Acura RSX (All years/types)

robertsmx · January 2002

check engine light issue
Make sure you close the gas cap properly after refueling. And if you didn't, and this light comes up, but you closed the gas cap properly, it may take a few trips before the lights go off. This must be mentioned in the user manual as it is in that of my two Hondas.

beowulf7
I don't think Accord coupe looks disproportionate or Civic coupe looks disproportionate, so a four/five door RSX wouldn't either. In fact, Accord coupe is shorter and lower than the sedan counterpart, and also sits on a shorter wheelbase (105.3" versus 106.9"). Integra sedan and coupe also had the difference (atleast in terms of wheelbase). The sedan had the same wheelbase as Civic sedan/coupe at 103.1" and the hatchback had it at 101". I don't think it looked awkward. In fact, the RSX may be about as long as Lexus IS300/BMW 3-series.
But I would rather see European/Japanese Accord as base Acura sedan in America. Smaller in dimensions than the American Accord, and lighter too.

notacon
If you liked ITR, you may find RSX-S too refined. These are two different cars even though the power output is similar. ITR was much lighter though. The RSX-S advantage may be in ownership costs, as ITR comes equipped with performance equipment (especially tires and brake pads), equipment level (if it matters) and ride refinement.
If you want a car like the ITR, you may want to wait for RSX-R. Once again, stripped of all fat, the new ITR (as it is called outside America) is light (<2600 lb.) and track oriented, while Type-S is more of a GT coupe. Still, you might want to test drive the S to see if it fits your needs.

notacon · January 2002

Thanks for the comparison. That helps a little. I was completely happy with my 98 ITR and lived without the creature comforts of A/C, moonroof, leather, etc... I so I could live without them again... but my fiance didn't like the fact the ITR didn't have A/C very much. I think I will test drive the RSX-S and see what it's like. Thanks again!

beowulf7 · January 2002

I never said the Accord coupe looks/looked awkward. It might have been someone else. dsm6 asked what I thought about the Civic sedan and I concurred that it on it, it looks OK. But I still think the Integra sedan looks horrible. (As an aside, I think a non-spoilered Integra is a bad idea, too, but I digress.) Given that an RSX is supposed to be and look sporty when compared to a Civic, IMHO, an RSX sedan would not be aesthetic.

In the end, I think it is a combination of car length and sporty appearance that would determine what looks good with 2 doors and what is better suited for 4 doors. Obviously, it is the automobile buying public that makes this determination. The Integra sedan did not fare very well, hence, Acura eschewed the sedan for the Integra's replacement, the RSX .

cyranno99 · January 2002

I doubt that the 4 door version would eat into the Accord sales. It might be for a very small percentage of buyers that would cross-shop. It would not be the same dilemma as the Prelude vs. Integra/RSX. As for styling, I think if Honda can make a good-looking 4-door sedan Accord version, then they could make a good-looking RSX sedan as well.

Unless there is a sports version of the Accord, then I might stop wanting the RSX sedan.... stay tuned...

sevaryn17 · January 2002

It seems that Acura has been driven towards the sport side of us all with the exception to the Honda Preludes and S2000s. Acuras have "type-s" versions I think Honda is gearing towards the "family car" like the Accords in competition with Camry. Honda might me directing the new sporty cars for Acura. Still, the fact that they are the same company says that one of them will always have a car that the market is in demand of. In the recent events, Honda will most likely produce more Accords and market them as a smart buy for fuel economy and reliability. Acura will continue to produce TL's and CL's as the everyday commute car with a little zip to them.

eludwig · January 2002

Based on some of the discussion here, I thought people would be interested in rumor-mill illustrations of the '03 Accord:

http://www.mag-x.com/scoop/accord0112/01.jpg, and

http://www.europeanhonda.demon.nl/03euroaccord.jpg

Speculation in the motor department is a 2.4L 4-cylinder and possibly 2 V6's.

Who know's the truth, but I'm hoping for a very sporty Accord when my lease expires in June '03!

thel · January 2002

of the spy pics. I wish they still made those for sale in the US.

sevaryn17 · January 2002

Those concept designs of the new Hondas are sweet. Honda has the resources to make such sporty cars. I hope the interior and instruments of those new cars that hopefully will come to the US will use Acura materials and interior design. But so far they look pretty sweet.

beowulf7 · January 2002

I think it's a tragedy that Acura is not including a spoiler in the Type S trim. A sports coupe without a spoiler is just a coupe. Yes, the RSX is not as sporty as some other sports coupe, but I think it looks even more bland without the rear wing. As an added bonus, very few RSXs on the road have a spoiler, so adding one would make an RSX more unique.

It's another tragedy that Acura did not integrate the brake lights on the optional spoiler. It looked so good on the Integra; why did Acura regress in spoiler technology? $600 does seem excessive for such a piece of plastic, but it is cheaper than the now-deceased Integra's $800 option.

mordrid52 · January 2002

Edmunds says that the Type-S uses premium fuel. What octane constitutes "premium"?

rjm12 · January 2002

Hi Mystery33 and sevaryn17! My check engine light still comes on and off so I am waiting on a call from the HQ. Will keep you informed. I will also check the vin.

All the best.

dsm6 · January 2002

Acura web site says 91 octane is recommended. It goes on to say that lower octane can be used with decreased performance.

jnt1 · January 2002

Well, after looking at the new A4, 3-series, WRX, C-coupe, Celica, Prelude, Jetta and TT I decided to purchase the type S. For the money, nothing can really touch this vehicle. The engineering is just brilliant. The engine is a jewel, the shifter is sublime and the ride/handling is superb. All other things really take a back seat in this vehicle, although the overall styling suits me just fine - it's refined and subtle. I've put on a little over 1100 miles without any problems to report. If anyone has any specific questions, don't hesitate to ask as I spent an enormous amount of time researching all the other vehicles before purchasing the type S. If you are in the market for a fun, somewhat luxurious and affordable daily rocket, this is the ticket.

dsm6 · January 2002

Just curious - what did you think of the wrx? Why did you choose the rsx over it? I've driven both and am still trying to decide between the two. WRX fans - this isn't meant to start a flame war, so lets not go there, OK? To each his or her own.

himiler · January 2002

I put down a deposit and ordered a WRX wagon after driving the RSX-S and decided that the Acura was pretty much a minor improvement over the '98 GS-R I was driving at the time.

The WRX offers more power, room, roadholding, rear lsd, lower insurance rates, and a higher seating position, to name a few things I liked. The Acura has a smooth (but boring) engine, killer 6spd box, slightly better build/material quality, and good fuel economy.

I did not consider the Acura's standard leather, climate control, or Bose to be added value because I didn't like the idea of not being able to get the Type-S without them. Why pay for what you don't want, right? (Obviously, most folks would disagree with me here.)

On the downside, both cars are fugly as hell, have big blind spots to the rear, transmit lots of road noise into the cabin, sit on McStruts, and can now be seen everywhere on a road near you.

My WRX was 3 weeks out when, on a whim, I test drove a Prelude. Game over.

beowulf7 · January 2002

First of all, congrats to jnt1 on his RSX-S. I'd also be interested on hearing your analysis of all those other cars you test drove and researched.

To all RSX-S drivers, are you using the premium (91 octane) fuel as recommended by Acura or something better or worse? What are the results? I remember a magazine concluding that in general, using a better grade fuel than what is recommended will affect neither performance nor mileage. However, by being a cheapskate (using lower grade fuel than what the manual suggests), your car's mileage and performance suffer by a nontrivial factor (I think it was ~10%). Can any RSX-S drivers attest to this, or do you all use 91 octane fuel?

While I have the RSX-S drivers' attention, has anyone else been told by the Acura dealership that the car requires a very finicky engine break in?

dsm6 · January 2002

Interesting - so you chose the Prelude. I too drove the Prelude and enjoyed the drive very much.

I hadn't thought about insurance premiums, but had assumed the WRX would be about the same as RSX, if not more. I guess I shouldn't assume. Many WRX owners would say the power advantage of the WRX and AWD is what mattered more than any ergonomic, drivability (eg the shifter on the WRX is not as nice as either of these two Honda products), comfort, quality of materials, etc., issues when compared to the RSX. Obviously opinions differ. I drive about 25,000 miles per year, so drivability and interior comfort/details matter to me almost as much as performance - hence the indecision. I had forgotten about the Prelude drive I took and will probably check one out again before deciding.

mtbaez · January 2002

I found at Japan´s Honda site that Integra Type R (Acura RSX Type R) is being sold now. The number for the car are:

2.0 litre i-VTEC

in-line 4 cyclinder

16 valve dohc

220 bhp

0-60mph 6.0 seconds

145mph top speed

Honda is offering the car with the stylish body kit available for the RSX type S and HID headlight as an option.

You can see pictures and specs of the car in

http://www.warrender.co.uk/homepage.htm

and

http://www.honda.co.jp/INTEGRATYPE-R/

Does anyone knows if this car will be sold in US?

dsm6 · January 2002

I've only heard speculation from various car magazines, but the speculation is that yes, the type r RSX will be sold in the US at some point in the not so distant future. The guess is that Acura will introduce the type r around 3 years or so into US RSX production, rather than having brought it over right away, in order to keep the public interested in the vehicle.

mtbaez · January 2002

Does anyone knows where is the RSX produced?

robertsmx · January 2002

I believe it is Sayama, Japan (same facility that produced Integra and CRV).

himiler · January 2002

I hear you. My job requires me to drive 6K miles a month, and I found the Prelude to have the best balance of comfort, noise suppression, ride control, and performance. Sure, either of the other cars will hit 60MPH faster, but I don't buy cars to cook their engines doing stoplight drags.

Honestly, the interior materials in the RSX didn't appear to be that much nicer than those in the WRX (pay particular attention to all the hard dash/door plastic and the funky headliner in the RSX -- this was all "soft touch" material in the Integra). Although boring, the interior of the Prelude is of better quality than both.

The seats in the WRX were much more supportive (for me, anyway) than those in the RSX-S. No slippery leather, either!

The WRX would have been much cheaper (~$850/yr!) for me to insure than the RSX-S -- credit the number of doors and low theft rates for Subes in general. However, after looking at the numerous cracked-up WRX's on iclub.com, I've got to think that rates might have gone up since I got my quote back in August.

strager · January 2002

Can RSX owners comment on the road noise, as well as engine and wind noise?

Consumer Reports says that it found the noise to be "considerable".

habitat1 · January 2002

Wow, that's a lot of driving. I have a friend who drives about 60k per year for business and has a 1998 Mercedes E300 Turbodiesel. He's about to hit 250k miles and the car looks and runs like new. He also contends that it is the cheapest car to own under extreme high milage conditions (has averaged 33 mpg+ on diesel). He actually expects to come out ahead by taking the milage rate deduction 34 cents +/- than if he took actual expenses and depreciated the car. Expects to have it at least 3 more years, so at 400k miles, he will have taken about $130k in tax deductions. And then it goes to his teenage daughter.

dkneedsnwcr · January 2002

With respect to the gas, this is what I've found:
I use Sunoco Supreme 92 (whatever it's called in the US or other countries, I don't know) mainly. Whenever I use Shell 91 or Esso 91, my mileage dips about 2mpg. Not much. When I use Sunoco 94, I get the same dip. I think it's because I drive the car a tad harder with the 94. I'm not sure though.

When it comes to road, wind and engine noise. It is a bit louder than any other car I've ever driven (A boatload of rentals, and the old '88 Accord). I got used to the noise and don't pay much attention to it anymore. I definately noticed it when I first got the car. Wind noise I don't pick up though. On the highway, with a full load of people who are sleeping, the engine noise did start to come thru. Usually I have the stereo on so I don't notice.

Hope that helps.

Oh, and I've never used anything lower than 91.

himiler · January 2002

I considered a used E-Diesel, but couldn't find any of the previous-generation cars (boxy look) with fewer than 400K on 'em already.

I'm not a fan of the styling on the current model, and they don't feel as solid at highway speeds as the older ones did.

Supremely comfortable, though, it's just a damn shame they're so expensive to maintain. I mean, come on! $800 for a brake job? That would eat up my mileage allowance in a hurry.

Pardon the off-topic post, all.

beowulf7 · January 2002

Edmunds ostensibly likes the base version of the RSX. Things they didn't like about it can be cured with the Type S (except for the unexciting and bland styling). They drove the slower and heavier auto instead of the manual. RSX-S, w/ its extra 40 HP and 6-speed manual, should shave at least 1 sec off the 0-60 time vs. RSX base w/ auto. I'm not sure what they meant by "buzzy engine at high RPMs". Of course it will be loud at 6,000 RPM - like any other vehicle when revved so high.

Now, I'd be interested in Edmunds doing a long-term road test of the RSX-S. That is where the excitement lies. If the RSX "[has] an overall feeling of refinement, and exemplary steering ... RSX is a car you can drive to work every day and still cut loose in it over the weekend", imagine how well the RSX-S would rate! The RSX-S would be even more luxurious w/ its leather and 6-disc CD changer. Now only if Acura would address that styling for the 2003 model ... and drop the price to be more competitive with the Tiburon GT ($20 k)

thel · January 2002

would Acura care about competing with the Tiburon, or any other Hyundai???

dsm6 · January 2002

At first glance, it seems strange that the two would be cross-shopped. Nevertheless, with the RSX and the redesigned Tiburon, I can concieve of some competition. Whether or not Acura cares about that, I don't know.

wishnhigh1 · January 2002

"would Acura care about competing with the Tiburon, or any other Hyundai??? "

I'll tell you why: There are hundreds of people on this board alone that have seen the new tib, and seen the price, and seen the features and style that come with that price, and they all say they will consider it, or even worse, actually plan on buying it.

thel · January 2002

An Acura for around $20,000 versus a Hyundai for whatever. No contest for me even if the Acura was $25,000.

wishnhigh1 · January 2002

An acura RSX for 20k and a beautiful Hyundai with similar specs for 3k less. I dont care if you consider it or not, many people are considering it.

himiler · January 2002

Since when do leather seats and an in-dash CD changer equal luxury? When I think luxury, I think about a smooth, quiet ride, and a roomy cabin that doesn't have to advertise high-quality textures and design. Think about an S8 or LS430 and you'll get the general idea.

The fact that Acura has sprinkled low-cost (no option) luxury bits on the RSX in the effort to move it "upmarket" serve only to dilute the character that the Integra had. By keeping the focus on affordable performance, the RSX-R looks to be another class-leading Honda. In Type-S trim, however, the RSX is neither a serious luxury or sporting machine. With its copius road noise and tight cabin, it qualifies only for the "pretend luxury" class.

varmit · January 2002

What were you expecting from an entry level car?

dsm6 · January 2002

I agree with himiler on the luxury part, but I don't know that I'd say the RSX-S isn't a sporting machine. It may come down to how we define sporting, though.

fxashun · January 2002

Looks cheap to me.
It's another case of like the Nissan Altima. The outside is gorgeous but the interior leaves a lot to be desired. In addition, like most Korean designed cars the exterior doesn't look proportional or integrated. The front, side, and rear look like they were designed by 3 different companies.

thel · January 2002

I don't really consider the RSX a luxury car (too stiff) or really a high performance car (FWD) but I do see it as durable/reliable (read that NOT Hyundai) and fun sporty coupe. It' no Boxster but it ain't no Civic either.

As for people buying up Tiburons, I guess that is a good thing to. After all, auto mechanics need jobs to.

varmit · January 2002

I dunno. Is the Lexus IS300 a luxury car? I've read plenty of complaints about the interior not being up to snuff. But they slap a 30K price tag on it and no one seems to mind. The RSX is a lot like a smaller, less expensive version of that car. IMO, the RSX is a sport coupe for people who have grown out of sport coupes.

diploid · January 2002

I do have to agree that the Korean cars (for the most part, anyway) look like they copied several other manufacturers (especially the luxury marques) and simply glued all the pieces together.
Just look at the new Sonata - it's blatant that the front was inspired by Mercedes Benz.

But I do think the Tiburon strays away from this notion just a bit (yes I think those headlamps look a little VW-ish, too).

himiler: "pretend luxury" = entry luxury. I think that's why an IS300, even though it crosses the 30+K barrier (the "near luxury" category), is referred to by most automotive magazines as an "entry level" sedan; a clear criticism of its not-so-upscale interior. At least the RSX tries to avoid that same criticism.

beowulf7 · January 2002

Heck, the RSX has been cross-discussed with many other autos lately on Edmunds' Town Hall (WRX, Celica, C230, Eclipse come to mind). Maybe we should create an RSX vs. Tiburon board. In the meantime, I was just stating that the RSX, given that it is *not* as luxurious as the LS430s of the world (simple price check will prove that), should cost less.

I'm not saying the Tiburon (I was referring to the new 2003 model, not the el cheapo 2001 one) is the ideal sports coupe. It's simply a car that gives a lot for the money. Many of you are discounting the 2003 Tiburon GT simply because it's made by a Korean company. Fine. That's why Hyundai is countering with a 5 yr. bumper-to-bumper warranty (and 10 yr. power train that no one cares about). Acura only gives a 4 yr. b2b warr.

Once I test drive both cars (2003 Tiburon GT and 2002 RSX-S), I'll have a better idea. I was leaning more towards the RSX-S since it is an Acura and it has 200 HP. But when I saw the Tiburon in person at an auto show and checked out the specs at www.2003tiburon.com, I had second thoughts. Both of these cars, IMHO, now rank ahead of the Celica and Eclipse.

thel asked, "would Acura care about competing with the Tiburon, or any other Hyundai???" I don't work for a car company nor am I marketing person. That said, I bet that any product that can potentially steal marketshare would be a cause of concern. In other words, if the sports coupe/hatchback buying public is going to by Tiburons at the RSXs' expense, yes, Acura will care.

robertsmx · January 2002

I believe there will be people cross shopping RSX and Tiburon, and there will be many who would also consider Eclipse, Accord coupe, Solara, GTI, Jetta, Mini Cooper, ...

And unless Hyundai has really worked hard on Tiburon, I doubt it is going to attract the same buyers who like cars like RSX, Celica etc. Some who go by style, may.

robertsmx · January 2002

Many of you are discounting the 2003 Tiburon GT simply because it's made by a Korean company. Fine. That's why Hyundai is countering with a 5 yr. bumper-to-bumper warranty (and 10 yr. power train that no one cares about). Acura only gives a 4 yr. b2b warr.
There is some truth to it, but is there a reason for that belief? I think so. To add to that, is the 10 year powertrain warranty transferable? I don't think it is, and many people will have trouble with that, as well as hurting value of car after about 3 years of ownership. Unless somebody wants to own the car for next 10 years, used car market may not hold up, even if the company manages to. I'm not sure if long warranty may backfire companies like Hyundai/Kia/Isuzu (all offering 10 year 100K-120K power train warranty), and lately, Chrysler offering 7 year warranty. It is a risk for these companies, and it may be coming at a cost as well.

diploid · January 2002

Lacks the visual appeal that the Celica and RSX buyers look for. The Celica represents the extreme-design car, while the RSX has that typical Acura palatable blandness, which is also unique - it hardly looks like a 300M in my eyes.

The Tiburon? A little VW here, a little Porsche there, a bit of Ferrari...nothing to really call its own. I think the pros refer to this as "cookie cutting" design.

jnt1 · February 2002

It comes down to a matter of priorities and preferences. All three cars are superb. I gave the nod to the type S because of the luxury touches not found in the others, and especially because of the better build quality compared to the WRX. The WRX was a blast to drive, but the shifter was a little too vague and the interior materials put me off. If power delivery to all wheels is important to you, then this is the one.
But I do disagree with most posts describing the type S as ugly. Again, this is subjective, but I find it to be clean and subtle with the ghost of the prior integra in certain design details very appealing. Here are a few quick thoughts and impressions about all the cars I researched and drove before making the decision:

C-Coupe- Bizarre overall proportions, but some nice details. No headroom, and I'm only 5'9". Syrupy steering with slower responses than the true athletes of this group. OK shifter. Nice low end torque, but engine does not provide as visceral a thrill as others. Expensive when optioned up.

3 Series- Great car. Enough said, but too expensive.

WRX- fun, fun and more fun. I don't like the looks at all, and the interior says plain cheap. Little turbo lag, shifter better than C, not as good as type S. Amazing power above 3000rpm. If you don't mind the details, you can't go wrong with this one.

Celica - Um, style-wise, will date very poorly. Cramped interior with surprisingly lousy shifter. Engine response ok, but peakier and buzzier than others. Uninspired interior.

Prelude - Wow, felt like 1989 inside this car. Not a bad thing, but I was looking for something a little more today than yesterday. Dynamically, this car is great. Excellent engine, steering and shifter. With discounts, a great buy.

Jetta - Nice design. Great interior and material quality. 1.8T has more lag than WRX and shifter is clunky compared to the best in this group. Not for me.

type S- Great drivetrain. Best shifter of the group by far. Super seats and interior ergonomics. This is the one that just put a huge smile on my face. Hatchback makes it versatile. Gripes are few, but there should be an armrest and heated seats would be nice. Overall, you just can't go wrong with this one.

I can post impressions of the rest if anyone is interested.

zigster38 · February 2002

Integra for the first year it was out...it was only a coupe...

I would love a 4 door version of the RSX, and it is coming....

dsm6 · February 2002

"I would love a 4 door version of the RSX, and it is coming.... " -zigster38

Is that just wishful thinking based on the Integra experience, or do you know something we don't?

diploid · February 2002

That they're going to come out with a 4-door model. Remember when they said the redesigned Civics would not have a hatchback in the lineup?

only1harry · February 2002

The best thing about the '02 ITR in PacAsia and Australia is that it comes in many different colors, like silver, black, white and bunch of others. I hope we get all that here and won't have to resort to a yellow one or just 2 colors like before. Although the style of the current RSX-S doesn't do anything for me, I wouldn't mind owning a 2600lb 220hp car with race bred handling and less amenities. A/C is the only thing I want.
Besides, it looks much better with the side skirts and underspoilers.

irontiger · February 2002

Hi. I'm thinking about buying a Honda Civic EX. Now I'm also thinking about checking out an Acura RSX. How's the room inside for tall individuals (i'm 6'1")? Is it about the same as the Civic? Are the seats larger then the civic? I was thinking about replacing the seats in the Civic if I go that route. How much are you paying for your insurance? Will it be expensive to replace parts for this car because of the Acura label or will it be about average? One last question. How is the visbility inside? Thanks for help.

zoomzoom79 · February 2002

My boyfriend is 6'6 and from what I remember of our drive in the Type S he had plenty of room.

Acura RSX (All years/types)

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles