so went out on the town tonight, I was DD, and obviously the Z is not the car to use. so I drove my friends stick shift civic. I think they made the shaft out of rubber, it bends and is so imprecise I feel like Im shifting into a sponge....

and you go for going and stopping, I gotta admit, Im spoiled by drive by wire and the incredable linear and immediate power on the pedal. I had to push the pedal down atleast 2 inches before the revs raised. makes it tough to start on a hill.

I put it into "1st" nope, the shifter felt like it but not really. and 6th feels suprisingly similair to reverse.

anyway, needless to say, it was quite wierd. its amazing how smooth you can drive in a car like that with a loose clutch and long throw shifter.

 

hondas are known to have the best tranny's in the business. i like my z, but i wish it felt more like a short shifting honda.

 

oh the S2000 im sure is spectacular, maybe even SI, I havent driven one in a while. but this was a LX, and it was mush.

 

My red 2000 Si shifted great. It was a great car, but when I got the Z I forgot all about it.

WayneTN

 

after driving my cousin's rsx-s, i noticed a significant difference in comparison with my z's tranny. the rsx's tranny felt so smooth going into gears, and it didn't even need much force to slip into gear, you could literally tap the shifter and then it would fall into gear effortlessly at any rpm range. i recall reading a post by one of the members and it saying that the difference is due to our shifters being directly connected to our transmissions, as opposed to the honda's being connected by a rod. anyway, hands down, the rsx's tranny is way better.

 

Since we are on the subject, has anyone noticed that the Z shifter dosnt seem to follow a perfect "H" pattern? But rather when pushing into first you need to point the shifter towards the left front tire to got it in smoothly. Kind of like the "H" being slightly canted a bit. Or am I just out of my mind?


CS track.

 

Is that why they blow up more than others?

 

you are somewhat correct, honda is fwd so the transmission is not below the stick, meaning they are connected by a cable, which gives it a bit of a disconnected feel. the S2000 would be a different story.

as for that making the tranny way better? uhhh no... tight short shifts, while not making for easily smooth gear transitions, is not ideal for racing either. not saying the Z is better than the S2000, but its certainly better or ATLEAST equal to the rsx.

I have heard the S2000 is sorta the transmission that others are judged by. hadnt heard of them breaking, except maybe the clutch, which I think would be attributed to high RPM launches for power.

of course the other thing is that in the past 4 months of driving the Z, I have never once needed to downshift to get up a hill or anything. in the civic I kept my RPMs higher than I ever would in the Z, and still Id go up hills and just lose speed even tho my foot was to the floor. you forget that not all cars have limitless power and torque.

 

I have read a few Z mag reviews that have seemed to indicate that the S2000/RSX-S have the BEST shifters, BUT the Z is a close 2nd/3rd. In the time I have spent in a S2000 (a fair amount) and the fact that my Bro owns a RSX-S, I would agree.

btw the "broken tranny" issue that was brought up, regarding hondas, was a synchros issue that happened on some early S2000s. To be honest, I think some of the early Zs are having a similar problem (going by the symptoms that some are experiencing).

 

Some early Z's were having transmission problems, but that is/has been taken care of now.

 

are you talkin about manual or automatic? i thought we were on the subject of manuals.

 

The RSX Type S was also having early transmission troubles, but that may have been due to people doing stupid things... (ie: shifting into 2nd at 80mph, etc..)