0-60 mph - forget handling ability for 5.9 seconds

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by 86'd

I say a bit under 6 for a good launch, mid 6s for OK launches. Sticky tires and bolt-ons: mid 5's. Plenty fast.

a 328i does 0-60 in the low 6s its 3340lbs/230hp = 14.5lbs/hp

an FR-S is about 2700lbs/200hp= 13.75lbs/hp

for more comparison

an S2000 is = 11.90lbs/hp = 0-60 is highly dependent on the driver but can get mid 5's

a Mini Cooper S is = 15.88lbs/hp = upper 6's

a Honda Civic Si is = 14.43lbs/hp = Mid/upper 6's

The FR-S has a bit more torque than a Civic and from what I've heard more usable torque down low, plus the FR-S is a bit lighter as well.

Which year Honda Civic? The new one is more torquey than a FRS.

[86'd]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

[/B]

Which year Honda Civic? The new one is more torquey than a FRS.

My bad, I was looking at the the 2006-2011 model. The 2012 has 170tq.

However I'm pretty sure the FR-S has a bit more available tq down low (as compared to the Civic at say 3k rpms) and the FR-S weighs about 100-150lbs less (well from what we've heard).

C&D got a 6.3 0-60 time with the '12 Civic SI.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

[/B]

Which year Honda Civic? The new one is more torquey than a FRS.

Actually I'd expect the "torquier" engine to be even slower than the "high strung" FRS engine, because Honda likes to set up the low speed cam as the fuel economy cam. Besides, I don't think the <15% low speed acceleration advantage of an engine tuned for low end torque can make up for the extra 200 pounds and FWD.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

Actually I'd expect the "torquier" engine to be even slower than the "high strung" FRS engine, because Honda likes to set up the low speed cam as the fuel economy cam. Besides, I don't think the <15% low speed acceleration advantage of an engine tuned for low end torque can make up for the extra 200 pounds and FWD.

I highly doubt that. The weight difference is under 200 lbs and the 2.4l in the civic revs to 7k while the FRS engine revs to 7.5k and it really doesn't make any power in the last .5k rpms as every journalist have mentioned. I think you will be surprised when both cars have the same time because the new civic is closer to 6.1 seconds.

EX-L HF Hybrid Si
BASE PRICE $22,725 $20,225 $24,820 $22,975
PRICE (as tested) $24,225 $20,255 $27,520 $24,675
POWER (SAE NET) 140 hp 140 hp 110 hp (comb) 201 hp
TORQUE (SAE NET) 128 lb-ft 128 lb-ft 127 lb-ft 170 lb-ft
ACCEL 0-60, MPH 9.1 sec 8.6 sec 9.9 sec 6.1 sec
QUARTER MILE 16.9 sec 16.6 sec 17.5 sec 14.7 sec
BRAKING 60-0, MPH 123 ft 133 ft 130 ft 124 ft
MT FIGURE EIGHT 28.2 sec 28.7 sec 29.2 sec 26.6 sec
EPA ECON (CITY/HWY) 28/39 mpg 29/41 mpg 44/44 mpg 22/31 mpg
C

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/oftheyear/...#ixzz1gUzi1D8U

[serialk11r]

Hmmm now that I look at Honda K24 dyno charts, it seems like it is less of a fuel economy engine as the torque is pretty high in the low speed cam, so you might be right about this. But then we have to see the FRS engine first, naturally aspirated engines with the same max power tend to behave very similarly afterall.

[torquemada]

what´s the deal with all of these self-deception?
A standard FR-S or BRZ will never launch under 6 seconds, and most of the future owners were not being able to launch under 7 seconds.

Jesus, if you want a quartermile car, buy anything else...but stop this lame discussion

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by torquemada

what´s the deal with all of these self-deception?
A standard FR-S or BRZ will never launch under 6 seconds, and most of the future owners were not being able to launch under 7 seconds.

Jesus, if you want a quartermile car, buy anything else...but stop this lame discussion

You should've said this on the first page.

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by torquemada

what´s the deal with all of these self-deception?
A standard FR-S or BRZ will never launch under 6 seconds, and most of the future owners were not being able to launch under 7 seconds.

Jesus, if you want a quartermile car, buy anything else...but stop this lame discussion

Sorry we forgot that race tracks are nothing but curves

[hwoalang]

i think FR-S will do 0-60mph between 6sec and 6.5sec with manuel.

torque isn't that great with this car so... i don't expect lower than 5.5sec.

[Mr.Jay]

Originally Posted by hwoalang

i think FR-S will do 0-60mph between 6sec and 6.5sec with manuel.

torque isn't that great with this car so... i don't expect lower than 5.5sec.

I don't expect it to break into the 5s at all

[Allch Chcar]

The title of the thread is: "0-60mph - forget handling ability for 5.9 seconds."

The name of the game: jump to conclusions.

5.9 seconds is <6 seconds.

Did I win?

[hwoalang]

Originally Posted by Mr.Jay

I don't expect it to break into the 5s at all

i think high 5.x sec is possible with a good launch. it's rear wheel drive.

BTW, front wheel drive RSX-S can do 0-60 mph: 6.0 sec (2005-06 TYPE -S) with perfect launch. it has Maximum torque: 143 lb·ft (194 N·m) @ 7000 rpm.

i used to own RSX. and it's verify by the RSX club members.

[ahausheer]

Uh guys, the Civic Si Coupe (according to Motor Trend) will do 60 in 6.1 seconds. It is heavier and front wheel drive with basically the same power. Motor-Trend will have the Toyobaru under 6, I'll bet you lunch. (I pick the lunch)

[suprachica79]

Originally Posted by ahausheer

Uh guys, the Civic Si Coupe (according to Motor Trend) will do 60 in 6.1 seconds. It is heavier and front wheel drive with basically the same power. Motor-Trend will have the Toyobaru under 6, I'll bet you lunch.

Sweet. Please put filet mignon topped with lobster claws on your private jet to Connecticut. Thank you kindly

Edit - I really hope you're right.