Member Posts: 1,750
    Hi Folks- Some of you may be interested in checking out Edmunds'2001-2002 Sport Coupe Comparison Test where the 2002 Acura RSX Type-S placed first!

    Revka
    Host
    Hatchbacks / Station Wagons / Women's Auto Center Boards
  • himilerhimiler Member Posts: 1,209
    I guess the editors ultimately decided to ignore the spooky handling caused by the rear "compact double wishbone suspension."

    Not to mention the monster turning circle diameter, no doubt another benefit of those fabulous new struts up front.

    Oh, well. It's reassuring to see that "sizzle" still sells.
  • dkneedsnwcrdkneedsnwcr Member Posts: 35
    Just picked up me new RSX-S. Lovin' this car. Quite a step up from my '88 Accord. Quiet, smooth engine, sturdy ride. Can't wait to have it broken in.
    :)

    Two things I don't quite like (not really a complaint, just personal things I ain't used to): Visibility (I guess that's to be expected out of a coupe) and trying to find 5th & 6th. I'm used to going from fourth to fifth by pushing against the "wall" to get up there. Now it's kinda floating. Getting better at it, I was awful when I test drove it.
    :)

    that's it for now.

    Derek
This discussion has been closed.