What IF? - Honda Forum / Acura Forum

saint · 05-25-2005, 02:03 PM

What If Honda decided to make another RWD car.
What would make you run into the dealership and buy it brand new?

98vtec · 05-25-2005, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saint

What If Honda decided to make another RWD car.
What would make you run into the dealership and buy it brand new?

if it was h22 i-vtec 6speed

spray004 · 05-26-2005, 07:05 AM

Nathan123 · 05-26-2005, 02:46 PM

Hmmm... let's see... if it ran high 12's/low 13's, had torque, a 6 speed, and excellent handling for $25-28k... YES.
Otherwise, doubtful.

Mr GSR · 05-26-2005, 10:51 PM

If I had the money to get it would be all that stood in my way.

civic1784 · 05-28-2005, 04:03 PM

- Straight six
- Six speed manual transmission
- A back seat
- Wide wheel base
- Reasonable sticker price

saint · 05-30-2005, 07:37 AM

Im thinking:
2+2 coupe.
Wider then a S2000.Why?
SO people over 5.10" can fit in it comfortably.

2.2L-2.4L with 8000rpm redline.
Stock 17" 5-lugs
Acura TL sized diskbrakes.

Basicaly:
RWD RSX A-spec, with a K24/ F20C, 17" wheels and TL disks brakes.

Nathan123 · 05-30-2005, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by njn63

You know, i'd like to know one race series where they worry about having a lot of torque. Like, more torque than horsepower for example. If you could name one that would be great.

I mean, tractors, harley's and semis are all examples of vehicles that have a lot of torque. While people race some of them (i've seen Semi's at Pikes Peak and Harley's in the NHRA), they're hardly successful vs. a decently built vehicle with a lot of hp. Just look at pro stock bike if you need to see what i'm talking about. Harley's have 2800 cc's to the Suzuki 1500 or 1600 cc motors and they're running dead even. Yeah, give me torque!

Oh, shut the fuck up, idiot.
I mean ADEQUATE torque, not tractor torque, you fucking jackass. As in it doesn't feel like a sackless piece of trash under 5000 RPM.

For example:
Nissan 350Z
287 hp / 274 lb-ft

Ford Mustang
300 hp / 320 lb-ft

Anti-example:
Honda S2000
240 hp / 160 lb-ft - Under 5500 RPM? FUCKING FORGET ABOUT IT.

No torque = more shifting. More shifting = stupid waste of time during a race, and at the very least it's annoying.
But I'm sure you would prefer an even more impressive 300 hp @ 9000 RPM / 125 lb-ft @ 7200 RPM to my choice of 320 hp @ 6000 RPM / 300 lb-ft @ 4500 RPM, from what you are saying. THAT would be a sweet drive. Imagine the power band on that thing. Who needs torque?
HONDA POWER, MOTHER FUCKERS.

Oh, and by the way, fuck off and die. Go put words in other people's mouths. And get a clue while you're out there. Your stupid ass was talking 200 pathetic horsepower until I said "torque"... then you're all "racing series" this and "pro stock" that. Idiot.

GoldenAccord99 · 05-30-2005, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathan123

Oh, shut the fuck up, idiot.
I mean ADEQUATE torque, not tractor torque, you fucking jackass. As in it doesn't feel like a sackless piece of trash under 5000 RPM.

For example:
Nissan 350Z
287 hp / 274 lb-ft

Ford Mustang
300 hp / 320 lb-ft

Anti-example:
Honda S2000
240 hp / 160 lb-ft - Under 5500 RPM? FUCKING FORGET ABOUT IT.

No torque = more shifting. More shifting = stupid waste of time during a race, and at the very least it's annoying.
But I'm sure you would prefer an even more impressive 300 hp @ 9000 RPM / 125 lb-ft @ 7200 RPM to my choice of 320 hp @ 6000 RPM / 300 lb-ft @ 4500 RPM, from what you are saying. THAT would be a sweet drive. Imagine the power band on that thing. Who needs torque?
HONDA POWER, MOTHER FUCKERS.

Oh, and by the way, fuck off and die. Go put words in other people's mouths. And get a clue while you're out there. Your stupid ass was talking 200 pathetic horsepower until I said "torque"... then you're all "racing series" this and "pro stock" that. Idiot.

Wow, good comeback, Lets see what njn63 has to say....

Nathan123 · 05-30-2005, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenAccord99

Wow, good comeback, Lets see what njn63 has to say....

I don't really care what he has to say. He brought "tractors, harleys, and semis" into a discussion about "what if" Honda made a new RWD car, in order to make me look bad.
A commom rating for a semi truck engine, for example, is 400+ hp and 1500+ lb-ft. If he REALLY thinks that's what I meant by torque in a fucking Honda, then he is a retarded motherfucker. But I doubt that's the case (too much credit maybe?). I actually think he was just being a condescending ass (for no good fucking reason) and trying to act like he has some amazing grasp of horsepower and physics that is somehow beyond me.

Probly cause I gots a mullet and drive a dumbestic.

GoldenAccord99 · 05-30-2005, 06:37 PM

:clap

Nathan123 · 05-30-2005, 07:12 PM

Toyota Supra TT
320 hp / 315 lb-ft

Chevrolet Z06
405 hp / 400 lb-ft

Ferrari 575M
515 hp / 434 lb-ft

Porsche 911 Turbo S
444 hp / 457 lb-ft

Ford GT
500 hp / 550 lb-ft

Shit, man... it's a good thing you came along when you did... look what all these retarded monkeys have been doing with those sports cars up until now! Better go knock some sense into them. TORQUE IS USELESS, RETARDS!!! I mean, I'm sure some guy that drives a slow ass 15 year old Hoda shitbox knows more than hundreds of engineers from all over the world who design sports cars / exotics that cost into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, right?

You have, at best, a FEEBLE grasp of engine theory. You are talking out your ass and looking like a retard doing it. More torque does NOT lower the redline, and raising the redline is NOT always good. And, you TOTALLY missed my hp/tq comparison (300/125,320/300,etc.).

You fail to understand that on a real race track there are times when shifting WILL NOT be a little convenient thing you do before a little curve at the same time in every fucking car. You have tons of road course experience, don't you? You are BEYOND retarded if you honestly believe an S2000, for example will not lose time shifting to a C6 Vette. And that it's not a pain listening to the engine wind down when it should be winding up, requireing yet ANOTHER downshift.

Since you are obviously another one of the blind Honda sack-huggers who thinks VTEC, or any other Honda passenger car technology, is for performance and comes from racing research, and the world NEEDS another S2000 instead of a decent RWD Prelude replacement... go away.

Nathan123 · 05-30-2005, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by njn63

I thought about this more while i was outside and though of an interesting point. How many other cars does the vq30de out of the 350z go in? I'm pretty sure the Maxima is one of them and the one it was originally in. Much heavier car that needs the torque. I don't know the engine code on the Mustang, but Ford doesn't know much about building motors (brutal truth) so i don't care. <- Puts you higher on the retard fanboy list.

While we're throwing out figures, what about the lt1? GM put that thing in EVERYTHING including cars around 4k pounds.
I'm NOT sure how Vette/F-body/Impala is everything....

Now how many cars does the f20c go in? Um... 1. It was purpose built for that roadster and has a powerband to match it. Interesting concept huh? That is one of the reasons i have major respect for Honda, they don't cut corners.
LT5? LS7? Hello?
If i really wanted to hate on domestics, all i'd have to do is ask what the top Chevrolet powered finisher was yesterday in the Indy 500. Yeah, the top one was Buddy Lazier in 5th. What was the top Honda? They took first through fourth place and 7 out of the top 10 cars were Honda powered. Again, respect where respect is due, Honda knows how to build a motor.
I don't care. Unlike you, I'm not hugging any nuts around here. I just want a car that can get out of it's own way.

Nathan123 · 05-30-2005, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by njn63

1/2 of those cars aren't even in the relm of sportscars. No sports car should be forced induction or have 2 valves per cylinder.
What an elitist ass.

I mean, the engineering departments must know a lot when the GT has had 2 recalls so far.
I only know about the control arm recall, and that's NOT a fucking engineering problem, dick. Any other one I'm not sure about.

Ferrari Enzo:
650 bhp / 485 lb-ft

Porsche Carrera GT:
605 HP / 435 ft lb

I believe I'd be just fine with 435 or 485 lb-ft, also.

And i wouldn't judge people by what they drive. I'm going into my fourth year of college studying mechanical engineering. While i don't know everything (so i can't just shut you down beyond belief) i do know what other engine builders have learned. If you needed a torque figure as high or higher than your horsepower to go fast don't you think that the racers would be doing it? Nah, couldn't be. They're only pushing 900hp out of 3.0L, they know nothing.
I don't drive the fucking Indy 500. That is NOT useful passenger car technology, and an engine of the same hp/tq ratio as those cars will NOT be practical.

And expensive doesn't always mean it's good or fast. A FQ400 will keep up with a Murcialago around a track and it's 1/3 of the money.

See Ultima GTR. I have yet to be enlightened by your babbling.

we'll see about that.

wow and i have a feeble grasp or engine theory? More torque is a product of more stroke right?
When it suits your arguement, right? Torque can be gained through many methods, not just stroke. And stroke is the ONLY one of them that will have you win...

More stroke means the piston travels further and makes the rod/stroke ratio worse, both making the car rev lower. Blah blah blah.... more stuff about how revving ungodly high is the way to go blah blah blah.... 10k rpm.

and if you put camshafts to make power at higher rpms it will be good.

to further expand, i stole this from http://www.leecao.com/honda/vtec/whatsvtec.html
Honda chose to explore another method: keep the engine size the same, but turn the engine faster to consume more fuel. Here is an analogy: You want to move foam peanuts from one bucket to another with a cup. You can increase the size of your cup, compress/cram as much peanuts as possible into the cup each time, or you can just move the cup faster. All three methods moves more peanuts. Honda uses the last method. And again, more fuel combusted equals more power generated by the engine.

So, you admit to just trying to be a dickhead? It's not like I don't understand this shit at least as much as you...

you must of missed the 3 times i addressed it. Go back and reread.

No, ass... you missed my point. But nevermind.

Fine, go ahead and believe that. I agree that there will be time it's not conveinent but that's part of the skill in road racing. I don't have a lot of experience road racing or driving an s2000 so i'll bow out on that. I'm sure you have a ton of experience though right?

Not a ton, no... in fact, probably only about 10 laps at Pacific Raceway in the S2000... but that's way more than enough to know that an S2000 is a workout and a half compared to something with a powerband covering more than 2000 RPM.

wow, again, go back and read what you just typed. I'm sure Honda puts VTEC on the k20a2 RSX-S motor for fuel economy right? I mean, it doens't make 100hp/L or anything.

Yes... FUEL ECONOMY. THAT IS ALL, OF COURSE. What else would they use it for.... torque?

i would much rather have another s2000 than a RWD Prelude. That's me though and my opinion.

Than go buy one and stop trying to pick fights about who wants what out of a NEW car, dick.

And i'll stay right here. When you learn to understand how Honda works and it's not a fucking GM that they use the motor in everything under the sun you can come back and try to argue. The f20c was purposely build for one purpose and that was going fast.

Purposely built... for one purpose? Really now?

Not to compete with a Camaro on the drag strip or drive to the store. It was made as a good handling car with an amazing engine that is 5 years ahead of anything any other company has.

The S2000 is SLOWER than a base model Camaro SS around the majority of decent road courses. I don't care how "amazing" you think the engine is or whatever... it's still relatively slow and a pain to really drive fast, plus it can be beaten by a huge "muscle car" with "ancient" suspension and engine technology on it's own turf. If it was ONLY built to go fast, it FAILS miserably. I would have thought it was more than that... but you talked me out of it.

And you are a prick. Yay.