Originally posted by MrFatBooty
I was thinking that the RSX has really long gears to pull through, but I've looked up the specs and the ratios aren't really that much different from the assorted B-series transmissions out there. The base 5-speed is very very close to the LS tranny but with a shorter FD and the Type-S 6-speed fits its ratios into about the same range as the 5-speed from the GSR. So I have no clue why they're so slow. Maybe there McPherson struts combined with not-so-sticky stock tires are conspiring to screw up traction on the launch.
The dyno numbers are still nice, regardless of how well they are executed in timeslips. 
i had thought maybe that was the reason too, but like you said, theyre pretty close in comparison, since the base model RSX is somewhat of the replacement LS and the Type-S a replacement GSR. and these cars arent much "slower" than the LS/GSR (respectively), its just they SHOULD be quicker than their counterparts....but theyre not
h: as for the tires, i dont see how Honda would use any tires worse than the stock Michelin XGTV's...at the worse case, whatever tires found on the RSXs are probably just as bad the XGTV.
but yeah i do agree, the spec numbers that the K20 puts down is pretty impressive...too bad it stops there. itd be awesome if the RSX can actually transfer those good numbers into good times... better competition and we can also stand up for it when in a conversation about Hondas and other cars... otherwise i find myself just shrugging off the RSX and talking about the B-series
h:
and also i agree that the K20 probably does gain "slightly" more benefits from boltons as lets say a well designed and smooth flowing cold air intake than opposed to a B18C1. but too bad the B18C ownz the K20 :fawk:
