lx vs lancer rs...
Thread Starter
Registered!!
iTrader: (9)
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,035
Likes: 0
From: PA
Rep Power: 315 

lx vs lancer rs...
help me out guys. its my ex's new bfs car. just got it two days ago and it two days ago and its a lancer rally sport or rs version, just under the evo. he says it has 160. i got an lx and its 115. both are stick. obviously he beat me and i wasn't really pushing it at all cuz it was raining and we were doing a rolling start and plus they beeped so i had to anticipate when they were gonna go. doesn't seem like he's a great driver or nothing tho and i got a kit, 17's, and system. any chance im guessing or not really. need some nitrous or turbo or something? i got a ss, catback, and intake.
Thread Starter
Registered!!
iTrader: (9)
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,035
Likes: 0
From: PA
Rep Power: 315 

well im not trying to get her back, its cool if she likes him now. we were like best friends for a few yrs and still are even tho she dumped me, or rather i dumped her first and then she did. but yea... anyways, her boy just got the car two days ago and wants to race it, lol. i guess he forgot to wait 500 miles or what not. but yea its the rallyart or something like that. it had a badge on the back. its a 2.4l i believe he said. and he said its got 160hp. its the lancer "rs" just below the evo. It was stick and my cars stick but i only got 115hp. i got intake, catback, and ss tho. but kit and rims add weight. i wasn't pushing it cuz it was raining and i kno not to drive crazy but carefully in the rain. i think i did pretty good considering he cant drive well i believe. but yea... i think its 160. any thoughts
Currently boosted at 0 psi.
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,241
Likes: 0
From: Southern OC, Ca
Rep Power: 0 
Um... Edmunds.com claims it to have 162 hp @ 5750 rpm, and 162 ft-lbs of torque @ 4000 rpm. The curb weight is 2843 lbs.
I don't think those numbers are in your favor. Sucks, cause I don't like those lancers; it would be nice if we could add them to our kill lists.
I don't think those numbers are in your favor. Sucks, cause I don't like those lancers; it would be nice if we could add them to our kill lists.
It's called a Lancer Ralliart.
162hp 162tq.
motortrend stated a 14.9 in the 1/4mile.
this sounds absurd, but people on the forums have showed time slips in the 15.2 range.
unless you have turbo, or a swap, you'll lose.
this car can eat up civic si's.
a skilled driver in a ralliart, could probably keep up or even beat a poor driver in an rsx type-s.
its gotta suck, cuz its your ex's new bf.
sorry man.
162hp 162tq.
motortrend stated a 14.9 in the 1/4mile.
this sounds absurd, but people on the forums have showed time slips in the 15.2 range.
unless you have turbo, or a swap, you'll lose.
this car can eat up civic si's.
a skilled driver in a ralliart, could probably keep up or even beat a poor driver in an rsx type-s.
its gotta suck, cuz its your ex's new bf.
sorry man.
Back From The Banned!
iTrader: (13)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,226
Likes: 0
From: Queens, New York, US
Rep Power: 339 



Originally posted by 6_funk
It's called a Lancer Ralliart.
162hp 162tq.
motortrend stated a 14.9 in the 1/4mile.
this sounds absurd, but people on the forums have showed time slips in the 15.2 range.
It's called a Lancer Ralliart.
162hp 162tq.
motortrend stated a 14.9 in the 1/4mile.
this sounds absurd, but people on the forums have showed time slips in the 15.2 range.
Isnt it a bit harsh on the esteem to be beat in 2 areas?
yea i know i was thinking what the hell.... RS thats a jap spec evo.... i guess hes means the ralliart edition which is styled after the US EVO 8 which like was quoted before is a quick little punk
they claimed 14.9 in that one mag which was a totally rigged. The other cars they had running were doing sub par times of 14.3-15.6 and then they whip out a 14.9 in the ralliart. Totally fixed and screwed up...those mags dont know what they're doing.
Most people are running times in the mid 15's stock because the tires suck ***. i'd say average time around for the average driver is 15.6
Most people are running times in the mid 15's stock because the tires suck ***. i'd say average time around for the average driver is 15.6
i've cruised the evolutionm boards more than once and like i said...15.2 is the BEST i've heard of. Average is 15.5-15.6. Granted thats to fast for a lighly modded 7thgen...its not a mile off.
They have good torque but the tires suck and they tend to loose traction on launches. Also they're heavier by a bit....2900 pounds i think. So 500 pounds heavier than a base DX and 350 heavier than an EX. A 50 shot would own him large, even if he is a good driver.
They have good torque but the tires suck and they tend to loose traction on launches. Also they're heavier by a bit....2900 pounds i think. So 500 pounds heavier than a base DX and 350 heavier than an EX. A 50 shot would own him large, even if he is a good driver.
Thread
Thread Starter
Honda Civic Forum
Replies
Last Post
doncarbone
Archive - Parts for Sale
5
Jun 8, 2015 03:37 PM
TwilightX
Honda Civic Racing: Drift/Drag/AutoX/Time Attack
7
Dec 24, 2002 08:04 AM



jk 