RX-8 vs Civic SI
03-01-2006, 02:49 PM
#26
The Prototype
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by lshu
I drove the Civic Si at the Chevrolet Drive Center event last Sunday. It is decently quick, but not as fast as the 8. Not too much torque in the lower rpms, but the power builds as rpms increase and there is a noticable kick in power when it hits VTEC. No noticeable torque steer like I experienced in the previous generation Si. There is plenty of body roll in the corners, and overall handling/grip is decent.
The interior is too futuristic and wierd for my taste. The gas pedal is attached to the floor instead of where it is normally attached to, didn't make much difference to me in driving. One thing I really liked was the shifter. It was very similar to the 8 with its short throw and precise feel. The shift **** felt light and the shifts felt a little more soft/cushioned than those in the 8.
I have an in-car video at home of me driving the course, I'll post it when I get home from work.
I also drove the Cobalt SS (which is Chevy's competition for the Si) and that thing is FUN. Noticeably more torque, car is more grippy and tossable (probably due to the Pirelli tires that I saw on them, do they come stock?). Interior feels cheap though other than the leather.
The interior is too futuristic and wierd for my taste. The gas pedal is attached to the floor instead of where it is normally attached to, didn't make much difference to me in driving. One thing I really liked was the shifter. It was very similar to the 8 with its short throw and precise feel. The shift **** felt light and the shifts felt a little more soft/cushioned than those in the 8.
I have an in-car video at home of me driving the course, I'll post it when I get home from work.
I also drove the Cobalt SS (which is Chevy's competition for the Si) and that thing is FUN. Noticeably more torque, car is more grippy and tossable (probably due to the Pirelli tires that I saw on them, do they come stock?). Interior feels cheap though other than the leather.
Hey i got to drive the cobalt SS too, its fun, haven't driven the Si yet, but if its anything like driving a RSX-S , then it will sell well. The RSX-S has to be one of the finest FWD platforms i ever driven. If ihad to chose between the Si and RSX-S, i would go for the RSX-S. Looks better IMO....don't know if its any faster , or handles better, but the RSX-S is easier on the eyes.
03-01-2006, 03:55 PM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portsmouth NH
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I literally just drove a WRX limited, in no way shape or form was it as quick as my car, it felt much slower at all speeds. I don't know what to say, maybe they break in a bunch. My gf was with me as well, maybe it just doesn't feel fast??? I don't know but there was a big diffrence with our butt dyno's from the 8 to the rex. I have driven a SI as well, it was a dog compared to both, great typical honda stuff, great detail, shifter etc....but not much nut. The GLI I drove the other day with a the good ole standard 6 speed felt much quicker than the honda and the WRX. Just to note I have driven several STI's it feels like a totally diffrent animal than the base rex, those pull and pull and pull and pull, well you get the idea. I don't just go drive cars and waste peoples time either,(I didn't just get an EVO) my lease is almost up..time for a change. Oh and if your over 6'3" you look "touched" tolling around in a SI IMO.
03-01-2006, 04:07 PM
#29
Driving makes me :)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DailyDriver2k5
Hey i got to drive the cobalt SS too, its fun, haven't driven the Si yet, but if its anything like driving a RSX-S , then it will sell well. The RSX-S has to be one of the finest FWD platforms i ever driven. If ihad to chose between the Si and RSX-S, i would go for the RSX-S. Looks better IMO....don't know if its any faster , or handles better, but the RSX-S is easier on the eyes.
03-01-2006, 05:15 PM
#30
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgetown
Posts: 1,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
I'm sorry facts bother you so much.
Ike, there has yet to be a comprehensive test of the revised (by 3 hp) '06 WRX by any reliable source, yet here you are once again pulling "facts" out of your ***.
PLEASE, pull a hammer out of your *** next and hit yourself senseless with it.
03-01-2006, 05:28 PM
#31
06 WRX puts 200+ hp and 230+ ft/lb to the wheels. That is significantly more than the previous WRX ( 180 whp and 180 wtq, IIRC) and the Rx-8. The increased rating of 3hp doesn't tell the story.
Last edited by BlueEyes; 03-01-2006 at 05:31 PM.
03-01-2006, 05:50 PM
#32
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BlueEyes
06 WRX puts 200+ hp and 230+ ft/lb to the wheels. That is significantly more than the previous WRX ( 180 whp and 180 wtq, IIRC) and the Rx-8. The increased rating of 3hp doesn't tell the story.
Guys have hit high 13 second 1/4 miles with traps near 100mph in the '06 WRX.
Last edited by Ike; 03-01-2006 at 05:53 PM.
03-01-2006, 05:53 PM
#33
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by dwill9578
I literally just drove a WRX limited, in no way shape or form was it as quick as my car, it felt much slower at all speeds. I don't know what to say, maybe they break in a bunch. My gf was with me as well, maybe it just doesn't feel fast??? I don't know but there was a big diffrence with our butt dyno's from the 8 to the rex. I have driven a SI as well, it was a dog compared to both, great typical honda stuff, great detail, shifter etc....but not much nut. The GLI I drove the other day with a the good ole standard 6 speed felt much quicker than the honda and the WRX. Just to note I have driven several STI's it feels like a totally diffrent animal than the base rex, those pull and pull and pull and pull, well you get the idea. I don't just go drive cars and waste peoples time either,(I didn't just get an EVO) my lease is almost up..time for a change. Oh and if your over 6'3" you look "touched" tolling around in a SI IMO.
03-01-2006, 06:00 PM
#34
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
What he said...
Guys have hit high 13 second 1/4 miles with traps near 100mph in the '06 WRX.
Guys have hit high 13 second 1/4 miles with traps near 100mph in the '06 WRX.
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...0&page=1&pp=25
Also, keep in mind the '06 WRX has put down a little more power than a Legacy GT and Forester XT on a dyno, the Forester XT ran 13.8 in C&D, the Legacy GT has run high 13s and low 14s in mags many times.
03-01-2006, 06:07 PM
#35
The Prototype
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
What he said...
Guys have high 13 second 1/4 miles with traps near 100mph in the '06 WRX.
Guys have high 13 second 1/4 miles with traps near 100mph in the '06 WRX.
Yeah that is impressive, the fastest i trapped was 13.9?? at 100.The planets were in alignment that day....
Regular times was 14.2-14.6 trapping low to mid 90's...Oh stock 2k2/2k3 255HP/245TRQ Maximas put out 205WHP-209WHP-Auto tragics, 212-215WHP -6 -speed. WTRQ is around 220-226...depending on condition, variables, etc...
Ike you also got to understand that the 2k2/2k3 Maximas only wiegh 3200 and change ... lbs. Your WRX/Sti is around 34??-35??lbs, plus you have to look at gearing for both vehicles. Stop looking at HP numbers.....
The Maxima for that year was and is the fastest Maxima ever produced by Nissan.And it will embaress many cars , such as i did in execution than theroy.
The newest Maxima which should have been the Altima Se-R , the new Maxima is a slug of a butt!
The WRX/Sti are fast, my Maxima was just faster....
From a stand still the Wrx /Sti would kill me as any RWD. But from a roll, that Maxima would give most cars a run for there money.
03-01-2006, 06:21 PM
#36
WRX weighs anywhere from 3196lbs to 3296 lbs depending on transmission and packages. The STI weighs 3350lbs.
We're talking about 2006 WRX too, whcih as I showed is significantly more powerful.
We're talking about 2006 WRX too, whcih as I showed is significantly more powerful.
03-01-2006, 06:32 PM
#37
The Prototype
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BlueEyes
WRX weighs anywhere from 3196lbs to 3296 lbs depending on transmission and packages. The STI weighs 3350lbs.
We're talking about 2006 WRX too, whcih as I showed is significantly more powerful.
We're talking about 2006 WRX too, whcih as I showed is significantly more powerful.
Because before all this Evo/WRX/Evo craze, the 1st gen DSM Eclipse GSX(AWD) in modified form was making some pretty impressive feats wether in the WHP/WTRQ department , 1/4 mile times and even top end speed. To bad DSM have such crappy trannies , that can't handle all that power delivery to the wheels....
I just would love to see the WRX/STi, Evo become more than just a acceleration monster out of the box, it needs to be more of a all around performance car IMO.
Last edited by DailyDriver2k5; 03-01-2006 at 06:38 PM.
03-01-2006, 06:40 PM
#38
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DailyDriver2k5
Yeah that is impressive, the fastest i trapped was 13.9?? at 100.The planets were in alignment that day.... Regular times was 14.2-14.6 trapping low to mid 90's...
Oh stock 2k2/2k3 255HP/245TRQ Maximas put out 205WHP-209WHP-Auto tragics, 212-215WHP -6 -speed. WTRQ is around 220-226...depending on condition, variables, etc...
Ike you also got to understand that the 2k2/2k3 Maximas only wiegh 3200 and change ... lbs. Your WRX/Sti is around 34??-35??lbs, plus you have to look at gearing for both vehicles. Stop looking at HP numbers.....
The Maxima for that year was and is the fastest Maxima ever produced by Nissan.And it will embaress many cars , such as i did in execution than theroy.
The newest Maxima which should have been the Altima Se-R , the new Maxima is a slug of a butt!
The WRX/Sti are fast, my Maxima was just faster....
From a stand still the Wrx /Sti would kill me as any RWD. But from a roll, that Maxima would give most cars a run for there money.
Regular times was 14.2-14.6 trapping low to mid 90's...Oh stock 2k2/2k3 255HP/245TRQ Maximas put out 205WHP-209WHP-Auto tragics, 212-215WHP -6 -speed. WTRQ is around 220-226...depending on condition, variables, etc...
Ike you also got to understand that the 2k2/2k3 Maximas only wiegh 3200 and change ... lbs. Your WRX/Sti is around 34??-35??lbs, plus you have to look at gearing for both vehicles. Stop looking at HP numbers.....
The Maxima for that year was and is the fastest Maxima ever produced by Nissan.And it will embaress many cars , such as i did in execution than theroy.
The newest Maxima which should have been the Altima Se-R , the new Maxima is a slug of a butt!
The WRX/Sti are fast, my Maxima was just faster....
From a stand still the Wrx /Sti would kill me as any RWD. But from a roll, that Maxima would give most cars a run for there money.
You're also way off with your weights, the '02+ WRX weighed 3085, the new '06 TR weighs a little under 3200 and STI is a little under 3300. The STI might weigh a little more than your Maxima, but I'll take the fast fun to drive STI over the torquesteering, ill handling boat, thanks.
03-01-2006, 06:56 PM
#40
The Prototype
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
Look man, I owned a Maxima before I traded it on a WRX, so lets keep the bragging to a minimum because I know what they're all about. I also know what guys run with various mods, and with the mods you claimed to have you're being a bit hopeful unless you forgot to mention your 50 shot. Even if it's stock you're not taking an STI, WRX, sure. But then again you're comparing a modded car to a stock car, put some mods on the WRX and STI and see where your boat would have stood.
You're also way off with your weights, the '02+ WRX weighed 3085, the new '06 TR weighs a little under 3200 and STI is a little under 3300. The STI might weigh a little more than your Maxima, but I'll take the fast fun to drive STI over the torquesteering, ill handling boat, thanks.
You're also way off with your weights, the '02+ WRX weighed 3085, the new '06 TR weighs a little under 3200 and STI is a little under 3300. The STI might weigh a little more than your Maxima, but I'll take the fast fun to drive STI over the torquesteering, ill handling boat, thanks.
What year maxima did you own?
Also i was running a full intake not just some pipe and a filter...
Had intake manifold ported , restrictor plate taken off,pre-cats were off, had a custom cat-back race exhaust made, exhaust weighed 17lbs. Also had the car tuned.... now i don't know what Maxima you had, but 2k2/2k3 Maximas stock run 14.6-14.9 stock. And if you know anything about the Vq3.5, because its detuned in the Maxima , it adapts pretty well ,to basic bolt on mods, much better than its Z/g35 counterparts which are pretty muched tuned out in N/A form. Also it doesn't take 50 shot to break into the high 13's with a 2k2/2k3 Maxima, just the removal of a spare tire, jack, and 1/4 tank of gas and some good driver and launch skills to boot and some basic bolt ons. Notice in my previous post i said i did this"once".....not consistent runs of that time.
So far the fastest N/A VQ3.5 Maxima with all bolt ons , no rear seat ,and some more weight reducing items, tuning, lighter wheels is pulling mid 12's.........not bad for a family grocery getter.
Last edited by DailyDriver2k5; 03-01-2006 at 07:01 PM.
03-01-2006, 07:10 PM
#42
"Call me Darkman"
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Toronto/Florida
Posts: 2,034
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
twwwisssstttttttttYYYYYYYYYYIIIIIIIIIIZZZZZZZZZZAA AAAAAALLLlllllllllllAAAAAAbbbbbboooooouuuuutttttTT TThhhhhhheeeeeeeTTTTTTTTTwWWWWWWWWIIIIIIIIIIIISSSS SSSSSTTTTtTTTTTIIIIIIIIIEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS.
03-01-2006, 07:12 PM
#43
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DailyDriver2k5
What year maxima did you own?
Also i was running a full intake not just some pipe and a filter...
Had intake manifold ported , restrictor plate taken off,pre-cats were off, had a custom cat-back race exhaust made, exhaust weighed 17lbs. Also had the car tuned.... now i don't know what Maxima you had, but 2k2/2k3 Maximas stock run 14.6-14.9 stock. And if you know anything about the Vq3.5, because its detuned in the Maxima , it adapts pretty well ,to basic bolt on mods, much better than its Z/g35 counterparts which are pretty muched tuned out in N/A form. Also it doesn't take 50 shot to break into the high 13's with a 2k2/2k3 Maxima, just the removal of a spare tire, jack, and 1/4 tank of gas and some good driver and launch skills to boot. Notice in my previous post i said i did this"once".....not consistent runs of that time.
So far the fastest N/A VQ3.5 Maxima with all bolt ons , no rear seat ,and some more weight reducing items, tuning, lighter wheels is pulling mid 12's.........not bad for a family grocery getter.
Also i was running a full intake not just some pipe and a filter...
Had intake manifold ported , restrictor plate taken off,pre-cats were off, had a custom cat-back race exhaust made, exhaust weighed 17lbs. Also had the car tuned.... now i don't know what Maxima you had, but 2k2/2k3 Maximas stock run 14.6-14.9 stock. And if you know anything about the Vq3.5, because its detuned in the Maxima , it adapts pretty well ,to basic bolt on mods, much better than its Z/g35 counterparts which are pretty muched tuned out in N/A form. Also it doesn't take 50 shot to break into the high 13's with a 2k2/2k3 Maxima, just the removal of a spare tire, jack, and 1/4 tank of gas and some good driver and launch skills to boot. Notice in my previous post i said i did this"once".....not consistent runs of that time.
So far the fastest N/A VQ3.5 Maxima with all bolt ons , no rear seat ,and some more weight reducing items, tuning, lighter wheels is pulling mid 12's.........not bad for a family grocery getter.
I owned a 95 GLE 5 speed, fairly rare and the fastest of the 4th gens (My brother had a 97 SE). The car never really did it for me, even after some mods. I test drove a 5th gen 6 speed a couple times, and liked it even less, was faster but torque steer was worse and it felt like a big hulking car, even compared to my 4th gen. It was a good highway cruiser and for the money was a great car to get me through a time where I needed minimal car payments.
03-01-2006, 07:13 PM
#44
The Prototype
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DARKMAZ8
twwwisssstttttttttYYYYYYYYYYIIIIIIIIIIZZZZZZZZZZAA AAAAAALLLlllllllllllAAAAAAbbbbbboooooouuuuutttttTT TThhhhhhheeeeeeeTTTTTTTTTwWWWWWWWWIIIIIIIIIIIISSSS SSSSSTTTTtTTTTTIIIIIIIIIEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS.
lol....
03-01-2006, 07:34 PM
#45
The Prototype
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
Maybe I wasn't clear, with I/E and y pipe you're not going to be trapping 103+, which is what it would take to show up a STI from a roll.
I owned a 95 GLE 5 speed, fairly rare and the fastest of the 4th gens (My brother had a 97 SE). The car never really did it for me, even after some mods. I test drove a 5th gen 6 speed a couple times, and liked it even less, was faster but torque steer was worse and it felt like a big hulking car, even compared to my 4th gen. It was a good highway cruiser and for the money was a great car to get me through a time where I needed minimal car payments.
I owned a 95 GLE 5 speed, fairly rare and the fastest of the 4th gens (My brother had a 97 SE). The car never really did it for me, even after some mods. I test drove a 5th gen 6 speed a couple times, and liked it even less, was faster but torque steer was worse and it felt like a big hulking car, even compared to my 4th gen. It was a good highway cruiser and for the money was a great car to get me through a time where I needed minimal car payments.
Both cars excel in diffrent areas...all i am saying the WRX/Sti are not that impressive on top end. No need to get upset or disgruntal, hell my 99 GT stang was great till about 110, but got walked on a from mere bolt on preludes vtecs, integras, etc. Some cars are better than others in top end, some not...
03-01-2006, 07:47 PM
#46
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DailyDriver2k5
I never said i was trapping 103 mph.........also 1/4 mile racing is alot diffrent from going from a roll till your car runs out of steam or until you run out of road. I am not going to mention how fast i was going when i ran that Sti, all you need to know it was serious triple digit speeds.As long as the car your going against is in a ball park figure , as far as weight, gearing, Hp and trq, anything is possible....also did you see where i said from a dig, the max had no chance against a Sti/Wrx. Barley touching the gas will spin those front tires , launching the max was the most challenging part about that car.
Both cars excel in diffrent areas...all i am saying the WRX/Sti are not that impressive on top end. No need to get upset or disgruntal, hell my 99 GT stang was great till about 110, but got walked on a from mere bolt on preludes vtecs, integras, etc. Some cars are better than others in top end, some not...
Both cars excel in diffrent areas...all i am saying the WRX/Sti are not that impressive on top end. No need to get upset or disgruntal, hell my 99 GT stang was great till about 110, but got walked on a from mere bolt on preludes vtecs, integras, etc. Some cars are better than others in top end, some not...
03-01-2006, 07:55 PM
#47
The Prototype
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
Not getting disgruntled, I've never said the WRX was that impressive on the topend. My point was it's about the same as an RX-8.
03-01-2006, 08:07 PM
#48
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Blue87Sport
I agree with Ike except about maintenance and reliability. I think an NA rotary is just as, or more, reliable than a Honda piston engine. Maintenace on the rotary is primarily fluids and plugs. And one timing belt replacment buys a lot of oil changes. I would expect both engines to last upwards of 200K miles without major problems. As a long time rotary owner as well as a Honda owner, I'm impressed by both when it comes to reliability.
Honda makes great cars and there's no reason to think the Si won't be one as well.
I would expect both engines to last upwards of 200K miles without major problems. As a long time rotary owner as well as a Honda owner, I'm impressed by both when it comes to reliability.Honda makes great cars and there's no reason to think the Si won't be one as well.
Last edited by Japan8; 03-01-2006 at 09:24 PM.
03-01-2006, 08:35 PM
#49
Extraordinary Engineering
I had a '98 civic and must say that the car was the least rewarding car I have ever driven: An appliance on wheels. Also the honda dealer used for service was the worst I have experienced. The car was in for a for number of problems that the dealer was not able to solve. I do not consider honda a great car and would caution people against the assumption that they are somehow superior to Mazda or others.
While I'm ranting, the Dodge Charger I am renting while my '8 is in the shop has been a disappointment. From all the good press I expected better. It feels and drives like a truck, responds in a heavy, ponderous manner to any input and sucks gas faster than my '8.
I can't wait to get my '8 back.
Edit: In case you are wondering see https://www.rx8club.com/rx-8-discussion-3/hit-animal-way-home-83692/
While I'm ranting, the Dodge Charger I am renting while my '8 is in the shop has been a disappointment. From all the good press I expected better. It feels and drives like a truck, responds in a heavy, ponderous manner to any input and sucks gas faster than my '8.
I can't wait to get my '8 back.
Edit: In case you are wondering see https://www.rx8club.com/rx-8-discussion-3/hit-animal-way-home-83692/
Last edited by DarkBrew; 03-01-2006 at 08:38 PM.
03-01-2006, 09:23 PM
#50
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^ yeah that too. The Honda dealer I was taking my Prelude to for service didn't know sh&t. I was lucky that after 3 visits, new plugs, wires, distributor and more they finally figured out that it was the timing belt and changed it before it broke... AGAIN! Too bad after dropping all that change from MY pocket when I was a poor college student the damn car got hit by an SUV and totalled.
My friend who swears by Honda spends God only knows how much money on "maintenance" of that car. Sure it has never broken down on him, but on the other hand, he takes the car in multiple times a year for "maintenance work"... by now he has about replaced all the drivetrain components. And his car is 100% stock.
The cars look and feel more "quality"... like the Civic doesn't feel so economy inside (and this was a rental car!), but don't be fooled by this. Honda reliablity ain't the same as what's advertised.
My friend who swears by Honda spends God only knows how much money on "maintenance" of that car. Sure it has never broken down on him, but on the other hand, he takes the car in multiple times a year for "maintenance work"... by now he has about replaced all the drivetrain components. And his car is 100% stock.
The cars look and feel more "quality"... like the Civic doesn't feel so economy inside (and this was a rental car!), but don't be fooled by this. Honda reliablity ain't the same as what's advertised.