Which car in stock do u think is faster, the honda accord coupe v6 (2003) or the rsx type s??? :?: :?: :?:

Although I don't really know, my guess would be the Accord.

Well, the RSX Type-S weighs a feathery 2800lbs, has a 2.0-liter inline four, 200hp engine thats mated to a 6-speed manual transmission, and is front wheel drive. Your Accord V6 Coupe weighs just a tad bit more(3000lbs), had a 3.0-liter vee six, 240hp engine thats put to the ground via a 6-speed manual transmission, aslo FWD. It's damn close, I'd say, but the torque enriched V6 would definitly have an advantage I'd think. So maybe Accord, I don't know of any solid 0-60 or 1/4 mile times. The RSX has an edge on handling, though we are just talking about pure speed right now. :mrgreen:

Whats awesome is that both engines are N/A and kick most any other manufacturers ass. GM gets 240 hp out of a superhcarged 3.8-liter V-6 in the huge Monte Carlo SS and Ford poops 190 out of it's 3.8-liter V-6 in the Mustang. Ford's SVT Focus has a limp 170hp out of a 2.0-liter I-4, the best I-4 GM has in an American car is the Cavaliers and Sun Fires 2.2-liter with a totally LAME 140hp. Finally, Dodge has the Neon driven by an I-4 with 150 hp and 2.2-liters of displacement(the SR-T 4's engine is a total rip of the Evo 8's) and the best V-6 is in the Intrepid, with an AMAZING :? 244hp out of 3.5 liters.(notice everyone else gets less power per liter in EVERY case). Who says Honda doesn't make some of the finest engines ever? I put these stats up for everyone who doesn't believe in Honda performance, or thinks that current American engneering is equal or somehow superior.(and I didn't even have to mention S2000 :wink: )

I have no idea whats faster, but i'd rather have the RSX. Since i'm young, i wouldn't need the space of the accord. The RSX looks more nimble.

I'd go with the accord v6 coupe it looks nicer

I agree with you Raith. With both parts of your post.

Yeah, it may seem unessicary to some people, but my roomie is constantly insistent that American cars are the best over anything. :P

Well, perhaps you could change the mind of your 'roomie'... :wink:

I've stopped really trying. We are both on very diffrent levels of thinking, and he does has a valid claim......with the 70 year old muscle cars. The better ones at least. Thats always his argument. That America used to make these awesome cars, and somehow that makes them still good car companines. Yeah, don't ask me. I really don't understand myself

I think that all the Honda coupes are very ugly, so i would take the RSX. It's a lot sportier, too.

the acura is a honda so honda coupes are not ugly they are nice and what aobut the nsx.....Type R now thats a sweet car :twisted: :lol: :lol:

anybody heard of what they are doing to the new rsx. well redesign??? if u have info give it to me...... are they making it a 6 cylinder car???? alll i know is its gonna be redesign for 06..........

Yeah, I've heard about a redesign as well. No info on the engineering changes though :?

the acura is a honda so honda coupes are not ugly they are nice and what aobut the nsx.....Type R now thats a sweet car :twisted: :lol: :lol:
I know the RSX is a Honda. But i ment the Civic and Accord coupes. They are really ugly.

The civic coup ehas been redesigned and it looks really nice, the accord coupe is one of the nicest cars in that price range

The Accord v6 6-speed is much faster than the RSX type S. According to Car and Driver:

0-60 1/4mi
Accord 6spd 5.9 14.5
RSX-S 6.8 15.4

Without question get the Accord v-6. Both are very similar cars and the only MAIN difference between the two is the "name." Whether you want Acura or Honda. Of course more people will opt for the Acura name because many view Acura as a better product than Honda when in reality the difference is negligible. I agree with the above posts that the Accord has a much nicer design and it is faster than the Type-S.

Well, the RSX Type-S weighs a feathery 2800lbs, has a 2.0-liter inline four, 200hp engine thats mated to a 6-speed manual transmission, and is front wheel drive. Your Accord V6 Coupe weighs just a tad bit more(3000lbs), had a 3.0-liter vee six, 240hp engine thats put to the ground via a 6-speed manual transmission, aslo FWD. It's damn close, I'd say, but the torque enriched V6 would definitly have an advantage I'd think. So maybe Accord, I don't know of any solid 0-60 or 1/4 mile times. The RSX has an edge on handling, though we are just talking about pure speed right now. :mrgreen:

Whats awesome is that both engines are N/A and kick most any other manufacturers ass. GM gets 240 hp out of a superhcarged 3.8-liter V-6 in the huge Monte Carlo SS and Ford poops 190 out of it's 3.8-liter V-6 in the Mustang. Ford's SVT Focus has a limp 170hp out of a 2.0-liter I-4, the best I-4 GM has in an American car is the Cavaliers and Sun Fires 2.2-liter with a totally LAME 140hp. Finally, Dodge has the Neon driven by an I-4 with 150 hp and 2.2-liters of displacement(the SR-T 4's engine is a total rip of the Evo 8's) and the best V-6 is in the Intrepid, with an AMAZING :? 244hp out of 3.5 liters.(notice everyone else gets less power per liter in EVERY case). Who says Honda doesn't make some of the finest engines ever? I put these stats up for everyone who doesn't believe in Honda performance, or thinks that current American engneering is equal or somehow superior.(and I didn't even have to mention S2000 :wink: )


What you have to remember, though, is that it isnt always horsepower that matters. A lot of people forget to realize the concept of torque. I used to be jealous when my friend told me he got a honda accord with a whopping 240 horses. Then I found a lot of people were beating him in races with some GM coupes, etc....that had a bit less horsepower.

I myself own a 2002 Monte carlo SS, weighing about 3,300 lbs. I have managed to squeeze about 220 hp out of it. Yes, it is a big car i suppose. But i did manage to beat my friend's small 2001 grand am GT ( not much of a feat considering his 175 hp) His car had about 200 ft lbs. torque and mine 230. he was overconfident he would beat me due to his car weighing 300 lbs less than mine. I really think the 300 lbs didnt make much difference because he was defeated.( i have had friends strip their cars of about 300 lbs before, improving their 0-60 time by .6 secs...meaning if the smaller Grand AM engine were slapped into my car, Grand Am could quite possibly surpass my car by .6 seconds. ) Now, as for the Supercharged monte carlo SS, yes, it is supercharged. And the engine is said to have the same HP as the accord, but here is my main point. The main factor in this is how much muscle is actually going to the wheels. The Monte carlo has 280 ft lbs or torque, whereas this accord has around 212 ft lbs. Remember, theyre both 240 horsepower.

I have noticed a lot of the American cars have the low-end torque that import cars lack. The 212 ft lb torque of accord comes in the high RPM's around 6-7 thous. The MC does 280 ft lbs @ around 5000.

So the question is coming down to which one has more torque. I doubt the weight difference would really matter in this scenario. It may be obvious the accord has the torque advantage, but the question is by how much.

What needs to be realized is that HP is how fast the engine is running, to up the R.P.M's, torque is how much "twisting" power is going to the wheels. High horsepower doesnt always surpass high low end torque.

Holy mother of jesus.

Welcome to the site and all, just next time, check the previous posts' date. :)

Nice info, I'm closing this though.