200 HP? Really?

[GTB/ZR-1]

Originally Posted by chulooz

So you genuinely drag a FRS... interesting choice.

Not @ all--I test my cars on the strip to validate the power they're making & how the mods I'm adding are improving the car's performance. Plus, hey, it's fun...
I'm a hardcore Solo competitor--and acceleration is certainly part of the car's total performance envelope.

[zooki]

Originally Posted by chulooz

So you genuinely drag a FRS... interesting choice.

Hey man, I saw "The Fast & The Furious". I know all imports run 9's, right? LOL

[GTB/ZR-1]

Originally Posted by zooki

Hey man, I saw "The Fast & The Furious". I know all imports run 9's, right? LOL

Word!

Maybe if I transplant the 'nawz' from my ZR-1 to my FR-S... LOL

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by GTB/ZR-1

That being said, I'm hoping my personal car makes ~200whp on e85 @ 2800 w/ me in it (weight-saving mods will also be in place) & runs 99-100 traps--I'll be tickled.
I came out of a car w/ 601whp--561wtq SAE (132+ qtr)--so I'm a bit jaded... lol

Coming from such a fast car, surely the difference between 95 and 100mph in the 1/4 is not a big deal, they're both (relatively) dog slow!

Having a 129+ mph in the 1/4 (151 in the 1/2, 185 in the mile) FD doesn't prevent me from enjoying my 100mph stock S2000 on the street or at the track. On the street, I practically never get into VTEC with it, so it's essentially a sub-150rwhp car for 99% of my usage. Still fun!

[ZDan]

That said, yeah, faster is better, 100>95, modding is fun, validating at track also fun

[Cjm005]

Sorry to disappoint anyone, but 95, or 100 MPH is not close to being fast in the 1/4. Instead of being disappointed, go and do what the car I'd made for, open track racing!

[Superhatch]

I'm wondering how the Civic Si coupe compares to our trap speeds?

[fistpoint]

Originally Posted by Superhatch

I'm wondering how the Civic Si coupe compares to our trap speeds?

If you go to the Civic forums they all believe the Si beats the shit out of the twins...someone had to correct them, like this guy in the link below who posted the results of the twins against the 9th gen Si(coupe and sedan) and even linked the same car magazines tests to compare against each other so you can't claim one mags better drivers or testing methods:

scroll down(if needed) to post #35:
http://www.9thgencivic.com/forum/9th...tml#post129927

According to the popular car mags(C&D, MT), they are damn near i-forking-dentical. And you'd think people on this forum drink the "you can't talk shit about MY purchase" kool-aid?...sheeit. Virtually zero difference, the driver will dictate the winner every single time in either twin or Si variant. ***Talking about straight line numbers of course.

We believe the car mags numbers when we like the numbers, but disregard them when we don't. That seems to be a common theme on car forums.

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by fistpoint

If you go to the Civic forums they all believe the Si beats the shit out of the twins...someone had to correct them, like this guy in the link below who posted the results of the twins against the 9th gen Si(coupe and sedan) and even linked the same car magazines tests to compare against each other so you can't claim one mags better drivers or testing methods:

scroll down(if needed) to post #35:
http://www.9thgencivic.com/forum/9th...tml#post129927

According to the popular car mags(C&D, MT), they are damn near i-forking-dentical. And you'd think people on this forum drink the "you can't talk shit about MY purchase" kool-aid?...sheeit. Virtually zero difference, the driver will dictate the winner every single time in either twin or Si variant.

We believe the car mags numbers when we like the numbers, but disregard them when we don't. That seems to be a common theme on car forums.

It's nothing to do w car forum. It's human nature, to only accept only good things & denies all bad things.

[Jaylyons1]

A lot of cars out there are underrated (corvettes being one of them). When I had my 335i, BMW claimed 300 hp & 300 torque but mine dyno'd at 290whp and 305 torque stock. I figured they shot low so it wouldn't overthrow the M3 sales.

[DanoFA20]

Originally Posted by clayrush

All I know is my celica gts says 180 HP but did 163stock. fwd no lsd. 370z claims 332 got 277 stock rwd with lsd. FRS 167 rwd with lsd. All on Mustang dyno . I just wonder if lsd saps more power.

remember mustang dynos read 10% lower then most

[Exhaust]

Originally Posted by fistpoint

If you go to the Civic forums they all believe the Si beats the shit out of the twins...someone had to correct them, like this guy in the link below who posted the results of the twins against the 9th gen Si(coupe and sedan) and even linked the same car magazines tests to compare against each other so you can't claim one mags better drivers or testing methods:

scroll down(if needed) to post #35:
http://www.9thgencivic.com/forum/9th...tml#post129927

According to the popular car mags(C&D, MT), they are damn near i-forking-dentical. And you'd think people on this forum drink the "you can't talk shit about MY purchase" kool-aid?...sheeit. Virtually zero difference, the driver will dictate the winner every single time in either twin or Si variant.

We believe the car mags numbers when we like the numbers, but disregard them when we don't. That seems to be a common theme on car forums.

I read a couple posts after your quote from that forum and the ignorance is fucking astronomical there. Here's a quote "10.34 seconds for 0-60. Those guys sucked for sure, but 10-12 seconds 0-60 is awesome for a Toyota..." I couldnt stop laughing.

[fistpoint]

Originally Posted by Exhaust

I read a couple posts after your quote from that forum and the ignorance is fucking astronomical there. Here's a quote "10.34 seconds for 0-60. Those guys sucked for sure, but 10-12 seconds 0-60 is awesome for a Toyota..." I couldnt stop laughing.

I love Civics, but damn do the Honda(RSX/Civic) forums attract the most Ritalin addicted members. Regardless of what vehicle I end up in, if there is something about it worth talking shit about I'll be the first to do it

[Bill_Rockoff]

OP, I think ~18% is still pretty valid for front-engine, rear-drive, with a transmission in the middle and independent rear suspension (half-shafts have CV joints to let them articulate.) Solid-axle cars do a little better because there are no CV joints in a solid rear axle, and maybe Corvettes do a little better because of the torque tube / transaxle setup (no u-joints in the driveshaft, right?) Also, I'd believe "LS3/LS7 is under-rated" rather than "GM found a way to make its gears and bearings waste only 2/3 the power wasted by the gears and bearings in every other transmission out there, including transmissions made by folks who only make transmissions."

So, 200 crank hp minus ~18% gives 165 to 170 rwhp on a dyno, give-or-take the variation between one 200-crank-hp car and another, one dyno and another, one run and another.

The differences among a brake dyno, an eddy current dyno, and an inertia dyno is a completely different discussion.

Having driven a 600-rwhp Corvette once (C6 Z06 with an STS kit and methanol) and having spent 20+ years daily-driving an almost-as-quick literbike and a ~100rwhp Miata, I'm a lot more curious to know "how does an FR-S / BR-Z feel?" rather than "does it break 170 rwhp on a Dynojet / 100 mph on a dragstrip?" To paraphrase the guy who basically thought up the Miata 25 years ago, if I can't go fast with 165 rwhp, 265 rwhp wouldn't do me much good.