Why does everyone talk **** bout the 350Z?
02-11-2007, 08:57 PM
#42
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northern Jersey
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chishifu
i'm still fascinated with america's obsession with going fast in a straight line... the steering wheel is there for a reason...
ChiShi
ChiShi
02-11-2007, 09:14 PM
#46
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: naperville, il
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i hate idiots. see having previously been a domestic guy (as of a month and a half ago), i always just figured that the two categories were imports, and domestics. now that i've gotten my z and i've started talking to some z, sti, supra, and evo owners, i've realized that the imports are in two classes. the guys with sti's, evo's, z's, and supras are intelligent with what they say. if we know we're in a slower car than the guy we're racing, we'll admit it and we wont talk ****. that's the same way that my domestic friends operate. but then you have the cars like rsx's, civics, eclipses (mostly 3rd gen eclipses because you can make the earlier ones damn fast for little $), lancers, and neons that are just ****in morons. their logic never makes any sense. they'll try and say that they have the superior cars when several tests done by tv shows and magazines show which car is clearly better. what cars do you see z's competing with on tv and in magazines? s2000's, boxsters, m3's, sometimes wrx's, and occasionally evos. what do you see rsx's compared to? a civic Si or some other Fwd car with low hp levels. they really need to start using their head because it really gets old.
explain to me how they think the rsx is better than a z based on these little numbers:
rsx type s:
Horsepower : 200 hp @ 7400 rpm('02-'04), 210 hp @ 7800 rpm('05+)
Torque : 142 lb-ft @ 6000 rpm('02-'04), 143 lb-ft @ 7000 rpm('05+)
Redline : 7900-8100 rpm
Top speed : 145 mph
0-60 mph : 6.7 sec.('02-'04), 6.5 sec.('05)
0-¼ mile : 15.2 sec @ 92.7 mph('02-'04)
60-0 braking distance : 135 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.86 g
350z:
Horsepower : 287 hp @ 6200 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual),
300 hp @ 6200 rpm('05-'06 manual)
Torque : 274 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
Redline : 7000 rpm('05-'06 manual), 6550 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual)
Top speed : 155 mph(electronically limited)
0-60 mph : 5.4 sec.('03 manual)
0-¼ mile : 14.1 sec @ 101.0 mph('03 manual)
60-0 braking distance : 119 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.89 g
do you see a single area that would suggest the rsx is better? and also even relating to the brand, nissan has several nasty cars (z, skyline, ect). what does honda/acura have? nsx? that car was nice but rediculously expensive for what you were getting. the s2000? beaten by a z and not even close to a skyline. an rsx or a civic? rsx's arent fast and a civic is basically the first car that comes to mind when you think of stupid ricers
the rsx has what going for it? striaght line?no. corners? pretty good, but not better than the z, or an sti, or an evo. power?hell no. torque? not even gonna answer that one
sorry for the rant, but i really cant stand ricer retard pieces of ****
explain to me how they think the rsx is better than a z based on these little numbers:
rsx type s:
Horsepower : 200 hp @ 7400 rpm('02-'04), 210 hp @ 7800 rpm('05+)
Torque : 142 lb-ft @ 6000 rpm('02-'04), 143 lb-ft @ 7000 rpm('05+)
Redline : 7900-8100 rpm
Top speed : 145 mph
0-60 mph : 6.7 sec.('02-'04), 6.5 sec.('05)
0-¼ mile : 15.2 sec @ 92.7 mph('02-'04)
60-0 braking distance : 135 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.86 g
350z:
Horsepower : 287 hp @ 6200 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual),
300 hp @ 6200 rpm('05-'06 manual)
Torque : 274 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
Redline : 7000 rpm('05-'06 manual), 6550 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual)
Top speed : 155 mph(electronically limited)
0-60 mph : 5.4 sec.('03 manual)
0-¼ mile : 14.1 sec @ 101.0 mph('03 manual)
60-0 braking distance : 119 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.89 g
do you see a single area that would suggest the rsx is better? and also even relating to the brand, nissan has several nasty cars (z, skyline, ect). what does honda/acura have? nsx? that car was nice but rediculously expensive for what you were getting. the s2000? beaten by a z and not even close to a skyline. an rsx or a civic? rsx's arent fast and a civic is basically the first car that comes to mind when you think of stupid ricers
the rsx has what going for it? striaght line?no. corners? pretty good, but not better than the z, or an sti, or an evo. power?hell no. torque? not even gonna answer that one
sorry for the rant, but i really cant stand ricer retard pieces of ****
Last edited by FALLEN1z; 02-11-2007 at 09:25 PM.
02-11-2007, 09:19 PM
#47
New Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FALLEN1z
i hate idiots. see having previously been a domestic guy (as of a month and a half ago), i always just figured that the two categories were imports, and domestics. now that i've gotten my z and i've started talking to some z, sti, supra, and evo owners, i've realized that the imports are in two classes. the guys with sti's, evo's, z's, and supras are intelligent with what they say. if we know we're in a slower car than the guy we're racing, we'll admit it and we wont talk ****. that's the same way that my domestic friends operate. but then you have the cars like rsx's, civics, eclipses (mostly 3rd gen eclipses because you can make the earlier ones damn fast for little $), lancers, and neons that are just ****in morons. their logic never makes any sense. they'll try and say that they have the superior cars when several tests done by tv shows and magazines show which car is clearly better. what cars do you see z's competing with on tv and in magazines? s2000's, boxsters, m3's, sometimes wrx's, and occasionally evos. what do you see rsx's compared to? a civic Si or some other Fwd car with low hp levels. they really need to start using their head because it really gets old.
explain to me how they think the rsx is better than a z based on these little numbers:
rsx type s:
Horsepower : 200 hp @ 7400 rpm('02-'04), 210 hp @ 7800 rpm('05+)
Torque : 142 lb-ft @ 6000 rpm('02-'04), 143 lb-ft @ 7000 rpm('05+)
Redline : 7900-8100 rpm
Top speed : 145 mph
0-60 mph : 6.7 sec.('02-'04), 6.5 sec.('05)
0-¼ mile : 15.2 sec @ 92.7 mph('02-'04)
60-0 braking distance : 135 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.86 g
350z:
Horsepower : 287 hp @ 6200 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual),
300 hp @ 6200 rpm('05-'06 manual)
Torque : 274 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
Redline : 7000 rpm('05-'06 manual), 6550 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual)
Top speed : 155 mph(electronically limited)
0-60 mph : 5.4 sec.('03 manual)
0-¼ mile : 14.1 sec @ 101.0 mph('03 manual)
60-0 braking distance : 119 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.89 g
do you see a single area that would suggest the rsx is better? and also even relating to the brand, nissan has several nasty cars (z, skyline, ect). what does honda/acura have? nsx? that car was nice but rediculously expensive for what you were getting. the s2000? beaten by a z and not even close to a skyline. an rsx or a civic? rsx's arent fast and a civic is basically the first car that comes to mind when you think of stupid ricers
sorry for the rant, but i really cant stand ricer retard pieces of ****
explain to me how they think the rsx is better than a z based on these little numbers:
rsx type s:
Horsepower : 200 hp @ 7400 rpm('02-'04), 210 hp @ 7800 rpm('05+)
Torque : 142 lb-ft @ 6000 rpm('02-'04), 143 lb-ft @ 7000 rpm('05+)
Redline : 7900-8100 rpm
Top speed : 145 mph
0-60 mph : 6.7 sec.('02-'04), 6.5 sec.('05)
0-¼ mile : 15.2 sec @ 92.7 mph('02-'04)
60-0 braking distance : 135 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.86 g
350z:
Horsepower : 287 hp @ 6200 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual),
300 hp @ 6200 rpm('05-'06 manual)
Torque : 274 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
Redline : 7000 rpm('05-'06 manual), 6550 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual)
Top speed : 155 mph(electronically limited)
0-60 mph : 5.4 sec.('03 manual)
0-¼ mile : 14.1 sec @ 101.0 mph('03 manual)
60-0 braking distance : 119 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.89 g
do you see a single area that would suggest the rsx is better? and also even relating to the brand, nissan has several nasty cars (z, skyline, ect). what does honda/acura have? nsx? that car was nice but rediculously expensive for what you were getting. the s2000? beaten by a z and not even close to a skyline. an rsx or a civic? rsx's arent fast and a civic is basically the first car that comes to mind when you think of stupid ricers
sorry for the rant, but i really cant stand ricer retard pieces of ****
Very thorough and informative. I applaud you.ChiShi
02-11-2007, 09:56 PM
#49
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Salem, Oregon
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FALLEN1z
i hate idiots. see having previously been a domestic guy (as of a month and a half ago), i always just figured that the two categories were imports, and domestics. now that i've gotten my z and i've started talking to some z, sti, supra, and evo owners, i've realized that the imports are in two classes. the guys with sti's, evo's, z's, and supras are intelligent with what they say. if we know we're in a slower car than the guy we're racing, we'll admit it and we wont talk ****. that's the same way that my domestic friends operate. but then you have the cars like rsx's, civics, eclipses (mostly 3rd gen eclipses because you can make the earlier ones damn fast for little $), lancers, and neons that are just ****in morons. their logic never makes any sense. they'll try and say that they have the superior cars when several tests done by tv shows and magazines show which car is clearly better. what cars do you see z's competing with on tv and in magazines? s2000's, boxsters, m3's, sometimes wrx's, and occasionally evos. what do you see rsx's compared to? a civic Si or some other Fwd car with low hp levels. they really need to start using their head because it really gets old.
explain to me how they think the rsx is better than a z based on these little numbers:
rsx type s:
Horsepower : 200 hp @ 7400 rpm('02-'04), 210 hp @ 7800 rpm('05+)
Torque : 142 lb-ft @ 6000 rpm('02-'04), 143 lb-ft @ 7000 rpm('05+)
Redline : 7900-8100 rpm
Top speed : 145 mph
0-60 mph : 6.7 sec.('02-'04), 6.5 sec.('05)
0-¼ mile : 15.2 sec @ 92.7 mph('02-'04)
60-0 braking distance : 135 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.86 g
350z:
Horsepower : 287 hp @ 6200 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual),
300 hp @ 6200 rpm('05-'06 manual)
Torque : 274 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
Redline : 7000 rpm('05-'06 manual), 6550 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual)
Top speed : 155 mph(electronically limited)
0-60 mph : 5.4 sec.('03 manual)
0-¼ mile : 14.1 sec @ 101.0 mph('03 manual)
60-0 braking distance : 119 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.89 g
do you see a single area that would suggest the rsx is better? and also even relating to the brand, nissan has several nasty cars (z, skyline, ect). what does honda/acura have? nsx? that car was nice but rediculously expensive for what you were getting. the s2000? beaten by a z and not even close to a skyline. an rsx or a civic? rsx's arent fast and a civic is basically the first car that comes to mind when you think of stupid ricers
the rsx has what going for it? striaght line?no. corners? pretty good, but not better than the z, or an sti, or an evo. power?hell no. torque? not even gonna answer that one
sorry for the rant, but i really cant stand ricer retard pieces of ****
explain to me how they think the rsx is better than a z based on these little numbers:
rsx type s:
Horsepower : 200 hp @ 7400 rpm('02-'04), 210 hp @ 7800 rpm('05+)
Torque : 142 lb-ft @ 6000 rpm('02-'04), 143 lb-ft @ 7000 rpm('05+)
Redline : 7900-8100 rpm
Top speed : 145 mph
0-60 mph : 6.7 sec.('02-'04), 6.5 sec.('05)
0-¼ mile : 15.2 sec @ 92.7 mph('02-'04)
60-0 braking distance : 135 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.86 g
350z:
Horsepower : 287 hp @ 6200 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual),
300 hp @ 6200 rpm('05-'06 manual)
Torque : 274 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
Redline : 7000 rpm('05-'06 manual), 6550 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual)
Top speed : 155 mph(electronically limited)
0-60 mph : 5.4 sec.('03 manual)
0-¼ mile : 14.1 sec @ 101.0 mph('03 manual)
60-0 braking distance : 119 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.89 g
do you see a single area that would suggest the rsx is better? and also even relating to the brand, nissan has several nasty cars (z, skyline, ect). what does honda/acura have? nsx? that car was nice but rediculously expensive for what you were getting. the s2000? beaten by a z and not even close to a skyline. an rsx or a civic? rsx's arent fast and a civic is basically the first car that comes to mind when you think of stupid ricers
the rsx has what going for it? striaght line?no. corners? pretty good, but not better than the z, or an sti, or an evo. power?hell no. torque? not even gonna answer that one
sorry for the rant, but i really cant stand ricer retard pieces of ****
QUOTED FOR TRUTH
02-11-2007, 10:00 PM
#51
Banned
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: MIAMI!
Posts: 1,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jealous, and my friend has an RSX type-s with headers exhaust chipped and a few other mods, and stock my 350 was blowing his doors off, these acura/honda idiots just talk a bunch of trash to make themselves feel better, the RSX is nicknamed the really slow xperience around here because it is just that.
02-11-2007, 11:26 PM
#52
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why are we still arguing with them? It's pointless...who gives a **** if their modded RSX can keep up or beat a STOCK Z. Any modded car can be made fast. Look at it this way...ff they race a 350z with the same amount of mods (eg. rsx w/ i/e/h/tune VS. 350z w/ i/e/h/tune)...whos going to win?
02-11-2007, 11:41 PM
#54
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 829
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by keosh
hahah i guess this kid was racing a 350z with no tires or an engine hahaha stupid honda's i swear i hate them with passion
02-12-2007, 01:59 AM
#56
Originally Posted by FALLEN1z
i hate idiots. see having previously been a domestic guy (as of a month and a half ago), i always just figured that the two categories were imports, and domestics. now that i've gotten my z and i've started talking to some z, sti, supra, and evo owners, i've realized that the imports are in two classes. the guys with sti's, evo's, z's, and supras are intelligent with what they say. if we know we're in a slower car than the guy we're racing, we'll admit it and we wont talk ****. that's the same way that my domestic friends operate. but then you have the cars like rsx's, civics, eclipses (mostly 3rd gen eclipses because you can make the earlier ones damn fast for little $), lancers, and neons that are just ****in morons. their logic never makes any sense. they'll try and say that they have the superior cars when several tests done by tv shows and magazines show which car is clearly better. what cars do you see z's competing with on tv and in magazines? s2000's, boxsters, m3's, sometimes wrx's, and occasionally evos. what do you see rsx's compared to? a civic Si or some other Fwd car with low hp levels. they really need to start using their head because it really gets old.
explain to me how they think the rsx is better than a z based on these little numbers:
rsx type s:
Horsepower : 200 hp @ 7400 rpm('02-'04), 210 hp @ 7800 rpm('05+)
Torque : 142 lb-ft @ 6000 rpm('02-'04), 143 lb-ft @ 7000 rpm('05+)
Redline : 7900-8100 rpm
Top speed : 145 mph
0-60 mph : 6.7 sec.('02-'04), 6.5 sec.('05)
0-¼ mile : 15.2 sec @ 92.7 mph('02-'04)
60-0 braking distance : 135 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.86 g
350z:
Horsepower : 287 hp @ 6200 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual),
300 hp @ 6200 rpm('05-'06 manual)
Torque : 274 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
Redline : 7000 rpm('05-'06 manual), 6550 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual)
Top speed : 155 mph(electronically limited)
0-60 mph : 5.4 sec.('03 manual)
0-¼ mile : 14.1 sec @ 101.0 mph('03 manual)
60-0 braking distance : 119 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.89 g
do you see a single area that would suggest the rsx is better? and also even relating to the brand, nissan has several nasty cars (z, skyline, ect). what does honda/acura have? nsx? that car was nice but rediculously expensive for what you were getting. the s2000? beaten by a z and not even close to a skyline. an rsx or a civic? rsx's arent fast and a civic is basically the first car that comes to mind when you think of stupid ricers
the rsx has what going for it? striaght line?no. corners? pretty good, but not better than the z, or an sti, or an evo. power?hell no. torque? not even gonna answer that one
sorry for the rant, but i really cant stand ricer retard pieces of ****
explain to me how they think the rsx is better than a z based on these little numbers:
rsx type s:
Horsepower : 200 hp @ 7400 rpm('02-'04), 210 hp @ 7800 rpm('05+)
Torque : 142 lb-ft @ 6000 rpm('02-'04), 143 lb-ft @ 7000 rpm('05+)
Redline : 7900-8100 rpm
Top speed : 145 mph
0-60 mph : 6.7 sec.('02-'04), 6.5 sec.('05)
0-¼ mile : 15.2 sec @ 92.7 mph('02-'04)
60-0 braking distance : 135 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.86 g
350z:
Horsepower : 287 hp @ 6200 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual),
300 hp @ 6200 rpm('05-'06 manual)
Torque : 274 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
Redline : 7000 rpm('05-'06 manual), 6550 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual)
Top speed : 155 mph(electronically limited)
0-60 mph : 5.4 sec.('03 manual)
0-¼ mile : 14.1 sec @ 101.0 mph('03 manual)
60-0 braking distance : 119 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.89 g
do you see a single area that would suggest the rsx is better? and also even relating to the brand, nissan has several nasty cars (z, skyline, ect). what does honda/acura have? nsx? that car was nice but rediculously expensive for what you were getting. the s2000? beaten by a z and not even close to a skyline. an rsx or a civic? rsx's arent fast and a civic is basically the first car that comes to mind when you think of stupid ricers
the rsx has what going for it? striaght line?no. corners? pretty good, but not better than the z, or an sti, or an evo. power?hell no. torque? not even gonna answer that one
sorry for the rant, but i really cant stand ricer retard pieces of ****
hey man dont forget the vtec!!!! they have that too!
02-12-2007, 02:34 AM
#57
Banned
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: MIAMI!
Posts: 1,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by CaliTouring
hey man dont forget the vtec!!!! they have that too!
lol dont start, i hear that from every idiot with a honda, 3RD GEAR PULL WILL RAPE YOU IN MY S2K KID, ILL OWN YOU, YOU CAN TOUCH THE VTECH
needless to say i went from a 3rd gear run with this turd in an s2k and i hurt his feelings the next week he went to the dealership with his title in his hands and a face full of tears and traded in his slow 2000 for a 350z, owned?
there is a cobalt SS around back next to the SRT-4
02-12-2007, 05:30 AM
#59
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: IL
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FALLEN1z
i hate idiots. see having previously been a domestic guy (as of a month and a half ago), i always just figured that the two categories were imports, and domestics. now that i've gotten my z and i've started talking to some z, sti, supra, and evo owners, i've realized that the imports are in two classes. the guys with sti's, evo's, z's, and supras are intelligent with what they say. if we know we're in a slower car than the guy we're racing, we'll admit it and we wont talk ****. that's the same way that my domestic friends operate. but then you have the cars like rsx's, civics, eclipses (mostly 3rd gen eclipses because you can make the earlier ones damn fast for little $), lancers, and neons that are just ****in morons. their logic never makes any sense. they'll try and say that they have the superior cars when several tests done by tv shows and magazines show which car is clearly better. what cars do you see z's competing with on tv and in magazines? s2000's, boxsters, m3's, sometimes wrx's, and occasionally evos. what do you see rsx's compared to? a civic Si or some other Fwd car with low hp levels. they really need to start using their head because it really gets old.
explain to me how they think the rsx is better than a z based on these little numbers:
rsx type s:
Horsepower : 200 hp @ 7400 rpm('02-'04), 210 hp @ 7800 rpm('05+)
Torque : 142 lb-ft @ 6000 rpm('02-'04), 143 lb-ft @ 7000 rpm('05+)
Redline : 7900-8100 rpm
Top speed : 145 mph
0-60 mph : 6.7 sec.('02-'04), 6.5 sec.('05)
0-¼ mile : 15.2 sec @ 92.7 mph('02-'04)
60-0 braking distance : 135 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.86 g
350z:
Horsepower : 287 hp @ 6200 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual),
300 hp @ 6200 rpm('05-'06 manual)
Torque : 274 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
Redline : 7000 rpm('05-'06 manual), 6550 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual)
Top speed : 155 mph(electronically limited)
0-60 mph : 5.4 sec.('03 manual)
0-¼ mile : 14.1 sec @ 101.0 mph('03 manual)
60-0 braking distance : 119 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.89 g
do you see a single area that would suggest the rsx is better? and also even relating to the brand, nissan has several nasty cars (z, skyline, ect). what does honda/acura have? nsx? that car was nice but rediculously expensive for what you were getting. the s2000? beaten by a z and not even close to a skyline. an rsx or a civic? rsx's arent fast and a civic is basically the first car that comes to mind when you think of stupid ricers
the rsx has what going for it? striaght line?no. corners? pretty good, but not better than the z, or an sti, or an evo. power?hell no. torque? not even gonna answer that one
sorry for the rant, but i really cant stand ricer retard pieces of ****
explain to me how they think the rsx is better than a z based on these little numbers:
rsx type s:
Horsepower : 200 hp @ 7400 rpm('02-'04), 210 hp @ 7800 rpm('05+)
Torque : 142 lb-ft @ 6000 rpm('02-'04), 143 lb-ft @ 7000 rpm('05+)
Redline : 7900-8100 rpm
Top speed : 145 mph
0-60 mph : 6.7 sec.('02-'04), 6.5 sec.('05)
0-¼ mile : 15.2 sec @ 92.7 mph('02-'04)
60-0 braking distance : 135 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.86 g
350z:
Horsepower : 287 hp @ 6200 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual),
300 hp @ 6200 rpm('05-'06 manual)
Torque : 274 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
Redline : 7000 rpm('05-'06 manual), 6550 rpm(auto/'03-'05 manual)
Top speed : 155 mph(electronically limited)
0-60 mph : 5.4 sec.('03 manual)
0-¼ mile : 14.1 sec @ 101.0 mph('03 manual)
60-0 braking distance : 119 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.89 g
do you see a single area that would suggest the rsx is better? and also even relating to the brand, nissan has several nasty cars (z, skyline, ect). what does honda/acura have? nsx? that car was nice but rediculously expensive for what you were getting. the s2000? beaten by a z and not even close to a skyline. an rsx or a civic? rsx's arent fast and a civic is basically the first car that comes to mind when you think of stupid ricers
the rsx has what going for it? striaght line?no. corners? pretty good, but not better than the z, or an sti, or an evo. power?hell no. torque? not even gonna answer that one
sorry for the rant, but i really cant stand ricer retard pieces of ****
