RSX type-s or 2001 Prelude (stock)
Power of Dreams
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,588
Likes: 0
From: San Jose Ca
welcome to HAN
i agree to the fact that the prelude is too heavy
i does handle quite nicely for a car it's weight
the type S should be slightly faster if driven equally
the USDM type s is ofcourse more compareble to the old GS-R and is a bit slower than the Type R, IMO type s are a dime a dozen
97-01 SH 15.8 1/4
Type S 15.2 1/4
USDM ITR 14.8 1/4
JDM ITR 96 spec 14.9 1/4
JDM ITR 98 spec 14.5 1/4
JDM ITR/ RSX type R 2003 spec 14.9 1/4
i agree to the fact that the prelude is too heavy
i does handle quite nicely for a car it's weight
the type S should be slightly faster if driven equally
the USDM type s is ofcourse more compareble to the old GS-R and is a bit slower than the Type R, IMO type s are a dime a dozen
97-01 SH 15.8 1/4
Type S 15.2 1/4
USDM ITR 14.8 1/4
JDM ITR 96 spec 14.9 1/4
JDM ITR 98 spec 14.5 1/4
JDM ITR/ RSX type R 2003 spec 14.9 1/4
#212
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
From: LA
Originally Posted by eLuderTypeS
Not to nitpick, but the 99-01 ludes push 200HP to the crank. The 5hp increase was added after the 97-98 models. Just an FYI. Not that it would make it any faster.
I just bought my 99SH. I almost bought a 02 RSX type S, but it does'nt feel like it has enough torque from a dead stop. Always have to keep the revs high. Love the six peed tranny, but the damn thing is just too small. I felt like I was driving a clown car.(I'm 6 ft 4in.)
The prelude IS heavy which is it's downfall. If they were the same weight, the lude would win IMO-it has slightly better torque.
HP is for braggin' rights
Torque gets you down the road.
Just my 2 cents
BTW, I'm a newbie here....Greetings and salutations to all!
I just bought my 99SH. I almost bought a 02 RSX type S, but it does'nt feel like it has enough torque from a dead stop. Always have to keep the revs high. Love the six peed tranny, but the damn thing is just too small. I felt like I was driving a clown car.(I'm 6 ft 4in.)
The prelude IS heavy which is it's downfall. If they were the same weight, the lude would win IMO-it has slightly better torque.
HP is for braggin' rights
Torque gets you down the road.
Just my 2 cents
BTW, I'm a newbie here....Greetings and salutations to all!
reason being, all 5th gen base preludes dyno ~165 whp. sh's around 160 whp. 4th gen VTEC ~165.
if there was a hp increase in 99, then they made their trannies less efficient.
also, hp is a function of torque. they are related, vis a vis rev limit. if a car makes 200 hp with 130 ft lbs of torque, or 200 hp with 200 ft lbs of torque, they both have the same power output, they just get there in different ways. torque is good, don't get me wrong, but it's not quite so simple as that.
Farscape 1 pilot
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
From: Athens, GA
I dunno that it was a lie, Honda if anything usually leans toward being too conservative rating HP at the cam.
Having test driven both the RSX Type S and the Prelude (and brought the Prelude) the Prelude is a much nicer handling car, better suspension IMHO, definately has better torque. I also believe that the RSX S and the Prelude are about 90 lbs different, the RSX isn't that lightweight although I dont think either car is heavy. Of course I Think that because running the qtr mile sucks ass (if I wanted a ****ing qtr mile car I woulda gotten a Mustang).
If you want to see the Prelude shine, go find a mountain-y area and bust the car up and down some twisty roads. I think it was Car and Driver? that said during the run of the 5th gen, best handling car under $30,000 and 4th best handling car period.
Having test driven both the RSX Type S and the Prelude (and brought the Prelude) the Prelude is a much nicer handling car, better suspension IMHO, definately has better torque. I also believe that the RSX S and the Prelude are about 90 lbs different, the RSX isn't that lightweight although I dont think either car is heavy. Of course I Think that because running the qtr mile sucks ass (if I wanted a ****ing qtr mile car I woulda gotten a Mustang).
If you want to see the Prelude shine, go find a mountain-y area and bust the car up and down some twisty roads. I think it was Car and Driver? that said during the run of the 5th gen, best handling car under $30,000 and 4th best handling car period.
Farscape 1 pilot
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
From: Athens, GA
Well you can make anything anything. I can take a Civic, drop in a better engine, redo the suspension and take out any stuff that adds weight..if given enough time and money the Civic will waste the RSX S.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
I've got a 99 type sh with koni yellows and neuspeed greens. I've got about 730 bucks in the setup and there's no way in hell a rsx will touch this car on a mountain or curvy road. Who cares about all out drag racing or straight line speed. If that's what I wanted I sure wouldn't have bought a prelude!!! I did do a 5 grand engine build but don't have the block back yet from GE. The Head is being done by portflow. I'm excited that I'll have a NA monster with forged internals. If I put 215-240 to the wheels I'll be totally happy considering I put about 168 to the wheels before the engine build. This should make twisty roads even more fun.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,052
Likes: 0
From: Long Island, NY
Originally Posted by monkey
actually, all H22's (non type s) make 190 bhp. doesn't matter when they were made. the advertised increase in hp was a lie.
reason being, all 5th gen base preludes dyno ~165 whp. sh's around 160 whp. 4th gen VTEC ~165.
if there was a hp increase in 99, then they made their trannies less efficient.
also, hp is a function of torque. they are related, vis a vis rev limit. if a car makes 200 hp with 130 ft lbs of torque, or 200 hp with 200 ft lbs of torque, they both have the same power output, they just get there in different ways. torque is good, don't get me wrong, but it's not quite so simple as that.
reason being, all 5th gen base preludes dyno ~165 whp. sh's around 160 whp. 4th gen VTEC ~165.
if there was a hp increase in 99, then they made their trannies less efficient.
also, hp is a function of torque. they are related, vis a vis rev limit. if a car makes 200 hp with 130 ft lbs of torque, or 200 hp with 200 ft lbs of torque, they both have the same power output, they just get there in different ways. torque is good, don't get me wrong, but it's not quite so simple as that.
as far as the RSX goes, its definitely a drivers race, ive beaten RSX-S's and lost to a couple also, of course hondata can add 12-20 HP for a RSX-S...so most of the RSX-S i see near me use hondata.
i raced a type-s with hondata + i/e at beaver run and i was letting off in the turns, he put some distance on me in the straights but i always caught up to him quickly in the corners...but im nuts tho.
~kris
#212
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
From: LA
Originally Posted by preludedriver99
I've got a 99 type sh with koni yellows and neuspeed greens. I've got about 730 bucks in the setup and there's no way in hell a rsx will touch this car on a mountain or curvy road. Who cares about all out drag racing or straight line speed. If that's what I wanted I sure wouldn't have bought a prelude!!! I did do a 5 grand engine build but don't have the block back yet from GE. The Head is being done by portflow. I'm excited that I'll have a NA monster with forged internals. If I put 215-240 to the wheels I'll be totally happy considering I put about 168 to the wheels before the engine build. This should make twisty roads even more fun.
as far as ATTS vs a helical LSD, we all know the winner of that particular battle. hint, it's the LSD.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
OMG, I have to say Honda stuff things up with the Acura brand. The Rsx is the Integra Type R, its only in America that people call it an Acura. Anyway
it has 1.998-litre 16-valve DOHC front-mounted transverse inline four-cylinder with i-VTEC
Weight 1160kg
Power: 147kW @ 7400rpm = 127kw/tonne
Torque: 192Nm @ 6000rpm =165.5Nm/tonne
Compression ratio: 11.0:1
Bore x stroke: 86.0 x 86.0mm
The Lude has Twin-overhead camshaft, 16-valve, VTEC four cylinder
Weight 1305kg
Power: 147kW at 7000rpm = 113kw/tonne
Torque: 212Nm at 5250rpm = 162.4Nm per tonne
Bore/stroke: 87.0mm/90.7mm
So basically it is a Drivers race like everyone is saying because the difference is only 3.1 Nm/tonne. Also the lude gets those output figures at a slightly lower Rpms of 750rpms for the torque!
it has 1.998-litre 16-valve DOHC front-mounted transverse inline four-cylinder with i-VTEC
Weight 1160kg
Power: 147kW @ 7400rpm = 127kw/tonne
Torque: 192Nm @ 6000rpm =165.5Nm/tonne
Compression ratio: 11.0:1
Bore x stroke: 86.0 x 86.0mm
The Lude has Twin-overhead camshaft, 16-valve, VTEC four cylinder
Weight 1305kg
Power: 147kW at 7000rpm = 113kw/tonne
Torque: 212Nm at 5250rpm = 162.4Nm per tonne
Bore/stroke: 87.0mm/90.7mm
So basically it is a Drivers race like everyone is saying because the difference is only 3.1 Nm/tonne. Also the lude gets those output figures at a slightly lower Rpms of 750rpms for the torque!
Originally Posted by 98preludeSH
I agree. I have a 98 Prelude type SH with skunk2 cat back and an intake, (wow...) and my friend just got a 2002 RSX-s. It is basically a drivers race stock for stock, but if both are properly driven to their maximum potential, the RSX WILL win. Although 0-60 it will be that much ahead of the lude. After 60 though the RSX will begin to pull on the lude alot more. This is based on me racing my friend and we both know how to drive. This is a slightly side note but I have seen alot of people on differant forums claiming that stock for stock a GSR will beet a 99 Lude. If both are properly driven the lude will win. I was rather impressed with the RSX though, they handle beutifully and acceleration was good though not seriously impressive. But if you look at it in the light that a RSX is just a new integra. A type s runs the same times as a type r but a type r was not a regular production car like the type s so the type s compares more to the GSR, which it is a huge improvement on.
