9000revs

Than 1G? I mean with bolt ons and tune.

Thanks,

Abhi

thoiboi

yes

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

it's the same engine.
but heavier car.
bolt ons didnt do shit for the 1st gen.
why would you think it would do more for a heavier car?

both generations; you had the ability to tune.
the only advantage the 2nd gen has is the bigger v6 engine.

9000revs

From what I read the 2G had more potential as it was slightly detuned from factory. How much heavier 1G vs 2G 4 cyl?

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

1st gen - 3200-3400lbs depending on which transmission you had.
2nd gen - 3400-3700lbs. the heftier version is probably from the V6 engine.

at the lightest, the 1st gen TSX is 3200lbs and bolts ons didnt make the car any quicker.
bolt ons for the 2nd gen will result in worse results because of the heftier car.

They both have k24's with about 200 crank HP.
the weight in the 2nd gen WILL hinder performance. Unless you go for the bigger v6 engine

9000revs

I dd not own a 1G, but from what I heard, bolt ons and tune make a noticeable difference to the K24 engine.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

because of how light weight and "nimble" it is.
to clarify; only the 6MT was the fun one...because you can choose your own shifts and the tranny only weighed like 200lbs as opposed to the auto tranny that weighs like 400-600lbs

if you are looking for a fun car; the 1st gen 6MT with bolt ons would be it.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

also, when I think of bolt ons.. air intake, downpipe, exhaust...you're only adding like 10hp to the wheels.
200 crank - drivetrain loss = about 150hp. + 10hp = ABOUT 160 to the wheels in a 3200lb car. not good.

9000revs

Apparently intake, header, exhaust and ecu reflash gains about 30 whp and more tq

BROlando

Y'all need to eat your wheaties.

The manual trans weighs like?? maybe 80-100LB.

Auto probably 120-150ish.

The K24A2 in the 1st gen also reacted really well to bolt ons and tuning. Then again...maybe I'm thinking of Michael Bolton and Crooning?

An intake and reflash on the K24A2 makes like 30whp in the midrange, IIRC.

There are like 280ish WHP K24A2's out there with ZERO aftermarket engine components (with bolt ons and ECU tuning).

I don't think the 2G responds nearly as well.

Stock A2's put down 170ish HP through the 6MT and 160ish thru the slushbox. The 06-08 A2's are also a bit under rated....and are graded at "205hp" on the newer SAE scale.

BROlando

COT dang my biceps are accurate as scales.

http://www.superstreetonline.com/how-to/transmission-drivetrain/1306-honda-engine-drivetrain-weights/

http://forums.clubrsx.com/showthread.php?t=730211

Aaronpasko

This car needed the 2.4 turbo motor they put in the rdx.

BROlando

Its a 2.3.

I've been saying that for years, though. Station wagon would be better with an RDX SH drive train.

Aaronpasko

With a stick shift of course...lol

BROlando

Indeed! Or DCT.

Kinda like an Audi...but less breakable.

ImBroke

Wagon needs the diesel, and the MT.
Just my opinion, of course.

BROlando

I'm not familiar with any Honda diesel offerings. There are no diesel Honda options in the US.

ImBroke

They have had the N22 with 6MT in the Accord for a while, but of course not in this market. The new variant was hitting 76 mpg. I could do a wagon with 60+ mpg and a manual trans.