|
|
|
|
 |
NealX
 |
|
TOV will be attending SEMA this month after a long hiatus.
I'd look for something of more interest to the "enthusiast" to be on display there. :-)
|
rev2damoon
|
|
Neal wrote:
TOV will be attending SEMA this month after a long hiatus.
I'd look for something of more interest to the "enthusiast" to be on display there. :-)
|
Could you elaborate a bit more on that? Throw us a bone and just let us run with it.:)
|
superchg2
|
|
|
From Honda or aftermarket?
|
TonyEX
|
|
owequitit wrote:
TonyE wrote:
 \
owequitit wrote:
You gonna crank that up to 11 before or after you prove what a man you are by doing burn outs through crosswalks?
And for the record, you wouldn't prove a thing with your 1.75x engine with 50% more cylinders and 80 more HP except for what a douche you were being. It isn't like we would be jealous, because at the end of the day, I would have a car that is a lot smaller, lighter, more connected and ultimately more fun. And you know damn well that in any enthusiast driving contest that didn't involve public endangerment (like going to a track), you would have your ass handed to you by an 8th gen Si in any situation that didn't rely on pure thrust.
And for the record, rather than be jealous, I would take the money I saved by NOT buying an Accord to prove VTEC is stupid and invest it in a Kraftwerks supercharger that would be summarily used to stomp V6 6 speed Accords into the ground. I would even leave the exhaust 100% stock so you couldn't hear me over the sound of how awesome you are.
|
The cars that I buy and lease are priced so low that we can (barely) afford to send one kid to a private out of state university and another one to a local public institution.
I suppose that if I wanted to race.. hell, I would get myself an old Datsun 510 and race _that_.
|
It has little bearing to anything Tony. First, I went to an expensive private university, and busted my ass to do so, so I am not sure exactly what you are insinuating, but it is irrelevant to the topic at hand.
|
Aaagh... I didn't expect The Spanish Inquisition!
|
Fan Koni
|
|
superchg2 wrote:
DCR wrote:
this car will put you back in your seat pretty quick and the engine/exhaust sound is amazing. It has a very pronounced growl and you will find yourself revving and squirting the throttle just to feel and hear it.
|
I guess it's got one of them new fangled engine gramophone's that pipes the engine's sounds into the interior!
|
The old ST had it too - even with its wacky Volvo engine.
Anyhow "symposers" are now even built into the 911.
|
JP
|
|
DCR wrote:
JP wrote:
JP wrote:
DCR wrote:
Is that a serious question?
|
why not?
from the 0-60 numbers I can tell that is .3 seconds faster than the '12 Si. but that is in a drag race...
daily driver perception changes...
|
which is ~ 26 ft or almost 2 car lengths...
something like 1 car length in 1st shift and then one more in 2nd shift and that's it...
|
ST:
Power: 252 hp @ 5500 rpm
Torque: 270 lb-ft @ 2700 rpm
Si:
Power: 201 hp @ 7000 rpm
Torque: 170 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm
For "daily driving" the ST felt like it was on power no matter what I was doing, and it really felt like it when I hammered it.
|
IL tested the new ST, 15.0s for the 1/4 mile vs 15.1s of the '12 Si...
http://www.insideline.com/ford/focus/2013/2013-ford-focus-st-full-test.html
wait for ED engine/tranny on the Si, will knock out GTI, ST, MS3 and some other cars...
|
Jack Poland
|
|
JP wrote:
DCR wrote:
JP wrote:
JP wrote:
DCR wrote:
Is that a serious question?
|
why not?
from the 0-60 numbers I can tell that is .3 seconds faster than the '12 Si. but that is in a drag race...
daily driver perception changes...
|
which is ~ 26 ft or almost 2 car lengths...
something like 1 car length in 1st shift and then one more in 2nd shift and that's it...
|
ST:
Power: 252 hp @ 5500 rpm
Torque: 270 lb-ft @ 2700 rpm
Si:
Power: 201 hp @ 7000 rpm
Torque: 170 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm
For "daily driving" the ST felt like it was on power no matter what I was doing, and it really felt like it when I hammered it.
|
IL tested the new ST, 15.0s for the 1/4 mile vs 15.1s of the '12 Si...
http://www.insideline.com/ford/focus/2013/2013-ford-focus-st-full-test.html
wait for ED engine/tranny on the Si, will knock out GTI, ST, MS3 and some other cars...
|
Earth Dreams sucks, it was a bad omen from the start they year they brought it to F1 Honda sucked bad. I even think they lost in IndyCar this year too, i think Chevy beat them in their first year back. Anyway, the whole Honda DNA of racing is a dying breed at this point.
It seems to like the dohc vtec 6 speed is a pretty hard formula to mess up, eventhough dropping the redline is definately the wrong way to go.
Eventhough i am still partial to Honda and unfortunately will wait until Honda puts out something I have to buy.
Right now there is nothing about Honda that would make me buy a car.
|
DrRedsi
|
|
Sorry long time lurker here since 1999(when i got my 99si, followed by 07 MS3, and soon 2013 ST). Never got around to register. Anyway This video is more representative of the stock ST performance. 1/4 mile 14.41 secs @ 97.5 mph.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujnuXb_dLYk
|
DCR
|
|
JP wrote:
wait for ED engine/tranny on the Si, will knock out GTI, ST, MS3 and some other cars...
|
Yeah, well, unless you work for Honda and have some hard data on this, I will believe it when I see it. Given somewhat of a clean slate with ED, I hope they pulled their heads out of collective ass and made a nice Si engine that will surprise us all.
No Civic Si is going to be running on an MS3 unless they do something impressive. Maybe this year at SEMA they won't just be displaying stupid looking cars with stickers all over them and actually announce something exciting they intend to build...like REALLY REALLY build.
|
owequitit
|
|
Jack Poland wrote:
JP wrote:
DCR wrote:
JP wrote:
JP wrote:
DCR wrote:
Is that a serious question?
|
why not?
from the 0-60 numbers I can tell that is .3 seconds faster than the '12 Si. but that is in a drag race...
daily driver perception changes...
|
which is ~ 26 ft or almost 2 car lengths...
something like 1 car length in 1st shift and then one more in 2nd shift and that's it...
|
ST:
Power: 252 hp @ 5500 rpm
Torque: 270 lb-ft @ 2700 rpm
Si:
Power: 201 hp @ 7000 rpm
Torque: 170 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm
For "daily driving" the ST felt like it was on power no matter what I was doing, and it really felt like it when I hammered it.
|
IL tested the new ST, 15.0s for the 1/4 mile vs 15.1s of the '12 Si...
http://www.insideline.com/ford/focus/2013/2013-ford-focus-st-full-test.html
wait for ED engine/tranny on the Si, will knock out GTI, ST, MS3 and some other cars...
|
Earth Dreams sucks, it was a bad omen from the start they year they brought it to F1 Honda sucked bad. I even think they lost in IndyCar this year too, i think Chevy beat them in their first year back. Anyway, the whole Honda DNA of racing is a dying breed at this point.
It seems to like the dohc vtec 6 speed is a pretty hard formula to mess up, eventhough dropping the redline is definately the wrong way to go.
Eventhough i am still partial to Honda and unfortunately will wait until Honda puts out something I have to buy.
Right now there is nothing about Honda that would make me buy a car.
|
I agree for the most part about Earth Dreams, but I feel some of your Indy points need to be addressed:
First, Honda was competitive most of the season, but at least in the first few races I watched, they lost due to circumstance. The Honda cars were generally a little faster in the top end, but not as responsive in the bottom end. Yes, racing is racing, but there is some other stuff that I think comes into play here.
1) Honda committed to the new engine formula long before anyone else did. They were quite a bit further into development when some of the formula was changed, which may have influenced the outcome of the engine program.
2) Chevy paired with Ilmor, which was previously working with Honda on the last gen NA 3.5L V8 engine. Honda decided to go it alone with the new engine program, leaving Ilmor without a partner which then paired up with Chevy. Now granted, Ilmor/Chevy's engine was also all new, but Ilmor and Chevy both have a history of working very well together, and Ilmor is one of the most successful engine designers in open-wheeled US history. Not to say Honda isn't a formidable competitor, but losing to Ilmor isn't exactly shameful either.
3) Remember back to Honda's entrance into CART where they were so uncompetitive in the first year that it was truly sad. This also occurred during the heyday of Honda's racing success, and not long after they withdrew from F1 (part of the reason for the withdraw was due to wanting a higher motorsports profile in the US). The second year with their new engine they dominated everything. They continued to dominate everything so badly, that when Toyota took credit for their Target/Chip Gannasi wins in CART, and then ran to Indy (after getting stomped again by Honda), Honda enlisted Ilmor, followed them to Indy and subsequently beat everyone so badly they all quit leaving Honda as the sole engine supplier.
Personally, I am glad to see Honda take an entire engine program back in house to make a go of it, because it speaks volumes of their willingness to improve on their own. I also find it highly respectable that the engine was designed and built by HPD, which just a few years ago was nothing more than a small division of Honda that did something like ship parts to race teams. The fact that they have competed so well is telling of HPD's progress (as well as their progress in other motorsports). I also expect them to continue to improve based on their previous histories in motorsports, where they didn't usually dominate on the first go. Even in their absolutely stunning F1 rise in the 60's, they did not dominate right out of the gate.
|
RolledaNsx
|
|
owequitit
Ilmor is own by Penske,so when Roger Penske got Chevy to return to Indy Racing it was a no brainer that his own company was going to build it.
Also when Honda first came to Indycar racing they was still stuck in the F1 turbo (very high turbo boost and very small engines) mind set thinking that you had to build a low compression,low rev,over engineered superheavy iron block to last in Indycar Racing.
They fixed that the second year.... because of the low boost rules,it was better to make a high compression,high rev engine like a NA engine and because of the low boost(don't have to worry about throwing rods out the bottom end) make it as light as possible.
And the engine they designed this year was designed to win the Indy 500 and hopefully don't do to bad in the other races.
And they did that!!!!
|
superchg2
|
|
JP wrote:
wait for ED engine/tranny on the Si, will knock out GTI, ST, MS3 and some other cars...
|
Short of going to a Turbocharged/Supercharged engine, it seems pretty unlikely that an ED Si will have the performance chops to compete with these guys.
|
CivicB18
|
|
If we look back a few years we'd all realize the Si has never been the most powerful car in its class nor was it the fastest. However, what made the Si desirable was the drivetrain which was top notch (B16/K20) high revving engine, precise manual transmission and the all around goodness of the chassis. Unfortunately, with the 2012 Si, Honda has a lot of work to do and I really hope Erik Berkman (whos known to be aggressive and highly influential) can give the Si back its soul and character.
~Patrick
|
TonyEX
|
|
CivicB18 wrote:
If we look back a few years we'd all realize the Si has never been the most powerful car in its class nor was it the fastest. However, what made the Si desirable was the drivetrain which was top notch (B16/K20) high revving engine, precise manual transmission and the all around goodness of the chassis. Unfortunately, with the 2012 Si, Honda has a lot of work to do and I really hope Erik Berkman (whos known to be aggressive and highly influential) can give the Si back its soul and character.
~Patrick
|
B16?
ROTFLOL...
It was a BUZZ BOMB.
The GSR's B18C had it all over it.
|
DCR
|
|
|
Tony, he is referring to the Civic Si engines. You might as well comment on the engines in the Space Shuttle, and it would make as much sense as your post.
|
xBeastx
|
|
DCR wrote:
Tony, he is referring to the Civic Si engines. You might as well comment on the engines in the Space Shuttle, and it would make as much sense as your post.
|
Thrust (vac.) 2,279 kN (512,300 lbf)
Thrust (SL) 1,859 kN (418,000 lbf)
Chamber pressure 2,994 psi (20.64 MPa)
Isp (vac.) 452.3 seconds
Isp (SL) 363 seconds
|
S600=Dream
|
|
xAbSoLuTexZeRo wrote:
DCR wrote:
Tony, he is referring to the Civic Si engines. You might as well comment on the engines in the Space Shuttle, and it would make as much sense as your post.
|
Thrust (vac.) 2,279 kN (512,300 lbf)
Thrust (SL) 1,859 kN (418,000 lbf)
Chamber pressure 2,994 psi (20.64 MPa)
Isp (vac.) 452.3 seconds
Isp (SL) 363 seconds
|
Pshhh, my '90 Miata can do that bone stock.
|
xBeastx
|
|
S600=Dream wrote:
xAbSoLuTexZeRo wrote:
DCR wrote:
Tony, he is referring to the Civic Si engines. You might as well comment on the engines in the Space Shuttle, and it would make as much sense as your post.
|
Thrust (vac.) 2,279 kN (512,300 lbf)
Thrust (SL) 1,859 kN (418,000 lbf)
Chamber pressure 2,994 psi (20.64 MPa)
Isp (vac.) 452.3 seconds
Isp (SL) 363 seconds
|
Pshhh, my '90 Miata can do that bone stock.
|
Pshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh I walk faster.
|
TonyEX
|
|
DCR wrote:
Tony, he is referring to the Civic Si engines. You might as well comment on the engines in the Space Shuttle, and it would make as much sense as your post.
|
I'm commenting to the fact that while the Si had the B16, the GSR had the B18C. MUCH better powertrain. FAR better car.
Later, while the Si soldiered on with the K20A1, the RSX-X had the K20A2 and later the K20Z1.
Not until the Integra got discontinued did we see the Si get the top dog engine.
Currently, I wonder if the K24 wasn't supposed to be the top dog engine for the ILX but somehow, with the Lehman's fiasco the plans all went wrong.
Let's face it, while the Integra/RSX exists, the Civic did not, will not get the top dog engine. The 8th gen is an anomaly so those of you in love with the Si better get back on board and realize that odds are that the ILX at some point -hopefully soon- will take exclusive rights to the top dog motor.
I've owned like three Civic S/Sis, but we've owned four Integras/RSXs... for obvious reasons.
|
DCR
|
|
I know what you were commenting on, but it is still pointless here. Was this yet another opportunity to pump your own tires because you rent a Tier 1 Acura?
Also, given the direction Acura seems to be hell bent on, your assumption that the ILX would get the "top dog" engine is laughable. There was no other engine, because that would cost money...which there is no reason to spend when you have a perfectly good parts bin full of K24's.
|
TonyEX
|
|
DCR wrote:
I know what you were commenting on, but it is still pointless here. Was this yet another opportunity to pump your own tires because you rent a Tier 1 Acura?
Also, given the direction Acura seems to be hell bent on, your assumption that the ILX would get the "top dog" engine is laughable. There was no other engine, because that would cost money...which there is no reason to spend when you have a perfectly good parts bin full of K24's.
|
(1) Tier 1 pumping my tires? Now, you are being Obamabastic on me. Don't go putting words in my mouth, huh?
(2) Why shouldn't the ILX be the top dog? It's the Acura-Civic which since '86 has always had the top engine. From '86, the Integra/RSX always had the top engine, top drivetrain... starting with a real DOHC 1.6, 1.8. B18s, K20s, etc... it was only when the Integra/RSX was discontinued that you had the oddball 8th gen Civic which was unfettered by the constrained of internecine competition with the Integra and thus had full access to the parts bin. With the introduction of the ILX you'd expect that at some point there will be a return to the status quo... The fact that it has not yet happened is likely that the ILX was a de facto car that was not exactly planned for.
If the ILX is to succeed, then it must constrain the Civic or must offer something really better and unique. I doubt that HMC/AHM are willing to do this, hence I think the Si will go downmarket in the future. Who knows, it might become the next gen EP-4.
|
rvittori
|
|
|
Why couldn't this happen. Honda keeps the SI as is and adds a 2 door ILX which is the current SI with leather seats, a more ILX style dash, remote entry, and a few other bells and whistles. Give it a bit more horsepower to compensate for the extra weight. Done. Honda drivers happy , Acura drivers happy.
|
NealX
|
|
|
"Obamabastic?" I was thinking more "self-congratulatory," though I've never considered the EU Honda Accord Tourer to ever be "Tier 1."
|
TonyEX
|
|
Neal wrote:
"Obamabastic?" I was thinking more "self-congratulatory," though I've never considered the EU Honda Accord Tourer to ever be "Tier 1."
|
Bombastic more like it. As in HE was being so.
Yes, I never thought of my TSX or my TL as High Falutin'
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - 1 2 [3] |
| |
|
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
