8th Generation Honda Civic Forum banner

61 - 78 of 78 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
842 Posts
Wouldn't it be great if his Mustang was really a V8 made to look like a V6. (yes I know the exhaust note would give it away) The R18 would get raped!

Anyway those V6 engines in the Mustangs suck incredibly. Try racing cars with real V6 engines like the 2003 Acura CL-S, Acura NSX, G35 and G37!!

I drive an R18 Civic and if you drive an R18 Civic the best race is between you and another R18 Civic. Then you get to see which car has more mods, or which was better modded or which driver is better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
842 Posts
I just checked out edmunds.com, that Mustang V6 engine has so little power for its size!!
Performance
Base Number of Cylinders: 6 Base Engine Size: 3.8 liters
Base Engine Type: V6 Horsepower: 190 hp
Max Horsepower: 5250 rpm Torque: 220 ft-lbs.
Max Torque: 2750 rpm Drive Type: RWD
Curb weight: 3066lbs.- unless its a convertable: 3208lbs.

It will actually be a little closer than i first thought-especially off a roll. If he crives a convertable then you might just get him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
922 Posts
Andrei'sCivic said:
I just checked out edmunds.com, that Mustang V6 engine has so little power for its size!!
And yet it makes a LOT of power for what it cost. You could EASILY buy a '99-04 V6 Mustang for ~$13k, brand new, at the time.

Also, the V6 in a $90k NSX makes more power than the my $13k V6 Mustang? :eek:mg: Not really an apples-to-apples comparison there... not even between the Mustang and a G35/G37 or something. The V6 Mustangs actual cost puts it in the same price class as the LX/DX/EX Civics, and in that class, 190hp and low-mid 15's w/ a 5-speed is pretty respectable, to say the least.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,705 Posts
Discussion Starter #64
Blainestang said:
And yet it makes a LOT of power for what it cost. You could EASILY buy a '99-04 V6 Mustang for ~$13k, brand new, at the time.

Also, the V6 in a $90k NSX makes more power than the my $13k V6 Mustang? :eek:mg: Not really an apples-to-apples comparison there... not even between the Mustang and a G35/G37 or something. The V6 Mustangs actual cost puts it in the same price class as the LX/DX/EX Civics, and in that class, 190hp and low-mid 15's w/ a 5-speed is pretty respectable, to say the least.
But some stock civics have done mid 15's and they only have 140HP, plus you get great handling, but just to show you am going to beat his mustang and am rolling on 18inch rims..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
922 Posts
Civic Pride said:
But some stock civics have done mid 15's and they only have 140HP, plus you get great handling, but just to show you am going to beat his mustang and am rolling on 18inch rims..
Your reply seems to attribute much too much meaning to this one race. If you win... it doesn't mean the Civic is faster than the Mustang or even AS fast. If HE wins... it doesn't mean the Mustang is faster or even AS fast as the Civic. A single race is statistically worthless in determining which car is truly the faster car, which is what I am talking about.

Any car can win a single race, especially when two cars are relatively close such as these, but what I'm interested in, is what should typically happen given equal driving, based on statistically significant information, such as track times from MANY different cars. This is why I've asked for information on what R18's typically run. You now claim that some have gone mid-15's, stock. That's the kind of info I'm interested in. I already know that 5-speed 99-04 V6 Mustangs typically run mid-high 15's, but are CAPABLE of low 15's, stock. I'd like to figure out what R18's typically run, AND what they are CAPABLE of as well, with excellent driving.

I'm fully aware that the R18 could win a street race against the Mustang. Anything can happen on the street, and therefore, this specific, isolated race means virtually nothing in proving which car is faster. You guys could both drive TERRIBLY, him runnning the equivalent of a 17.2 and you a 17.1, but without those numbers, ridiculous and false assumptions are made. Assumptions that the Civic is the faster car (which could be true, but not based on such a race)... assumptions that the Civic must be capable of low 15's or it wouldn't have won (which could be true, but not based on such a race), etc.

Point is, I'm MUCH more interested in the times that these cars typically run, rather than an individual race, and so I'd like to see those mid-15's... timeslips, threads, etc... because I want to know what they're REALLY capable of, not what happens in a random street race.

To bring everything together, the point is that what really matters is typical and best times for each car, because that information can be logically be applied to future situations. One street race... even multiple street... cannot.


So,

99-04 5-speed V6
Typical: mid-high 15's
Excellent: low 15's

R18 Civic
Typical: ?
Excellent: ?

Fill in these numbers by looking at many different 1/4-mile times for stock R18's, and we will actually accomplish something meaningful in this thread... information that can be extended to other situations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
i've got a bone stock 07 si coupe, v6 stang followed me off the freeway and we went at it up a pretty steep hill. not even CLOSE, i even peddled for him and let him catch up, he couldn't hang.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
251 Posts
I've never been a fan of the modern day V6 muscle car (if muscle would even be the right word to use in this scenario) as I've felt they were always lacking in relation to their weight... now...

... the 06-07 v6 stangs on the other hand though are pretty good considering the cost. Performance wise they're just about right for the price and I think they look great. Of course in terms of raw power... there's no question that a V8 is the standard for any modern day muscle car. (Btw, the LSx can nevar lose)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,705 Posts
Discussion Starter #69
This thread has one guy saying he has done 15.6 on a sedan with only a modded air intake box, and he is not the only one there is another guy on here that said he ran 15.5 i think or something when he was stock..
http://www.8thcivic.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24519&highlight=1/4+mile+r18

So i don't see the point of racing him then, even if i win you will say that i beat him and not his car lol..

I have not gone to the track because the closest one to me is only 1/8 of a mile..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
922 Posts
Civic Pride said:
This thread has one guy saying he has done 15.6 on a sedan with only a modded air intake box, and he is not the only one there is another guy on here that said he ran 15.5 i think or something when he was stock..
http://www.8thcivic.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24519&highlight=1/4+mile+r18
Interesting thread. It seems like most guys are running 16's, and that, given amazing driving, someone could run a mid-15 in a stock-ish R18.


Civic Pride said:
So i don't see the point of racing him then, even if i win you will say that i beat him and not his car lol..
Well, take a look at the facts.


The fastest stock-ish R18 you can produce ran a 15.6 @ 86 w/ a 2.2 60'.

My slower-than-stock '00 5-speed Mustang went [email protected] w/ a 2.331 60'.


So, not only was my car .1 faster in the 1/4, but it also had a 4 mph faster trap speed, AND a much higher 60'. A difference of .1 in 60' is generally assumed to result in a .2 difference in 1/4-mile ET.

So, not only is my Mustang faster than the fastest R18 you can find at the moment, but it also had significant room to improve the 60' and likely the shifting as well... the 15.5 was run my very first time to the track.

Now, I'm not saying that the Mustang will inherently beat you, or that the Mustang driver inherently sucks if you beat him, but from the facts that we actually have, based on many Mustang times and several civic times, it seems that the Mustang should win given equal driving and such. Is it close enough that excellent driving could make the difference? Probably. Is the Civic going to win without outdriving the Mustang? Probably not.

So, yeah, if you win, it'll probably be because you are a better driver than the Mustang guy, OR your mods make up the difference, but I don't see why that eliminates the reason for you to race. If we all only cared about which car was theoretically faster, we'd never race at all. However, looking at times from what many other cars have run previously, is the best method that exists for discussing logically a possible outcome.


Civic Pride said:
I have not gone to the track because the closest one to me is only 1/8 of a mile..
That will still give you a decent idea of what you'd run in the 1/4. Obviously 1/4-mile is preferred, but 1/8th is useful as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
543 Posts
Blainestang said:
And yet it makes a LOT of power for what it cost. You could EASILY buy a '99-04 V6 Mustang for ~$13k, brand new, at the time.

Also, the V6 in a $90k NSX makes more power than the my $13k V6 Mustang? :eek:mg: Not really an apples-to-apples comparison there... not even between the Mustang and a G35/G37 or something. The V6 Mustangs actual cost puts it in the same price class as the LX/DX/EX Civics, and in that class, 190hp and low-mid 15's w/ a 5-speed is pretty respectable, to say the least.
V6 mustangs are assembled in mexico :eek:hnoes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
543 Posts
Blainestang said:
So, not only was my car .1 faster in the 1/4, but it also had a 4 mph faster trap speed, AND a much higher 60'. A difference of .1 in 60' is generally assumed to result in a .2 difference in 1/4-mile ET.
this is very untrue, I understand your point, better 60' better run, but in no way is .1 = to .2 off your time. Ive ran a 14.5 with a 60' of 2.3 and a 14.8 with a 60' of 2.2, so yes it can make a difference but saying .2 is little ummm, bonkers..:thumb:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
922 Posts
GreyK20z said:
this is very untrue, I understand your point, better 60' better run, but in no way is .1 = to .2 off your time. Ive ran a 14.5 with a 60' of 2.3 and a 14.8 with a 60' of 2.2, so yes it can make a difference but saying .2 is little ummm, bonkers..:thumb:
Um...Of course, this is assuming that all else is equal. Clearly, something happened differently when you ran .3 slower with a quicker launch.

Fact is, if you are going faster at the 60' mark... let's say 1mph, then you will be covering ground 1mph faster all the way down the track, thereby multiplying the benefit of the better launch... assuming all else is equal.

Obviously, if you get a better launch and then miss a gear or something, you're not going to run .2 better.

It's simply a rule of thumb, such as "100lb = .1 seconds".

Clearly, there are many variables that go into that as well. If you take 100lb off of a 2500lb civic, it's going to make a heck of a lot more difference than 100lb off of an H2.

If it makes you feel better, though, go ahead and say .1 in the 60' = .1 1/4-mile ET... nothing changes. [email protected] is still better than [email protected] by .1 and 4mph, and there's still room for improvement w/ the Mustang. The overall point doesn't change, even if you want to nitpick the intricacies of "rules of thumb".

It's like saying, "Oh, but you took a dump before the race and the Civic driver didn't!!!!" ... neither make any difference to the race or my point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Only a R18 said:
I think the cars would be extremly even. There is no such thing as a fast v6 mustang. The 05+ v6 ones are ok i guess.....
no fast v6 mustangs? so trapping 118.5mph in the 1/4 in my stock longblock stock geared v6 mustang is slow?


Pdivizzle0112 said:
the 05 v6 mustangs couldnt even keep up with my 06 element...i can imagine the Si...
lol

+1 Blainestang. a lot of ppl dont understand that muscle cars of the 60s were running 14s and 15s. my v6 100% stock went 15.26 and eventual 14.32 with a bad clutch with only boltons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,705 Posts
Discussion Starter #76 (Edited)
I race him today but not a good race i will not even consider that a race, this is what happen, i was driving with a friend of mine he weights 240lbs and me i weight170lbs the mustang owners weights about 140lbs at most, so he pulls next to me while i was doing 35 in 2nd gear(not sure what gear he was on) and he said lets race right there, so we both step on it i had a slow start and he pulls on me like 1/2 half a car right of the back then he shifted and i pull on him badly like 1 car before i had to shift to 3rd and then we stop..

so my conclusion is that if i had started the race at a good rpm range i will have smoke him right of the back(i started at arounf 2500rpms and we all know the R18 can't race at that rpm) and maybe pull a few cars on him by the end of the 1/4 mile.. + dont forget the extra 240lbs i had on my car..

But we are going to take our cars to the 1/8 mile and race a real race sometime.. from a stop. i will make sure to record it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,232 Posts
My 2001 Diamante is faster 0-60 then my friend's 99 V6 mustang. Both are autos.

I'm pretty damn sure the Si is alot faster to 60 than my Diamante, so, I would say that an SI can take on a V6 Mustang even if it's manual.

Don't know about a non Si though....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
Ooh this is a fun thread.

2-3 weeks after I bought my 2006 civic lx 5spd and it was bone stock, I raced a 2005 mustang v6. It was from a ~20mph roll to ~60mph. I was 2-3 cars ahead. We pulled up to a red light, I was turning left, he was turning right. He flipped me off and sped off.

The second race was another 2005 mustang, I think it was a 5 spd, and unknown mods.. at minimum he had a chrome dual exhaust. We raced from ~55mph - ~80mph. When we let off, I was ~2 cars ahead of him. I had p2r + light wheels.
 
61 - 78 of 78 Posts
Top