that RSX- Type S with 200HP can run 0-60 in 6.1 sec and 1/4 mile in 14.9. These numbers were gotten from this month Car and Drive issue. The car is rated as a Top Ten pick by C&D. Could this be true because it seem somewhat odd this car would be quicker than a CL-S auto and right on the tale of a CL-S 6 spd.

By the way is saw the performance numbers for the Cl-S 6 speed on Motorweek program and is not shaby. 0-60 was 5.9 sec and 1/4 was 14.4 at 96 or 97MPH. Not bad. Arent the CL-S auto running about 6.3-6.4 sec in the 0-60MPH test.


Opinions welcomed and thanks in advance.

 

They tend to over inflate numbers but that is quite possible, i believe that the auto was around closer to 6.5 0-60 but i can easily be wrong

 

Those numbers are very true. I was really set on getting an RSX-S until I drove one a few times and noticed that I would prefer a larger car.

Don't doubt the speed created in the 2.0, that car can hold its own and don't even get me started on cornering

 

I know I might get bagged for saying it, but I think the RSX is a tight little car, love the interior design. It a quick little thing, it was of the cars i really wanted to buy after my prelude was totaled, but the insurance would have been too high. So i found my CL and its history from there.

My only complaint about that car is the fact that there is no armrest, that and after getting back into a larger car again, i dont think i could go that small ever again, unless they make a new prelude one day

 

cos CL, like many americans, is a fatass

and weight being enemy #1 for speed freaks

 

Yep, it's the weight thing. My 2003 CLS6 was preceded by a 2002 RSX-S. I think the CLS weighs about 870 pounds more-that's a lot. And the RSX-S does seem nimbler in the corners. But the biggest difference I see is that the RSX was really happy to launch to the redline in every gear until you got paranoid of the cops. I find the CLS6 hard to launch, but once out of first gear it is really pretty quick.

Gearing issues aside, it is really called the "power to weight" ratio.

Assuming the RSX-S is ~2600 lbs and 200 hp, and the CLS6 is 3,470 lbs and 260 hp, the numbers work out like this:

RSX-S: 13 lbs/hp. CLS6: 13.35 lbs/hp. We always look at pounds per hp when assessing the performance of unfamiliar airplanes. Airplanes have another factor that is closely associated; wing loading, but it works oppositely. If the wing loading is high (50 lbs/sq. ft. of wing), the thing will go like stink. If low (15 lbs/sq.ft), it will be slow.

 

RSX-S curb weight is 2778 lbs. Info here: http://www.new-cars.com/2003/acura/acura-rsx-specs.html

 

That's funny shit...never heard it before.

 

cls autos will take a rsx type s

 

how do you figure it will "take" a rsx-s, do you think it should just because it has less hp, i had a GTS with 180hp and it would stay right along with a cl-s auto.

 

a competent manual driver i.e. someone w/extended past exp. in honda vtec engines and manual trannies, put in a rsx type S vs. a stock cl-s auto will be a good race


i'd give the edge after 75 mph to the cl-s though