frankiietc

They Have A K24?

frankiietc

Dang Crazy..Torque Is Higher Though But Still..From A Honda Owners Perspective. "You Don't Need Torque Brah" Basically Making The Same HP. If They Say The FRS is Slow, Males They're Car Slow Also Lmao..Also Making The New Car Junk Because Supposibly 2.4 Engines Are Slow When They Relate To The tC..Not Knowing Our Engines Are Low Compression.

dropzone

^Yes.

They have a thread on comparing the two also lol.
http://www.8thcivic.com/forums/civic...scion-frs.html

frankiietc

Wow Embarrasing. They Upped The Displacement by .4 and Only Made 4 or 5 HP? Lmao

TheQuietThings

The better driver will win. Not the FR-S

yellowxhoodie

iTrader: (16)

lol @ thinking FWD vs RWD are the only determining factors as to how good a car is.

And Stop Capitalizing The First Letter In Every Word, All It Does Is Make Everything Harder to Read.

rhythmnsmoke

Anyhow, No one mentioned this yet. But did anyone realize that this is the same track that they did the Genesis 2.0T vs FR-S on? Note the lap time of the FR-S

FR-S 1:26.2
HFP SI 1:26.5

That's .3 Tenths of a second faster than the HFP SI...so I guess if the SI "Dominated" the BRZ, I guess the FR-S simply "DESTROYS" the HFP SI

frankiietc

It's one of the major factors for a high speed track. Or your saying you wouldn't mind your 350z if it was FWD.

yellowxhoodie

iTrader: (16)

That's not what 'im saying at all. Ill take RWD over FWD any day. I meant that there are far more variables than just RWD vs. FWD.

Also, this whole thing is stupid. All these tests are dumb. Pretty much everything on the internet is biased one way or another. Its all about money.

At the end of the day buy whatever car you like. Like someone said earlier, there's always going to be cars that are slower and there's always going to be cars that faster.

torqueTc

iTrader: (11)

Man, do you live by what other people say about cars, or do you like to drive them yourself and find out about them?? I look at car reviews as ENTERTAINMENT, not gospel. You keep clinging on to something is 1/4 second faster around a track. or slower by .5 seconds....Why not go drive the car first?? I can tell you this, the civic SI is a nice car. The FRS is a nice car. The Genesis is a nice car too. I also like r32s, g37's, TL type S's, IS350's, m3s, and yes - even mustangs. I still miss my porsche 944 turbo S.

I can guarantee you 99% of the FRS's sold will NEVER see a track, be it auto-x, road course, or even 1/4 mile. People buy cars because they want to enjoy them. Enjoy them driving to work, enjoy taking hot girls out in them, enjoy making friends with people who have the same car. I can tell you when your closed minded, and say "I hate XYZ because its a honda" and havent even driven the car your backing, thats not intelligent.

The whole "it sucks because its FWD" debate is retarded - unless your office is in the race track. How did ALL of you end up with tc's if you hate FWD? Why are you not in some tail sliding m3, or wicked awd audi or STI? Let me know when you are getting a paycheck from racing. Until then, your a typical enthusiast. All you guys coming in here saying how crappy the civic is because its FWD, and driving a tc (which is a total downgrade against a civic SI ) is just laughable.

Before I buy a FRS - I am waiting to see the new ford focus. Should be around 280hp and fun to drive. The next new car I buy is going to be part of my 10 year ownership plan, so I want to make sure I love it. I am not looking for a race track car, but an all around car that is a blast to drive.

frankiietc

Just judging By specs. First comes how much power a car is making, technically Honda Has 1hp Extra. Then goes The weight, FRS is 100 Pounds Lighter. Finally comes The drivetrain layout, which A FRS won't have As much struggle Accelarating on a turn as much as a FWD. Basically Both Have bragging rights stock. When it comes to the track, The civic is no where near of bragging, specially a FWD.

highvoltage1

iTrader: (11)

Torque and rhythm calm yourselfs. Yal may have some good points but lets be constructive and not start any arguments. And torque stop the cursing even though u are using symbols you know those words are not allowed. Family forum here ok!!!!!

torqueTc

iTrader: (11)

Understood Brock. I edited my post. I just dont get how people bash a car they have never driven, and praise another car they have never driven. I do apologize. I was not trying to start trouble. My point is simply drive both, then give a valid review/opinion. To hate something just to hate it is pretty ignorant.

highvoltage1

iTrader: (11)

Hey I understand! Both you and Travis are good members on here. Have a lot of knowledge and hey we all can get deep into how we feel. Listen personally I wouldnt want a new si. That K24 in it is a joke. Its basically the ________ child the K20 was on the Si hatch EP3. I just dont think you can compare those cars. But I know why they did it as young buyers may be out there actually comparing these.

Anyways both yals feedback is cool just keep it civil. Like I said both of yal have good points. Thanks for editing your post also. Saves me time! LOL

EvilMonkey07

Only reason the Si had the factory package option was to be comparable price wise to the FRS. I think it's ridiculous that some people say "compare the frs with good tires." You just bought a $28k car. And you need to spend another $600 for "good" tires to compare it with other cars? Then I find it almost laughable that some people say "FRS isn't fast." Well a freaking Si isn't either. It seems like the FRS was designed for small, tight tracks. "Take it to the Ring"... yeah good idea

Jon

You act like one can control who a manufacturer signs a contract with for tires. The car isn't sold only in warm climates so the logical choice would be to put all-seasons on it. With tires designed for what they're testing it to do, the results would probably be a little different. Maybe not extraordinary, but more accurate. Price aside, if you want to prove to me what's a better track car, let's level the playing field. But then I guess if they did that, critics wouldn't have anything to talk about.

The article/reviewers at hand loses credibility thinking a tenth of a second is "dominating". It would take 10 laps to gain 1 second over the FR-S and that's with no errors. Hardly impressive.

rhythmnsmoke

What does 3 different lap times have anything to do with me? You posted this long paragraph, just because I posted up another lap time that was faster than the HFP SI...lol.

I've driven the SI (not this SI). Not my cup of tea. Waiting on VTEC until 4k rpms the car felt like a slug. The new SI is fugly outright. I don't need to go drive it, it would be pointless as its not even on my scope of consideration.

I've driven the FR-S from a dealer, and AutoX'ed it when they came and did the little drive event.

Again, not sure what ANY of that has to do with me and what I like to do with my cars or the car I chose to buy. I posted lap time comparisons, it's not that crucial, it's something to talk about. That's the bottom line. And it's funny....Honda Fan boy's I'm sure or FR-S/BRZ haters will be like..."oh the SI beat the BRZ"...blah blah blah. And then soon as you show them a lap time from the FR-S on the same track that beat the HFP SI by even more than the HFP did the BRZ, all of a sudden you want to over look that and make it about something else....How ironic.

Because I didn't post that I have been in a 500whp GTR track car, 600whp Porsche 911 at the track or talk about driving the FR-S around as well as a Civic SI....you assume I haven't driven anything other than my Scion? Weird assumption considering I use to daily drive and weekend drift my 350z. You shouldn't assume things about people, just because they didn't tell you about it.

rhythmnsmoke

FAIL of a post when I have driven the FR-S TWICE and a friends SI. Not this year's SI, nor do I want to drive it. On top of that, I didn't even bash on the HFP SI. Not sure where you got that from, but it didn't come from me.

Saying that I already have a FWD and need another RWD, or saying no way I would take a FWD SI over the RWD FR-S....is considered bashing the HFP SI?




Jon, it doesn't even matter. This comparison was thrown out the window as soon as I posted the FR-S lap time being .3 tenths faster than the HFP SI on what appears to be the same race track. So, on a given day, the FR-S, BRZ and HFP SI can run faster than one another. Would take a good driver in the HFP SI though to overcome the understeer enough to post a similar lap time as the Twins.

The title "dominating" was just something to draw you into reading their article. No one considers .1 tenth of a second to be "dominating". Even I don't consider the .3 tenths of a second faster that the FR-S did, to be domination over the HFP SI.

So in essence, you don't even need to swap tires for the FR-S to beat the HFP SI... Swapping tires would be "unfair" to the SI if you did...lol.

EvilMonkey07

So what you are telling me is essentially: Yes, you do have to spend $600 after buying a brand new $28k sports car to be faster around a track than what some on here would call a fwd rice box. That doesn't sound ridiculous at all in any way.

Jon

I don't know how to dumb it down anymore than I already have. If you read what I wrote, I said price aside. Meaning leave price out of it. All I'm concerned about is a fair test. Do I think summer tires should be optional for those in warm climates with no additional cost? Yes that would be nice. But even with all-seasons, no ride height mods, no brake mods, no stiffer sway bars, etc. it does pretty damn good. If you want to remain in denial, that's cool. No one really cares. They'll keep on rolling in.