tc or rsx-s
#41
well, a "stage 1" tc is pushing what, 300whp? k-series motors take boost quite well without modification, much like our motors. yes if you're serious about boosting high numbers, definitely need lower compression to start with, but otherwise, its fairly easy to hit 300ish in a k20a as well.
http://www.turbo-kits.com/rsx_turbo_kits.html
(all except the kit at the top, as that requires a rebuild)
but lets not forget, most people never go turbo. its all talk.
also, a difference is that people have been boosting k series motors longer than anyone has boosted a 2azfe. they're fairly proven by now. 2az is also getting there, but i think we're playing with fire going near 300whp.
and RSXaco, thank you :D while i understand we own tCs here, it irritates me when people think they're more than what they are. there are many superior fwd cars in terms of performance, and of course all of them cost more. i forgot where it was written but you can say a tc is great, and then add the phrase "for the money" every time.
oh yes, build issues. lets not forget faulty hatch shocks, which ive had. hit my head on my hatch too many times to forget, since it kept going back down. or how about the rattles everyone complains about. while i dont have any, i know many others do. our sunroof deflectors? though hey, its GLASS what did anyone expect? power steering pump from 05 with tsb? or perhaps crank bearings being faulty. weak AC in hot weather when ive been in many other toyotas which are all ice cold. the stereo doors not working right on most 05s.
so lets not compare build quality ;] while its all under warranty, lets not get into it. ive never complained about anything about a tc. its pure se-- well, you know. words the young ones will learn later.
http://www.turbo-kits.com/rsx_turbo_kits.html
(all except the kit at the top, as that requires a rebuild)
but lets not forget, most people never go turbo. its all talk.
also, a difference is that people have been boosting k series motors longer than anyone has boosted a 2azfe. they're fairly proven by now. 2az is also getting there, but i think we're playing with fire going near 300whp.
and RSXaco, thank you :D while i understand we own tCs here, it irritates me when people think they're more than what they are. there are many superior fwd cars in terms of performance, and of course all of them cost more. i forgot where it was written but you can say a tc is great, and then add the phrase "for the money" every time.
oh yes, build issues. lets not forget faulty hatch shocks, which ive had. hit my head on my hatch too many times to forget, since it kept going back down. or how about the rattles everyone complains about. while i dont have any, i know many others do. our sunroof deflectors? though hey, its GLASS what did anyone expect? power steering pump from 05 with tsb? or perhaps crank bearings being faulty. weak AC in hot weather when ive been in many other toyotas which are all ice cold. the stereo doors not working right on most 05s.
so lets not compare build quality ;] while its all under warranty, lets not get into it. ive never complained about anything about a tc. its pure se-- well, you know. words the young ones will learn later.
#42
Since fiscal 2006 in the auto World isn't technically "USED" enough for you, I will revise my math.
KBB 2005 models (since tC is ONLY available from '05 on):
-------------------
Scion tC: $19,415
-------------------
Acura RSX Type S: $23,165
------------------------------
That gives the tC $3750 to beat the type-s. Is it possible? Bet ur A$$ u can!
How? you might ask... There are a # of ways... starting with one of the cheaper (and something I don't recommend on a stock block) mods is NOS.
Keep in mind (stock):
Scion tC = 15.7 quarter mile @ 88.2 mph
VS.
RSX-s = 14.9 quarter mile @ 95 mph
Sure, the MPH is faster, but distance is constant.
If u reach 60MPH faster than I can, however my car is already ahead of you ~ you'd still be losing (claim ur 0-60 fame all u want).
For me, all that matters is who gets across the finish line first.
In anycase, I wouldn't want to push a BRAND NEW car anyways. To me thats a complete waste of money.
At the same time i wouldn't want to get a USED RSX-s for the simple fact that in the USED car world there are so many better options out there ~ specially for true speed.
KBB 2005 models (since tC is ONLY available from '05 on):
-------------------
Scion tC: $19,415
-------------------
Acura RSX Type S: $23,165
------------------------------
That gives the tC $3750 to beat the type-s. Is it possible? Bet ur A$$ u can!
How? you might ask... There are a # of ways... starting with one of the cheaper (and something I don't recommend on a stock block) mods is NOS.
Keep in mind (stock):
Scion tC = 15.7 quarter mile @ 88.2 mph
VS.
RSX-s = 14.9 quarter mile @ 95 mph
Sure, the MPH is faster, but distance is constant.
If u reach 60MPH faster than I can, however my car is already ahead of you ~ you'd still be losing (claim ur 0-60 fame all u want).
For me, all that matters is who gets across the finish line first.
In anycase, I wouldn't want to push a BRAND NEW car anyways. To me thats a complete waste of money.
At the same time i wouldn't want to get a USED RSX-s for the simple fact that in the USED car world there are so many better options out there ~ specially for true speed.
#44
r2d2, it was stated nowhere specifying which year rsx-s it was. and if you actually go ahead and KBB the rsx-s from its early years onto its later years, using their average mileages listed...
check it out.
2002 rsx-s, 63,000 miles.
Excellent $15,485
Good $14,505
Fair $13,210
or maybe more evenly...
2004 rsx-s, 40,000 miles
Excellent $18,765
Good $17,610
Fair $16,080
a safe assumption is that the rsx-s is similarly priced as the new tc. in which case for PERFORMANCE, the rsx-s is better for the money.
so quit comparing new to new. its common knowledge the rsx-s new is far more expensive than the tc. thanks. you dont have any argument.
what does that even mean?
stay on track. price/performance buddy. and if you're concerned with true speed and drag times, i dont know why you bought a tc and wont "push" it.
check it out.
2002 rsx-s, 63,000 miles.
Excellent $15,485
Good $14,505
Fair $13,210
or maybe more evenly...
2004 rsx-s, 40,000 miles
Excellent $18,765
Good $17,610
Fair $16,080
a safe assumption is that the rsx-s is similarly priced as the new tc. in which case for PERFORMANCE, the rsx-s is better for the money.
so quit comparing new to new. its common knowledge the rsx-s new is far more expensive than the tc. thanks. you dont have any argument.
Scion tC = 15.7 quarter mile @ 88.2 mph
VS.
RSX-s = 14.9 quarter mile @ 95 mph
Sure, the MPH is faster, but distance is constant.
If u reach 60MPH faster than I can, however my car is already ahead of you ~ you'd still be losing (claim ur 0-60 fame all u want).
For me, all that matters is who gets across the finish line first.
VS.
RSX-s = 14.9 quarter mile @ 95 mph
Sure, the MPH is faster, but distance is constant.
If u reach 60MPH faster than I can, however my car is already ahead of you ~ you'd still be losing (claim ur 0-60 fame all u want).
For me, all that matters is who gets across the finish line first.
In anycase, I wouldn't want to push a BRAND NEW car anyways. To me thats a complete waste of money.
At the same time i wouldn't want to get a USED RSX-s for the simple fact that in the USED car world there are so many better options out there ~ specially for true speed.
At the same time i wouldn't want to get a USED RSX-s for the simple fact that in the USED car world there are so many better options out there ~ specially for true speed.
#45
^ my argument is the RSX-s is NOT better for the money (SPECIALLY in PERFORMANCE). On top of that, it's a USED car and for a USED car there are a TON of BETTER options out there (as in my NSX example which sold for under $23K).
Incase you missed the link the first time: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Acura...24781114QQrdZ1
Its just LOL funny how people love to compare the tC to something uneven or on a completely different level playing field (for example a USED to NEW car comparison) and call it a day like they made a valid comparison.
This entire debate is completely based off of opinion and preference. So, if u say the USED RSX-s is better that's ur rite, but just know that in my opinion there are better options out there for USED cars (just don't forget they are just that - USED).
Incase you missed the link the first time: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Acura...24781114QQrdZ1
Its just LOL funny how people love to compare the tC to something uneven or on a completely different level playing field (for example a USED to NEW car comparison) and call it a day like they made a valid comparison.
This entire debate is completely based off of opinion and preference. So, if u say the USED RSX-s is better that's ur rite, but just know that in my opinion there are better options out there for USED cars (just don't forget they are just that - USED).
#46
dude the original question is comparing a used rsx-s to a new tc. and i took the price/performance side. i used facts to show that for the money, the rsx-s used outperforms the new tc. no opinions. nothing to do with an nsx, or a supra. im not deviating from the original point of the post. end of story.
#47
Originally Posted by hunterUnknown
Scion tC = 15.7 quarter mile @ 88.2 mph
VS.
RSX-s = 14.9 quarter mile @ 95 mph
Sure, the MPH is faster, but distance is constant.
If u reach 60MPH faster than I can, however my car is already ahead of you ~ you'd still be losing (claim ur 0-60 fame all u want).
For me, all that matters is who gets across the finish line first.
what does that even mean?
VS.
RSX-s = 14.9 quarter mile @ 95 mph
Sure, the MPH is faster, but distance is constant.
If u reach 60MPH faster than I can, however my car is already ahead of you ~ you'd still be losing (claim ur 0-60 fame all u want).
For me, all that matters is who gets across the finish line first.
what does that even mean?
And why did I buy a tC and not "push" it? Cause I like having a car to drive daily.
This entire thread is an outrage - Used vs. new For the $ think of something better. There's my $0.02+ donation...
And for the record, u've proven nothing. Given the EXACT same amount of money and AGE for both cars, both would be pretty evenly matched (imo ~ the tC could beat it + u wouldn't be stuck with someones left overs).
#48
Its just LOL funny how people love to compare the tC to something uneven or on a completely different level
and RSXaco, thank you while i understand we own tCs here, it irritates me when people think they're more than what they are. there are many superior fwd cars in terms of performance, and of course all of them cost more. i forgot where it was written but you can say a tc is great, and then add the phrase "for the money" every time.
we even have them on clubrsx, they think our cars are faster than anything on 4 wheels.
the motor is built to run at a higher compression. Which means that you will need a complete rebuild to run a turbo.
#49
Originally Posted by RSXaco
the motor is built to run at a higher compression. Which means that you will need a complete rebuild to run a turbo.
Let me tell you its not pretty. For either car Honda or Toyota, it's highly recommended to rebuild a motor before dumping a Turbo into it. Anyone can drive it without the rebuild, just don't come complaining when ur a$$ed out with a blown motor.
#50
wow. i didnt know nitrous constituted a fast car.
when you have facts to back up any of your arguments, and ones that actually pertain to the question, please post then. otherwise, im done. id say quit while you're ahead, but you gotta be ahead to begin with.
when you have facts to back up any of your arguments, and ones that actually pertain to the question, please post then. otherwise, im done. id say quit while you're ahead, but you gotta be ahead to begin with.
#51
Originally Posted by hunterUnknown
wow. i didnt know nitrous constituted a fast car.
when you have facts to back up any of your arguments, and ones that actually pertain to the question, please post then. otherwise, im done. id say quit while you're ahead, but you gotta be ahead to begin with.
when you have facts to back up any of your arguments, and ones that actually pertain to the question, please post then. otherwise, im done. id say quit while you're ahead, but you gotta be ahead to begin with.
F.Y.I. NOS is just a cheaper way to gain instant HP incase u didn't get it.
#52
Senior Member
Scion Justice League of America
SL Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 5,594
YEA! I love this thread.... Reading my posts in it makes it seem refreshing
Many, Many guys running turboed tCs and RSX-s without built internals with few to now problems... like me... just be conservative.
My dad can beat up both your guyses dads!
Many, Many guys running turboed tCs and RSX-s without built internals with few to now problems... like me... just be conservative.
My dad can beat up both your guyses dads!
#54
r2d2, nos is temporary and will never make your car be considered actually fast.
i look forward to seeing more turbos out there. i really want one myself, hopefully within 2007!
i look forward to seeing more turbos out there. i really want one myself, hopefully within 2007!
#55
Not my statement
F.Y.I. NOS is just a cheaper way to gain instant HP incase u didn't get it
last time i checked N2O = F/I
from what i've known, a tC needs to be f/i or internally modify the engine block to beat a stock type-s (with equal drivers of course)
#56
Originally Posted by hunterUnknown
r2d2, nos is temporary and will never make your car be considered actually fast.
i look forward to seeing more turbos out there. i really want one myself, hopefully within 2007!
i look forward to seeing more turbos out there. i really want one myself, hopefully within 2007!
#57
NOS is cool on other cars, but nothing I would ever put on mine. Exploding possibility of the canister if you get in an accident is not something I want to be a part of. NA for now, and turbo later. IMO
#58
Originally Posted by R2D2
I agree it is temporary, however Never say never because it CAN & has made cars fast (even though I'm highly against pure NOS powered). I have a buddy that rebuilt his Honda motor (B1 with 120 shot NOS (N/A mind u) which SMOKED the Turboed ones he raced.