A buddy of mine got a 06 Si and claims that people are running 13.8-14.2 with only intake and exhuast upgrades. He claim he ran a 14.5 bone stock... obviously I know he's bsing through the roof, especially when I asked how he got that time he said "I friend timed it"

None the less I would image this car to get high 14's at best without any modifications.

We'll see when I race him when I get back home....

04 TSX (mods here and there) vs Bone stock Si

He should win, but then again I highly doubt his driving abilities, not that I'm the best driver in the world but he just started learning how to drive stick when he got his car a couple months ago.

 

Make us TSX owners proud,........win that race. LOL














Oh, and street racing is bad.

 

^ Haha no matter how much I agree with you on that one I still manage to do a couple races here and there (trying to be as safe as possible of course).

 

I'd say 14.8 in the 1/4 mile in stock form at best, unless he's a professional.

 

:ib15s:

 

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Sp...ivic&trimid=-1

scroll all the way down to the bottom for 1/4 time.
It's rated at 15.68. You'll need a supercharger to cut down to 14 secs. Most people Bullsh*t and your friend is one of them.

 

Those MSN times are slowwwww...

Hell my '97 TL can beat 15.6 1/4 mile stock (which its not)

 

If we're bringing up published numbers. Both C&D and R&T have tested am Si at ~ 15.1 sec. I thought I saw 14.9 but can't find it.

 

I figure the new Si should be about as quick as the RSX-S, which is good for about a 14.8sec with a >proficient driver. Unless Honda really handcuffed the stock intake/exhaust, it would NOT be an upper 13 second car with just an upgraded aftermarket I/E.

 

Si has a slightly detuned K20A engine, and its 6MT's gear ratio is different.

It shouldn't be faster than RSX-S.

 

Hence,

 

My understanding is Si is nowhere as quick as RSX-S, not "about" as quick.

I could be wrong, though. I haven't read too much of those Si reviews.

 

:ibhesmokesyoubecauseyoucantdriveforbeans:

 

The only dyno I've seen so far (at TOV) the Si put down considerably more power than an 05 RSX-S.

06 Si put down 197.

 

Interesting.

But if I have to choose one between those two I would pick RSX-S. Simply because it is a faster car.

 

I've never driven an Si but I seriously doubt its slower. Probly a driver's race. Mag times, if they mean anything have both in the 14.9-15.1 range.

My guess is Pixel will lose, by a car or two.

 

Edmunds posted a 15.1 seconds @ 93.8mph but , I would rather have the RSX-S too.

 

Not me..

The LSD makes all the difference

 

Yeah I saw the mag times at 15.2 or around there,

I told him I expected to lose anyway, but I guess I'll have to wait till mid may to find out.

 

So I've heard. Which is why I would pick the Si too.

 

I don't know if I'm misinformed or not, but I thought the LSD was better for maintaining a balance of power transfer when accelerating off a turn?

I thought I read somewhere that it does not help with straightline acceleration?

Can someone verify this is right or wrong info?

 

 

hmmmmm..... very interesting topic.
Perhaps some magazines under-rated the Si in 1/4 performance. If the 2006 Civic Si can do 15.2 or even 14.9 (for argument sakes, between 15.2 ~ 14.9) that's damn good for that little car.
I have only seen one on the road and it's sexy. I think the new design of the civic looks the best among the past gens. However, with just intake, exhaust... I don't see cutting down to 14.2. I'll give it at 14.6 for a really experience 1/4 mile driver because many of them are rookie drivers. How many of them really hit the tracks and can really hault down 1/4 that well?...........
Without any kind of F/I, I just don't see the civic doing 13.8.

 

You would think that but Honda is turning in to crap. At least Mitsubishi had enough balls to get there 2006 V6 at 263 horse. Honda isn't trying it seems like when it comes to performance.

I like my ol' 96 RL V6.

 

You would think that but Honda is turning in to crap. At least Mitsubishi had enough balls to get there 2006 V6 at 263 horse. Honda isn't trying it seems like when it comes to performance.

I like my ol' 96 RL V6.
Acura seems to be the only getting things right from Honda.

 

What does the 3.8L V6 have anything to do with this topic?

 

Anyone see the June Motortrend? Si vs. GTi. They posted a 0-60 time of 6.3 and 1/4 at 14.9 @ 94.7 for the Si. Not too bad. I would love to give an RSX-S a run and see how close we are.

 

Hey, MSZ. . I don't mean any offense.. but isn't your avatar picture, the dictator from China or N. Korea? Sorry hijacking the thread. Just had to ask

 

Mao was the chairman of the CPC.

 

That's about as much as an S2000 will put down.

 

Heres a 2006 SI at the Nurburing.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...071&q=civic+si


Sounds real nice @ 197 hp.

 

According to this vid someone ran the 1/4 mile at 14.27s @ 96MPH with just a catback in a '06 Civic SI. Not too shabby.

 

Mao being the same person who coined the oxymoronic term People's Democratic Dictatorship.

 

Yea, that too.

 

dude needs to get some balls, and learn how to drive

 

I'd say if he had a good R/T and a intake and exhaust and decent tires. he's good for 14.5.
I just thought of a good race.
a 03 CL 6 speed stock vs new Civic Si with a intake and exhaust. I think it would be dead even.

 

Last week I raced a new SI with exhaust from a 20-80 punch and beat him about 2 to 3 cars but I'm modded.

 

It may sound like BS. But Monday I ran a new Mustang GT Convertible from 80 to 110 and lost by only 1 car (My nose was at the rear bumper). The chick driving stopped at a rest stop so I stopped to talk. It was an Auto. This is a pretty good zone for the Si. 80 mph puts the Si at the low end of vtec in 4th.

 

i'd like to give a go against a new Si w/ my lude...I was able to pull a car on the cl-s so who knows. The new Si is definitely a great car no doubt; just not a fan of the looks too much

 

6.3 may be a tad optimistic. MT and C&D correct their times for temp etc. Methinks they miscalculated here or got a ringer.

R&T's numbers are reliable in the sense that the publish what they get. There are no corrections involved. Which explains their sometimes slower numbers.