SLoW SHO

I was in my friends bone stock 2000 Civic Si with 150,000 miles on it last night. We were at a light and some cocky ass kid in a 2.4SS was giving us revs through his n1 cannon. So he at least had a muffler on it, probably a few bolt ons, but we'll just say he had a muffler. He was also by himself.

So anyway my friend drives his car pretty well, he launched good but the 2.4SS launched just a little better (amazing this moron could actually drive). They both hit 2nd about the same time with us a half car back. Through second gear we were inching back on him, we both hit 3rd about the same time with the race being nose to nose but the Si was pulling. In 3rd we started leaving him pretty good, by the time we hit 4th ~95mph we were out a solid 2 cars and pulling.

Good times

BTW, this Si is the one with 160hp and nothing for TORQUE. Not that a tq rating means anything at all...

joeworkstoohard

i call BS, if it's a stock 00 si with 150k on, it should have been eaten alive, or the 2.4 driver was horrid, or it was an automatic.

omgshesaboy

uh yeah maybe if it was an 07 or 06.. I race my friends civic that has an older si motor with header back exhaust intake weight reduction and sts and from a 40 mph roll its dead even and from a 20 mph roll i crawl past him by like 5 feet so I'm just going to assume the ss/na driver was horrible

SLoW SHO

This car has ran 15.3 @ 89 bone stock thats just what they do, sorry the SS/NA is slower than a 2000 Si, saw it with my own eyes. The 06-08 Si is more of a mid-high 14 second car with traps easilly over 95mph.

lsjwannabe

iTrader: (1)

who cares there both slow, **** happens

Ryan88924

I think its possible if the ss was auto but not if it was standard. slow sho I see your from around CT what area?

FastSSinNH

Crappy driver FTL.

JPizzle

Yea, we should definately own those older Si's... But I like the looks of the older gens, (like 00).

Anything is possible... But I don't really think so.

SLoW SHO

The SS/NA was standard, he even chirped 3rd lol

Anyhow, I could be in Southington in 5 minutes.

TXRLU

Do you mean a peak TORQUE rating means nothing or TORQUE itself means nothing? I could understand ricers thinking torque means nothing, because their cars usually only have enough torque to tear through a wet paper bag once without having to do a rebuild afterwards. If you mean peak torque means nothing, then I will agree with you, its more AVERAGE TORQUE throughout the rev range that matters, at least in a race. As the saying goes, "HP sells cars, Torque wins races". And if you meant to say, "TORQUE MEANS NOTHING" then all I'm going to say is just.........WOW.......

SLoW SHO

The saying horsepower sells cars and tq wins races is completely pointless. You could have a car with 50 ft/lbs of tq run circles around a car with 500 ft/lbs of tq.

TALON

i believe you because anything can happen in a race, but i have an auto and i keep right up next to the new SI's so i would have to guess i would beat an older one for shure!!!
maybe he just needs to work on his driving next time he pulls up!!!

SLoW SHO

As you just said, anything can happen in a race... Because a new Si should completely demolish you.

slowboyy06

yeah those b16 are crazy when the vtec kick in so point you mad about the no tq is pointless cause its makes up when the vtec kick in thats wy the balt had a lead at first then u guys came up once that vtec pop in its a hole different ball game i have seen balts smoke turbo hatchies with dr's and the balt was stage 2 with meth and bet them buy 3 cars but dont worrrrrry the 08 ss/tc will take care of all this haterasion balt takeover is coming

TXRLU

Run circles? You mean as in use that 50 lb/ft of torque to tighten the lug nuts of the car with the 500 lb/ft of torque's wheels? Yeah I can see that.

And no that saying isn't completely pointless, unless you have some sort of scientific proof that will unravel all the racing that has taken place since the begining of racing history with some sort of jedi-mind-tricks type physics that dominates the ricer world.

Please don't go off on some ricer-pipe-dream-tangent with me about how you can gear a car with the STUPIDEST gearing with 1 lb/ft of torque that will run 1 second in the quarter mile. Torque is an important part of any equation where auto racing is involved. To say that its insignificant is just ignorant.


If torque is such a non-factor, then why is it a STOCK Cobalt SS can beat a STOCK RSX-S 0-60 AND 1/4 mile (with the RSX-S having a 5 HP edge)? You know why? Cause the Cobalt SS has about 40-50 more TORQUE than the RSX.

And with that I'm done trying to convince you otherwise.....

Projekt

demolish? wrong...its a drivers race but the SI has the edge..

as for the 2000 SI..i call big time bullshit..the 2.4 should "demolish" it.

Lets see...

2002 Honda Civic Si 7.6 15.8 (R&T July '02)

so your telling me your stock honda, with LOTS of clicks on it..managed to shave half a second..stock..of R&T's testing back in 02...last time i checked..cars lose horsepower with age..
i understand shaving time off of tests is very do-able..considering ive done it..but by half a second on a "weathered" car seems a bit unrealistic

SLoW SHO

You're retarded. Put them both on a dyno, the Cobalt will make about 30whp more than an RSX at the wheels. Congrats, you just lost all credibility by saying an RSX makes more power than an SS/SC...

To answer you anyway, the Cobalt wins because it makes more POWER. Why does a cobalt lose to a 138tq S2000? Because the S2000 makes more POWER.

Nice job on the mag times. You're just mad a stock 2000 Si ran a better 1/4 mile than your modded 2.4ss

Projekt

again another ******* post...i ran 15.45 stock..modded i would cleary run better then that..but hey im not all about the E-racing, next time i find a stock 2000 SI (and beleive me theres lots around here) ill race him, and proove to you that your full of ****

SLoW SHO

Whatever, 15.45 @ 86 is slower than 15.3 @ 89. You lost

If you don't think a 2000si is a drivers race with a 2.4ss you're head needs to be removed from your ass. Advantage, si.

Projekt

oh i dunno..a little thing called REAR-WHEEL-DRIVE!

SLoW SHO

S2000 is still pulling hardcore from a roll...

Hockeyman

iTrader: (4)

why is this so hard to believe? You can have the fastest car in the world and lose because you can't drive...it's always a drivers race.

Projekt

this is your worst statement yet...

ANY ******* RACE IS A DRIVERS RACE! if the driver is a ******* ******* and doesnt know how to put it in first he will not win!!!

advantage SI? lets do some numbers here...

SS-more horsepower
SS-more torque
SS-Newer (doesnt suffer from 150,000 Miles)
Honda-Vtok?
Honda- Less weight

Honda:
dohc I4 1.6 / 97 160(Hp) 111 (Tq)
Curb Weight, lbs. 2262

SS:
dohc I4 2.4 /145 173 @ 6200 163 @ 4800
Curb Weight, lbs. 2730

alright, ill give u the honda weights less..but im sorry...the SS cleary has the advantage, you need to pull your head out of your honda bias ass and open your eyes

SLoW SHO

15.3 @ 89 is quicker than 15.45 @ 86.69 so obviously all your paper racing and guessing means a whole lot of nothing.

2000si > or = 2.4ss

Projekt

A qouted example of "paper racing"