As most of us know, RDX has higher torque (260 HP) than horsepower (240 HP). Personally, I think it is kind of cool and fun when I accelerate. I guess this is the major contributor to the RDX's fun to drive nature ! I am wondering what are the other cars like this ? I look at lot of cars with higher horsepower but they have even lower torque.

 

How about the S/SL/CL65 AMG with 604hp and 738lb-ft of torque?

 

Nice but totally impractical to drive a 600+ hp car on the street.

 

I have only driven high horsepower, low torque cars only a few times in my life and there is a huge difference. I prefer more torque as the biggest problem in mountain driving is lack of power when loaded up with gear typically seen with the high horsepower engines. Not that I tow a lot or this and that but I prefer having enough power to get up a hill efficiently both speed wise and fuel wise. Around the city it's also nice to have a lot of low end torque with stop and go traffic but certainly not as much of a concern for me. Calgary's northwest does seem to have a good amount of hills so the more torque, the better.

 

Its principle I suppose, because then one may beg to argue the point that we should all drive Honda Civic and Toyota Prius hybrids, with the exception of utility trucks for those who apply them in their workfield I would assume. Human nature to always want more right? If everyone reached a level that they were content with wouldnt you beg to agree with me that we would be living in a Marxist environment? +1 for myself lol.

 

Try an Acura RSX-S: wonderful car, and the performance numbers look great on paper, but you should drive one in city traffic before you buy. I sense that too often you'd find that when you need it there's just nothing there, regardless of gear; this car would be fun on a racetrack, though.

The TSX also requires that you think about what you're trying to do, but that's what we call skill. Continuing the progression, I like the TL 6MT a lot, but I'd either lose my wife, or my license - or both - in a week, if I had one of those.

 

I think pretty much all deisel engines are built like that.

 

Diesel engines are high torque low HP by nature, and they make it all in a tiny RPM band.

Mike

 

SL AMG weighs 4,564 lb. WAY too heavy for a *sports* car.

 

I have had six Integras/RSXs since 1989, and I've never had a problem driving in city traffic. You just need to keep the revs up and know how to use your gears.
I'd still have an RSX/S if they made them with SH-AWD.

 

Haha. . . no one called it a sports car; it's a grand tourer, no doubt. But it does hit 60 in about 4.2 seconds, probably quicker. And to address the previous comment that the 600hp isn't usable on the street: yeah, you're probably right. Reviewers can't stop complaining about wheelspin on these cars, but on the bright side, they have astonishing top end acceleration, far beyond your wildest dreams (though not relevant to legal driving).

 

A Pontiac Grand Prix GTP with the supercharged 3.8 litre engine has more torque than hp. 280ft-lbs versus 240hp.

Hope to have an RDX parked next to my GTP really soon!!

George

 

Common with turbocharged engines. Examples,

Audi A4 2.0T - 200/207 (hp/torque)
Mazda CX-7 - 244/258
Mazdaspeed3 - 263/280
Saab 9-3 turbo 4 - 210/221
Volvo S60/V70 2.5T - 208/236
Volvo S40/V50 T5 - 218/236