Team MF Member #2046 Posts: 12443
Joined: 1/22/2004 From: United States Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: HotRods_n_Booze
quote:
ORIGINAL: 2000GT4.6
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jimmz
You dont have to race your car to have Flows and a CAI smart ass. My dad owns a muffler shop and he sells these parts and installs them. So of course if I can get these mods for free then Im gonna do it. Plus I wanted the agressive sound which EVERY mustang SHOULD have. Thats why....
A. your v6 mustang with flows doesnt sound agressive
B. A CAI on that car doesnt sound any different.
You couldn't be more wrong 2000GT4.6 Check out this clip. V6 with Flowmasters
I think this sounds nice for a V6, but this isnt "Agressive". And according to the clip, the car is also sans cats (and from what it sounds like, probalby has headers as well). A V6 with flows only isnt going to sound anything like this.
BTW you should feel good about posting it. I had to lie on the floor and hold the 2 wires of my ripped apart headphones to the ripped apart speaker solder points to listen in. Gotta get to walmart this weekend and buy a new set of sony headphones.
Posts: 13191
Joined: 12/29/2003 From: Southern California Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: 2000GT4.6
quote:
ORIGINAL: HotRods_n_Booze
quote:
ORIGINAL: 2000GT4.6
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jimmz
You dont have to race your car to have Flows and a CAI smart ass. My dad owns a muffler shop and he sells these parts and installs them. So of course if I can get these mods for free then Im gonna do it. Plus I wanted the agressive sound which EVERY mustang SHOULD have. Thats why....
A. your v6 mustang with flows doesnt sound agressive
B. A CAI on that car doesnt sound any different.
You couldn't be more wrong 2000GT4.6 Check out this clip. V6 with Flowmasters
I think this sounds nice for a V6, but this isnt "Agressive". And according to the clip, the car is also sans cats (and from what it sounds like, probalby has headers as well). A V6 with flows only isnt going to sound anything like this.
BTW you should feel good about posting it. I had to lie on the floor and hold the 2 wires of my ripped apart headphones to the ripped apart speaker solder points to listen in. Gotta get to walmart this weekend and buy a new set of sony headphones.
LMAO!!! Been there. You need a set of speakers and a sub woofer like me. It makes that V6 sound like a Moe Foe, LOL. P.S. I think it sounds agressive so I'd have to say "agressive sound is in the ears of the beholder" hehe.
Team MF Member #2046 Posts: 12443
Joined: 1/22/2004 From: United States Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: HotRods_n_Booze
quote:
ORIGINAL: 2000GT4.6
quote:
ORIGINAL: HotRods_n_Booze
quote:
ORIGINAL: 2000GT4.6
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jimmz
You dont have to race your car to have Flows and a CAI smart ass. My dad owns a muffler shop and he sells these parts and installs them. So of course if I can get these mods for free then Im gonna do it. Plus I wanted the agressive sound which EVERY mustang SHOULD have. Thats why....
A. your v6 mustang with flows doesnt sound agressive
B. A CAI on that car doesnt sound any different.
You couldn't be more wrong 2000GT4.6 Check out this clip. V6 with Flowmasters
I think this sounds nice for a V6, but this isnt "Agressive". And according to the clip, the car is also sans cats (and from what it sounds like, probalby has headers as well). A V6 with flows only isnt going to sound anything like this.
BTW you should feel good about posting it. I had to lie on the floor and hold the 2 wires of my ripped apart headphones to the ripped apart speaker solder points to listen in. Gotta get to walmart this weekend and buy a new set of sony headphones.
LMAO!!! Been there. You need a set of speakers and a sub woofer like me. It makes that V6 sound like a Moe Foe, LOL. P.S. I think it sounds agressive so I'd have to say "agressive sound is in the ears of the beholder" hehe.
Room mate cometh, room mate goeth away, room mate steal my AC adapter.
the newer SI hatches around here run 9.5 or 9.6's bone stock im not lucky enough to have a 1/4 miles track thats within a reasonable drive most v6 stangs run like 10.2's and above most gt's that are stock as far as i can tell run 9.5's and 9.4's
woa woa woa ...u got ur numbers straight? u must be talkin 1/8 mile cuz no stock car runs under 10 seconds 1/4..ESPECIALLY not a honda. most v6 stangs run low 15s and gt's run mid to low 14's. the mach 1 or saleen s281's run high to mid 13's ...and as for the si hatch... mid 15 stock if ur lucky. maybe i misunderstood what u were saying but thats how i interpreted it and if thats how u intended it to sound...yea..
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/20/2003 From: United States Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: kenbossy22
the newer SI hatches around here run 9.5 or 9.6's bone stock im not lucky enough to have a 1/4 miles track thats within a reasonable drive most v6 stangs run like 10.2's and above most gt's that are stock as far as i can tell run 9.5's and 9.4's
woa woa woa ...u got ur numbers straight? u must be talkin 1/8 mile cuz no stock car runs under 10 seconds 1/4..ESPECIALLY not a honda. most v6 stangs run low 15s and gt's run mid to low 14's. the mach 1 or saleen s281's run high to mid 13's ...and as for the si hatch... mid 15 stock if ur lucky. maybe i misunderstood what u were saying but thats how i interpreted it and if thats how u intended it to sound...yea..
whoa first learn how to quote! that will help keep confusion to a minimum! second did u eve read what u quoted? you qouted him saying that there arent ne 1/4 miles tracks near him, it is understood that if it isnt a 1/4 mile its an 1/8 unless u have seen something other then these two sizes? i know i havent!
Team MF Member #2046 Posts: 12443
Joined: 1/22/2004 From: United States Status: offline
Wow. Although I have absolutly no experence with 1/8th mile numbers (my car is yet to be at the track) there is no way in hell a SI would even come close to keeping up with my GT when it was stock.
My friend andy got a brand new SI around the time I got my new car. We went in a beer run in his, and then I let him drive mine.
His first words (after shifting out of 1st) was "Holy ****"
sorry if i didnt make it understandable but yes, those are 1/8th mile numbers the closest 1/4 to my area is about 3 hours away sorry bout that
there i think that dealt with my quoting disability...and yea i thought it must have been 1/8 because obviously a stock honda in the 9's is an oximoron.
Take your 1/8 time and multiply it by 1.56xxxx something something something and that'll give you a good estimate for a 1/4 time. Or you can just search up for a calculator on the net to do it.
RE: 2003 V6 Mustang vs. 2002 Acura RSX not type -s - 5/4/2004 10:50:25 PM
Guest
I let the massive confusion here run on too long.
The NEW Si's run mid 15s to low 16s depending on driver. They have i-VTEC which is just cam timing on the intake. It's not the DOHC vtec like on my 00 Si. They're about 75 pounds heavier but have 20 some more foot lbs torque.
A stock Si won't beat up on a stock 03 V6, but it'll keep up with it. I've kept up with stock V6s in my Escort, and my Si is faster for sure.
Posts: 2038
Joined: 7/6/2004 From: Suwanee, GA Status: offline
slegos888 i have a dyno shop right down the road from my house and if my scanner worked i would gladly show y'all my dyno sheets. my car, 02 v6, picked up 8 whp from a mac cold air kit, that brought it to 175. my cal mustang h-pipe, slp loudmouth and gutted rear cats freed up 11. that makes it 186. and btw a v6 stang can whoop an rsx type-s. my freind has one and every time we race he gets stomped. they only have 145 whp. now my car has 225
LOL this forum is a confusin mess. I think Jimmz orginal question was which would win in a race. An 02 base RSX or a 2003 Mustang V6. Not an easy question to ask but why not?:) Before I start my suggestion would be to personally test your car to see what its capable of. I would normally say search the net but it is near impossible to find 1/4 mile times for base models.
First lets look at what we know : Mustang RSX HP: 210 @ 5250 HP: 160 @ 6500 Torque: 220 @ 2750 Torque: 140 @ 4000 Curb Weight: 3000 lbs Curb Weight: 2700 lbs Valvetrain: OHV Valvetrain: DOHC i-VTEC Tranny: 4 spd auto Tranny: 5 spd man
Alright now that we have that established lets move on. There are several factors that affect a 1/4 mile race: torque, weight, valvetrain(power band), gearing ratios, and driver ability(launching & shifting). First torque, the stang has an 80 lb advantage over the RSX. However the RSX wins the weight part, wieghing 300 lbs less. Next is valvetrain. The stang has OHV(pushrod) which gives it a broad power band. The RSX on the other hand uses Variable valve technology, in this case i-VTEC. Unlike VTEC which relies soley on RPMs, i-VTEC measures RPMs & engine load. In addition to changing timing, duration, lift i -VTEC includes VTC(phasing). Phasing advances the cam on the intake cam by 25-50 degrees. This gives it more mid range power instead of all high RPM power. The i-VTEC is the base RSX is very different from that of the type-S(some people confuse them *sigh*). The one I just describe is like that in the base model, the type-s i-VTEC is more regular VTEC and uses a 3 cam lobs on BOTH intake and exhaust plus VTC(phasing). The base i-VTEC only has two cam lobes(one small and one big).
Sorry for all the reading but I had to settle that, early in the forum someone confused the two i-VTECs. Finally we have to take into consideration driver ability. A fast car isn't worth anything if you can't launch it right. This parts up to u jimmz. I would say warm up ur tires, put it in one and drop it from about 4500. If that doesn't work do a few practice runs on a back road see what works best.
Wow touchy touchy, a 4 cylinder mustang shouldnt even be called a mustang. This guy I knew had a 88 2.3l lx and it had like 80hp thats like a motorcycle it was amazingly slow. My friend has a 86 svo turbo that runs low 15's. thats a mustang. I'm just sayin that a 4 cylinder mustang that runs 20 sec in the 1/4 shouldnt be called a mustang. Why do you think they stopped makin them???!!??
Team MF Member #885 Posts: 2621
Joined: 12/4/2005 Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: 98LS1
Take your 1/8 time and multiply it by 1.56xxxx something something something and that'll give you a good estimate for a 1/4 time. Or you can just search up for a calculator on the net to do it.
I've always liked going to the track and getting some nice, real world info on what cars run. I'm sure you and a few others that were unfortunate enough to stumble into this sh*thole forum feel the same way..........this isnt even an argument, you'll destroy his sh*t. ALL acura RSXs are game for Edge V6s, the Type S is better left to modded cars for garuanteed kills, but if you're stock it is better to go from a dig, and if you have a stock auto you'll most likely lose the race up top. Jimmz, unless you dont know what the f*ck the letter D looks like, you'll win.
< Message edited by Clif Brohn -- 4/11/2007 12:46:49 AM >
_____________________________
quote:
Warning: Clif is extremely snide, sarcastic, and a little crazy
Posts: 1061
Joined: 7/18/2006 From: Champaign, IL Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: camarokid
LOL this forum is a confusin mess. I think Jimmz orginal question was which would win in a race. An 02 base RSX or a 2003 Mustang V6. Not an easy question to ask but why not?:) Before I start my suggestion would be to personally test your car to see what its capable of. I would normally say search the net but it is near impossible to find 1/4 mile times for base models.
First lets look at what we know : Mustang RSX HP: 210 @ 5250 HP: 160 @ 6500 Torque: 220 @ 2750 Torque: 140 @ 4000 Curb Weight: 3000 lbs Curb Weight: 2700 lbs Valvetrain: OHV Valvetrain: DOHC i-VTEC Tranny: 4 spd auto Tranny: 5 spd man
Alright now that we have that established lets move on. There are several factors that affect a 1/4 mile race: torque, weight, valvetrain(power band), gearing ratios, and driver ability(launching & shifting). First torque, the stang has an 80 lb advantage over the RSX. However the RSX wins the weight part, wieghing 300 lbs less. Next is valvetrain. The stang has OHV(pushrod) which gives it a broad power band. The RSX on the other hand uses Variable valve technology, in this case i-VTEC. Unlike VTEC which relies soley on RPMs, i-VTEC measures RPMs & engine load. In addition to changing timing, duration, lift i -VTEC includes VTC(phasing). Phasing advances the cam on the intake cam by 25-50 degrees. This gives it more mid range power instead of all high RPM power. The i-VTEC is the base RSX is very different from that of the type-S(some people confuse them *sigh*). The one I just describe is like that in the base model, the type-s i-VTEC is more regular VTEC and uses a 3 cam lobs on BOTH intake and exhaust plus VTC(phasing). The base i-VTEC only has two cam lobes(one small and one big).
Sorry for all the reading but I had to settle that, early in the forum someone confused the two i-VTECs. Finally we have to take into consideration driver ability. A fast car isn't worth anything if you can't launch it right. This parts up to u jimmz. I would say warm up ur tires, put it in one and drop it from about 4500. If that doesn't work do a few practice runs on a back road see what works best.
and have someone take a picture of what happens to your tranny when you drop it into gear at 4500 rpms....**** the 3.8 redlines at like 5500.
Posts: 1061
Joined: 7/18/2006 From: Champaign, IL Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: stangfan99gt
i say it's a driver's race with a slight edge going the the acura due to less weight.
the mustang has 40 more hp and 80 more ft/lbs of torque, 300 pounds less doesn't make up for that. launch right and you will walk him. and if you really want to find out race him.
Printable Version
RE: 2003 V6 Mustang vs. 2002 Acura RSX not type -s - 
