guys i need lots of help. im undecided on whether to choose the new civics or the 2002 rsx. i'm not very into fixing up my ride. maybe an intake and exhaust is pushing it. but i do love sports car. Performance and looks wise which would you guys choose.
Civic EX vs. Rsx Type-s
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Joined
·
6,940 Posts
I'm already hating myself for even answering this thread...*sigh*
I say neither. If you start a thread with the Si in comparision, I might bite. But I doubt it.
I say neither. If you start a thread with the Si in comparision, I might bite. But I doubt it.
Joined
·
332 Posts
if you want sports performance, get an Si or an RSX. Civics has a pretty responsive motor for a 1.x liter, but they're not tuned for performance... hence the 40MPG.
The new Si and the RSX-S run a 200hp DOHC 2.0L VTEC... a completely different beast than the economy 140hp 1.8L SOHC VTEC.
The new Si and the RSX-S run a 200hp DOHC 2.0L VTEC... a completely different beast than the economy 140hp 1.8L SOHC VTEC.
Joined
·
6,954 Posts
As said previously, EX vs. RSX-S is not really a good comparison. Either look at the EX vs. the regular RSX or the Si vs. the RSX-S.
I was shopping the RSX-S when the literature for the '06 Si came out. The LSD moved me to the Si, otherwise I would be driving the Type S now.
EX vs. regular RSX...myself, I would take the RSX, though if you are cost-minded the EX will run you a few grand less. I like the interior feel of the Acrua, fit and finish, as well as the exterior look. Can't say much about the audio systems in comparison. The EX coupe I took for a ride sounded fine, though I was not really comparing it to the RSX.
I was shopping the RSX-S when the literature for the '06 Si came out. The LSD moved me to the Si, otherwise I would be driving the Type S now.
EX vs. regular RSX...myself, I would take the RSX, though if you are cost-minded the EX will run you a few grand less. I like the interior feel of the Acrua, fit and finish, as well as the exterior look. Can't say much about the audio systems in comparison. The EX coupe I took for a ride sounded fine, though I was not really comparing it to the RSX.
Joined
·
2,560 Posts
02 RSX is old....
id get the 06 civic cuz it's 4 years NEWER! and if you get the Si, it would be cheaper than 06 RSX and have same performance.
id get the 06 civic cuz it's 4 years NEWER! and if you get the Si, it would be cheaper than 06 RSX and have same performance.
Joined
·
7,824 Posts
Apples to apples....Janizary said:
I dunno why people even begin to think that a civic is a performance or sports car, or that slapping on an intake and fart cannon will make it one. Even the name should tip people off that it's not a race car for christ sakes. It's an econobox, period. A damned good one too.
Anyways, it'll never go fast without serious work, at which point it would be more worth getting something already made to go fast, at least IMO. The civics, at least the new coupes, do handle well for what it is, and being a small car along with that, you can throw it around quite a bit if you wanted. Between a new civic and an 02 RSX-S, I'd take the civic. Even the RSX isnt THAT great, and I think that the civic is more comfortable, would be brand new instead of 6yrs old, and get much better MPG. Being small and with the decent handling, you get your kicks a little throwing it around like a sports car, and it does move ok for it's size and purpose. It's a worth while comprimise IMO. If your #1 goal is to go fast, I think I'd be looking elsewhere. AT LEAST an SRT-4, Cobalt SS, WRX, something along those lines if you need to stay near the $20k mark.
Anyways, it'll never go fast without serious work, at which point it would be more worth getting something already made to go fast, at least IMO. The civics, at least the new coupes, do handle well for what it is, and being a small car along with that, you can throw it around quite a bit if you wanted. Between a new civic and an 02 RSX-S, I'd take the civic. Even the RSX isnt THAT great, and I think that the civic is more comfortable, would be brand new instead of 6yrs old, and get much better MPG. Being small and with the decent handling, you get your kicks a little throwing it around like a sports car, and it does move ok for it's size and purpose. It's a worth while comprimise IMO. If your #1 goal is to go fast, I think I'd be looking elsewhere. AT LEAST an SRT-4, Cobalt SS, WRX, something along those lines if you need to stay near the $20k mark.
I was thinking on the performance end when i debated the two... I test drove both and they both are incredible!! although the gear box is a lil funny feeling in the rsx its still rides smooth and I love the way it feels. The civic on the other hand has great handling.. I"m not looking towards ricing out my car or anything. just straight up stocked performance...
GET THE RSX AND DONT LOOK BACK.
i had a whole 2 paragraphs, but ill just cut to the point so i dont offend anyone.
BOTTOM LINE.....A CIVIC IS A CIVIC...IT IS NOT A PERFORMANCE CAR...no car you get for 15-18 grand is. If you're gonna spend another couple of thousands of dollars to make it go faster, well ****, why dont you just buy the car thats in the 26-35 grand range, like a 350z. if you really want to go fast and "out-perform" people.. get a damn used sportbike for 5grand.
please...stop ricing out perfectly good cars.
i had a whole 2 paragraphs, but ill just cut to the point so i dont offend anyone.
BOTTOM LINE.....A CIVIC IS A CIVIC...IT IS NOT A PERFORMANCE CAR...no car you get for 15-18 grand is. If you're gonna spend another couple of thousands of dollars to make it go faster, well ****, why dont you just buy the car thats in the 26-35 grand range, like a 350z. if you really want to go fast and "out-perform" people.. get a damn used sportbike for 5grand.
please...stop ricing out perfectly good cars.
I would consider a 2006 civic si a sports car, as it has good performance for a 4 cyl. with a similar engine and more sporting equipment than the rsx type-s
hence the LSD, close ratio 6 speed, 8500 rpm redline, and a k20z3 and under 20k starting (base) price... and what? It weighs less? sport bucket seats? beautiful exhaust note? stock??!?! crazy, yea you could buy a faster car....haa
* 1 *srt-4's are not being made anymore dip.....
* 2 the colbalt SS come's with a supercharger and the build quality is less than ideal, have fun with repares and its not EVEN fast for what it is.....
* 3 have you even seen the new WRX's? that thing is hideous but hey, w/e tickles your fancy, see id wanna car I could take my girl out in. dunno....
*4 the rsx is more expensive. what they start at like $23-24k now right? paying for a slightly redesigned car. Barley different since 6 or so years.
*5 my grandpa drives a 350z.... they sound cool, but i dont see them unless modded out, as any sorta threat. chip and exhaust on my car and i'll rape them all day long.
hey u could always look at those wierd saturn's. but i see the civic being a better choice, oh and theres the scion....haa tc what a joke. you wanna rifle off any other under 20k ideas? 350z haa. Some people have bugets and brains...
hence the LSD, close ratio 6 speed, 8500 rpm redline, and a k20z3 and under 20k starting (base) price... and what? It weighs less? sport bucket seats? beautiful exhaust note? stock??!?! crazy, yea you could buy a faster car....haa
* 1 *srt-4's are not being made anymore dip.....
* 2 the colbalt SS come's with a supercharger and the build quality is less than ideal, have fun with repares and its not EVEN fast for what it is.....
* 3 have you even seen the new WRX's? that thing is hideous but hey, w/e tickles your fancy, see id wanna car I could take my girl out in. dunno....
*4 the rsx is more expensive. what they start at like $23-24k now right? paying for a slightly redesigned car. Barley different since 6 or so years.
*5 my grandpa drives a 350z.... they sound cool, but i dont see them unless modded out, as any sorta threat. chip and exhaust on my car and i'll rape them all day long.
hey u could always look at those wierd saturn's. but i see the civic being a better choice, oh and theres the scion....haa tc what a joke. you wanna rifle off any other under 20k ideas? 350z haa. Some people have bugets and brains...
lol...this is exactly why i try not to post my opinions in forums.
1.he was compairing the EX to the type-s.......not the SI.
2.why spend the same amount of money to make the civic go as fast as a bone-stock type-s or 350 or wrx or evo8? when you can buy those cars out the dealer with the 200+ hp? how is that having brains or a budget?
dont get me wrong, im not putting the civic down. i just dont try to make it seem what its not....im buying the civic cus of the bang for the buck and reliability. not to go out there and be fast and the furious.
chip and put fart-cans and 20's on a civic EX all you want...**** go all out and put some NOS and turbo....but if you wanna compair apples and oranges.....my bone stock sportbike will outperform any day.
to each his own...
im jelouse of your granpops..i wish i could afford his car.
1.he was compairing the EX to the type-s.......not the SI.
2.why spend the same amount of money to make the civic go as fast as a bone-stock type-s or 350 or wrx or evo8? when you can buy those cars out the dealer with the 200+ hp? how is that having brains or a budget?
dont get me wrong, im not putting the civic down. i just dont try to make it seem what its not....im buying the civic cus of the bang for the buck and reliability. not to go out there and be fast and the furious.
chip and put fart-cans and 20's on a civic EX all you want...**** go all out and put some NOS and turbo....but if you wanna compair apples and oranges.....my bone stock sportbike will outperform any day.
to each his own...
im jelouse of your granpops..i wish i could afford his car.
Joined
·
7,824 Posts
AN RSX IS AN RSX...IT'S NOT A PERFORMANCE CAR. Not unless you buy the more expensive Type-S, which is a performance car. So you're right, A CIVIC IS A CIVIC...IT IS NOT A PERFORMANCE CAR. Not unless you buy the more expensive Si, which is a performance car...xride717 said:
Stop comparing apples to oranges...
xride717 said:
exactly.
Just threw out a few ideas off the top of my head, and given the scope of the original post, was meaning near new to brand new, not just brand new. As for myself, I would of gotten none of the above. If it were me in that situation, I would of thrown a few more bucks in the pot and got an 05 mustang GT, or else a low mileage mach1 mustang if I needed to stay in the price range. The 05 is not the best bang for the buck nor the fastest thing around for the price, but quality has improved tremendously on the new style and it just looks bad ass. An 03 or 04 mach1 would be great bang for the buck. 300hp stock, couple year old car with low mileage, priced in the teens and not much more then a normal GT which isnt anything special isnt a bad way to go. Of course the camaro would be in there too if they were still being made, but even the last models is getting a little too far in the used catagory for my taste when going after a new or like new car.
sigh*xride717 said:
1.) no ****. i did read the topic. i was giving him a better comparison.
2.)civic si bone stock i believe is faster than the type-s. and under 20
K (BASE) will be a *budget* having brains to buy a car that is affordable. *bang for the buck* is right.... and im so far from fast and the furious its not even funney, body kits and clear tails are a joke to be laughed at. i like my rides clean, thats why im a german car buff. stick to the roots...
for the record i dont use fart cans , a 20th AE gti 6 speed 1.8t with a waterjacketed ko3 sport is what i rock, with a 3" stainless steel turboback exhaust. and a APR stage 2 DPP (direct port programming). oh yea and their not 20" im not 50 i roll 18" aristo's on michellin sports.
yea i gotta 01 r6. thats for when i wanna go faster....
Joined
·
7,824 Posts
Ditto...wickett said:
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!