01' civic vs. 02' focus
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 5,263
Likes: 0
From: Western MA
Rep Power: 349 
Originally Posted by Marcus
Scatman, How did you get beat. I owned one with my auto.. lol, I know you prolly got a bad start or the zx3 was boosted.
Thread Starter
Registered!!
iTrader: (13)
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,738
Likes: 0
From: Long Beach, Carson
Rep Power: 335
Originally Posted by trahma
Uhm.. I'm calling bullshit on this one.
The 2.3 liter focus makes a TON more power than a 7th gen. Your intake is good for a nominal 2-3HP. Yes you have the 5 speed advantage but he's also going to be consistant. Unless he doesn't know how to push the pedal down. You're talking about a 25HP (thats giving you 5hp for the intake) deficet and 37ft. lbs of torque of difference. As far as weight differential, you have him beat by 200lbs. Weight matters but not that much.
And no a Civic stock is not > than a Focus stock when it comes to a race. I don't say this because I own one, I say this because I've driven both and the Focus just outright makes more HP. Both cars are close in comparison when it comes to performance but the Focus puts down more power and is marginally heavier.
The 2.3 liter focus makes a TON more power than a 7th gen. Your intake is good for a nominal 2-3HP. Yes you have the 5 speed advantage but he's also going to be consistant. Unless he doesn't know how to push the pedal down. You're talking about a 25HP (thats giving you 5hp for the intake) deficet and 37ft. lbs of torque of difference. As far as weight differential, you have him beat by 200lbs. Weight matters but not that much.
And no a Civic stock is not > than a Focus stock when it comes to a race. I don't say this because I own one, I say this because I've driven both and the Focus just outright makes more HP. Both cars are close in comparison when it comes to performance but the Focus puts down more power and is marginally heavier.
Thread Starter
Registered!!
iTrader: (13)
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,738
Likes: 0
From: Long Beach, Carson
Rep Power: 335
Originally Posted by ilselu1
Along the lines of what trahma said...BS
A stock 2.3 5spd will put down 127whp in 5spd form, and about 10% less with the crapbox atx. That's not where he should have got you... it's the torque that unless he has traction controll would have eaten you alive. 145 crank ftlbs = 108-110 wheel torque even with an autotragic.
Thanks for playing.
A stock 2.3 5spd will put down 127whp in 5spd form, and about 10% less with the crapbox atx. That's not where he should have got you... it's the torque that unless he has traction controll would have eaten you alive. 145 crank ftlbs = 108-110 wheel torque even with an autotragic.
Thanks for playing.
Registered!!
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Rep Power: 0 
Well, near as I can figure, it's a driver's race, and if the other guy wasn't great at driving, you could have easily won. I'll leave it at that.
I'm posting to correct two things I saw in this thread:
1: Weight reduction. It seems to be a common mis-conception amongst many groups enthusiasts that cutting 100 pounds out of your car is going to have a significant impact on a quarter mile time. In general, 100 pounds is said to cut a tenth of a seconds off your ET. If it's worth the effort to you to do this, go right ahead, but dont' expect anything dramatic from it. You'd probably gain more time by going to the dragstrip and working on your launch...and you'd get proof of your kill in the form of a timeslip.
2: Dropping tire pressure on street tires a large amount to improve traction. Dropping a small amount of PSI can help, but don't do overdo it...modern radials don't like that sort of thing. If you make a habit of drag racing, try getting some drag radials mounted on whatever is the smallest stock wheel your cars come with...they're still street legal, but they'll give you a wider range of adjustability in terms of tire pressure.
I lurk on here occaisionally; I don't own a Civic (my brother has a 7th gen EX coupe), but i'm curious to see what the newest generation of Civic is capable of.
I'm posting to correct two things I saw in this thread:
1: Weight reduction. It seems to be a common mis-conception amongst many groups enthusiasts that cutting 100 pounds out of your car is going to have a significant impact on a quarter mile time. In general, 100 pounds is said to cut a tenth of a seconds off your ET. If it's worth the effort to you to do this, go right ahead, but dont' expect anything dramatic from it. You'd probably gain more time by going to the dragstrip and working on your launch...and you'd get proof of your kill in the form of a timeslip.
2: Dropping tire pressure on street tires a large amount to improve traction. Dropping a small amount of PSI can help, but don't do overdo it...modern radials don't like that sort of thing. If you make a habit of drag racing, try getting some drag radials mounted on whatever is the smallest stock wheel your cars come with...they're still street legal, but they'll give you a wider range of adjustability in terms of tire pressure.
I lurk on here occaisionally; I don't own a Civic (my brother has a 7th gen EX coupe), but i'm curious to see what the newest generation of Civic is capable of.
Last edited by Demon4545; Mar 5, 2005 at 01:26 AM. Reason: enabling sig.
Originally Posted by trahma
Uhm.. I'm calling bullshit on this one.
The 2.3 liter focus makes a TON more power than a 7th gen. Your intake is good for a nominal 2-3HP. Yes you have the 5 speed advantage but he's also going to be consistant. Unless he doesn't know how to push the pedal down. You're talking about a 25HP (thats giving you 5hp for the intake) deficet and 37ft. lbs of torque of difference. As far as weight differential, you have him beat by 200lbs. Weight matters but not that much.
And no a Civic stock is not > than a Focus stock when it comes to a race. I don't say this because I own one, I say this because I've driven both and the Focus just outright makes more HP. Both cars are close in comparison when it comes to performance but the Focus puts down more power and is marginally heavier.
The 2.3 liter focus makes a TON more power than a 7th gen. Your intake is good for a nominal 2-3HP. Yes you have the 5 speed advantage but he's also going to be consistant. Unless he doesn't know how to push the pedal down. You're talking about a 25HP (thats giving you 5hp for the intake) deficet and 37ft. lbs of torque of difference. As far as weight differential, you have him beat by 200lbs. Weight matters but not that much.
And no a Civic stock is not > than a Focus stock when it comes to a race. I don't say this because I own one, I say this because I've driven both and the Focus just outright makes more HP. Both cars are close in comparison when it comes to performance but the Focus puts down more power and is marginally heavier.
^^^^^ride along with him
Originally Posted by ilselu1
Along the lines of what trahma said...BS
A stock 2.3 5spd will put down 127whp in 5spd form, and about 10% less with the crapbox atx. That's not where he should have got you... it's the torque that unless he has traction controll would have eaten you alive. 145 crank ftlbs = 108-110 wheel torque even with an autotragic. Thanks for playing.
A stock 2.3 5spd will put down 127whp in 5spd form, and about 10% less with the crapbox atx. That's not where he should have got you... it's the torque that unless he has traction controll would have eaten you alive. 145 crank ftlbs = 108-110 wheel torque even with an autotragic.
Thanks for playing.
Why is my vagina bleeding?
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,582
Likes: 0
From: Montreal
Rep Power: 305
Originally Posted by scatman
my 01 ex raped a zx3 one night. if you drive good...
civic > focus
civic > focus
I pulled on a base model Mazda 3, Is that normal? Or do you think the dude in the Mazda 3 couldn't drive.
Originally Posted by ilselu1
you must have missed the news, focus is in Consumer Reports as The Best Small Car... beating Honda Civic... That's got to hurt.
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,031
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US
Rep Power: 401
Originally Posted by ilselu1
Along the lines of what trahma said...BS
A stock 2.3 5spd will put down 127whp in 5spd form, and about 10% less with the crapbox atx. That's not where he should have got you... it's the torque that unless he has traction controll would have eaten you alive. 145 crank ftlbs = 108-110 wheel torque even with an autotragic. Thanks for playing.
A stock 2.3 5spd will put down 127whp in 5spd form, and about 10% less with the crapbox atx. That's not where he should have got you... it's the torque that unless he has traction controll would have eaten you alive. 145 crank ftlbs = 108-110 wheel torque even with an autotragic.
Thanks for playing.ok, then explain to me why the 153 lb/ft S2000 is faster than the 302 lb/ft mustang GT?
/soundofcrickets
anyways, enough sarcasm. i dont mean to be harsh but seriously. you have to look at gearing, weight, power band, and the fact that it's an AUTO vs a manual. that alone makes a huge difference.
his story is not only believeable, but he SHOULD beat an auto focus with his stick shift civic.
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,031
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US
Rep Power: 401
Originally Posted by trahma
And no a Civic stock is not > than a Focus stock when it comes to a race. I don't say this because I own one, I say this because I've driven both and the Focus just outright makes more HP. Both cars are close in comparison when it comes to performance but the Focus puts down more power and is marginally heavier.
read my post above.
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,031
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US
Rep Power: 401
Originally Posted by ilselu1
you must have missed the news, focus is in Consumer Reports as The Best Small Car... beating Honda Civic... That's got to hurt.
Edit: oh and by the way, the ford won best small SEDAN. Not coupe. And that is in the top picks for best initial car. In 2 years, the civic will have surpassed the focus for the 2004 model year.
Also, it's sad when you get excited about ONE ford getting into the list, when the rest of the list goes like this:
All but one of the vehicles in the magazine's list of "top picks" in 10 different categories for 2005 are Japanese.
Japanese vehicles also score a clean sweep on a list of 21 vehicles that Consumer Reports says it can recommend because they earned "very good" or "excellent" scores in all five major ratings areas it tested.
Japanese vehicles also score a clean sweep on a list of 21 vehicles that Consumer Reports says it can recommend because they earned "very good" or "excellent" scores in all five major ratings areas it tested.
Last edited by S2000man01; Mar 5, 2005 at 06:43 PM.
Why is my vagina bleeding?
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,582
Likes: 0
From: Montreal
Rep Power: 305
Originally Posted by nindoo
I pulled on a base model Mazda 3, Is that normal? Or do you think the dude in the Mazda 3 couldn't drive.
my car is a ex coupe 2002, bone stock.
Last edited by nindoo; Mar 5, 2005 at 06:39 PM.
Registered!!
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Rep Power: 0 The 2.3l MZ3's typically don't do any better than 15.8 on up with an average driver...i'm not sure about the 2.0, but it's probably a fair bit slower than that. They weigh more than your Civic too, so i'm not surprised that you pulled on him.
My rectum hurts........
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted by S2000man01
torque means nothing by itself. you can look at torque numbers all day and never get it right. ooooo, the focus makes 145lb/ft crank torque. what, you want a cookie from the torque fairy?
ok, then explain to me why the 153 lb/ft S2000 is faster than the 302 lb/ft mustang GT?
/soundofcrickets
anyways, enough sarcasm. i dont mean to be harsh but seriously. you have to look at gearing, weight, power band, and the fact that it's an AUTO vs a manual. that alone makes a huge difference.
his story is not only believeable, but he SHOULD beat an auto focus with his stick shift civic.
ok, then explain to me why the 153 lb/ft S2000 is faster than the 302 lb/ft mustang GT?
/soundofcrickets
anyways, enough sarcasm. i dont mean to be harsh but seriously. you have to look at gearing, weight, power band, and the fact that it's an AUTO vs a manual. that alone makes a huge difference.
his story is not only believeable, but he SHOULD beat an auto focus with his stick shift civic.
Take it from me...Torque = teh win... and thats true S2000 are fast no doubt...to bad I proved my friend smoked a S2000 from a roll and from a light... 
Ohh it was a z28 too... well now that makes good sence in a GT making 302 torque but why dint you put a Cobra there instead?? To much power?? Not trying to be an *** either but just triying to make things even..... And yeah he did beat that Focus...Kinda makes sence since it's stock, not even a CAI.... 4 door auto and has original tires and rims..Dont expect much from a car like that.... some of you guys are getting too carried away with numbers and stuff..maybe you like math?? But it all really start and end's with the drivers... You can have all the power in the world but If you cant get it to the floor theres no point in having it..just my thought 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,031
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US
Rep Power: 401
Originally Posted by Mustang5.0HO
gotta love torque... Take it from me...Torque = teh win... and thats true S2000 are fast no doubt...to bad I proved my friend smoked a S2000 from a roll and from a light... Ohh it was a z28 too...
Take it from me...Torque = teh win... and thats true S2000 are fast no doubt...to bad I proved my friend smoked a S2000 from a roll and from a light... Ohh it was a z28 too...other than you saying torque=win, which is... wrong.
Originally Posted by Mustang5.0HO
well now that makes good sence in a GT making 302 torque but why dint you put a Cobra there instead?? To much power?? Not trying to be an *** either but just triying to make things even.....
aside from that, my point was this: torque is just a number. there are WAY too many other things involved to simply say "well this car will be faster cuz it has more torque".
Why is my vagina bleeding?
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,582
Likes: 0
From: Montreal
Rep Power: 305
Originally Posted by S2000man01
i have no idea what you are trying to say here.
other than you saying torque=win, which is... wrong.
what do you mean making things even? a mustang GT making 260hp and 302lb/ft torque vs an S2000 making 240hp and 153lb/ft torque isn't even enough for you? instead you want me to compare it to the supercharged cobra? how is that even?
aside from that, my point was this: torque is just a number. there are WAY too many other things involved to simply say "well this car will be faster cuz it has more torque".
other than you saying torque=win, which is... wrong.
what do you mean making things even? a mustang GT making 260hp and 302lb/ft torque vs an S2000 making 240hp and 153lb/ft torque isn't even enough for you? instead you want me to compare it to the supercharged cobra? how is that even?
aside from that, my point was this: torque is just a number. there are WAY too many other things involved to simply say "well this car will be faster cuz it has more torque".
Don't bother man.
My rectum hurts........
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Rep Power: 0 I never said that but torque is always a plus... To tell you the truth I still have no Idea how much horspower I have since I have soooo many mods but I can beat mostly anycar I go heads up with...No prob. So even If I had almost no torque I wouldnt know and wouldnt care since its mostly the driver that wins... And even if you take the supercharger off the Cobra id be running pertty good now wouldnt it?? 32 valves..mMmMmMm ohh sorry just got dazed off... That friend that Im talking about with the S2000 had a Mach 1 before but wrecked it and now owns his S2000
My rectum hurts........
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted by S2000man01
what do you mean making things even? a mustang GT making 260hp and 302lb/ft torque vs an S2000 making 240hp and 153lb/ft torque isn't even enough for you? instead you want me to compare it to the supercharged cobra? how is that even?
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,031
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US
Rep Power: 401
Originally Posted by Mustang5.0HO
I never said that but torque is always a plus... To tell you the truth I still have no Idea how much horspower I have since I have soooo many mods but I can beat mostly anycar I go heads up with...No prob. So even If I had almost no torque I wouldnt know and wouldnt care since its mostly the driver that wins... And even if you take the supercharger off the Cobra id be running pertty good now wouldnt it?? 32 valves..mMmMmMm ohh sorry just got dazed off... That friend that Im talking about with the S2000 had a Mach 1 before but wrecked it and now owns his S2000
32 valves.... uh, yeah that'd be 4 valves per cylinder. which pretty much every car has today. so what's the point??
and though driver has an effect, if you are making 500hp and beat a 127hp civic, it's not the driver that wins. lol
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,031
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US
Rep Power: 401
Originally Posted by Mustang5.0HO
I meant under the same price range you can compare a Cobra to a S2000....am I right?? your comparing a 30k+ car to a 20k car....I was just trying to make it even in that respect
and again my point was that torque in and of itself means absolutely nothing.
My rectum hurts........
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted by S2000man01
32 valves.... uh, yeah that'd be 4 valves per cylinder. which pretty much every car has today. so what's the point??
and though driver has an effect, if you are making 500hp and beat a 127hp civic, it's not the driver that wins. lol
and though driver has an effect, if you are making 500hp and beat a 127hp civic, it's not the driver that wins. lol
My rectum hurts........
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted by S2000man01
price is irrelevant.
and again my point was that torque in and of itself means absolutely nothing.
and again my point was that torque in and of itself means absolutely nothing.
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,031
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US
Rep Power: 401
Originally Posted by Mustang5.0HO
How does price not fit into all this?? And how in the world would you hate having 300+ feet of torque... Youd be crazy if youd pass that up
price isn't an issue. last i checked we were discussing torque and the fact that torque alone means jack ****. where does that concern price?
i mean hell, if you're going to bring in price, then we might as well discuss all features of the entire car and the particular demographic and class each car is geared toward. (the mustang and S2000 are completely different in that regard). so that's why price is irrelevant.
Registered!!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Rep Power: 0 http://www.yawpower.com/tqvshp.html
HP determines accleration, plain and simple.
It should be - HP wins races, but Torque will pull your *** out of a ditch.
However, if two cars have the same stats across the board, with one having more torque... that could be the deciding factor.
It's very hard to say exactly WHAT role torque plays, but it's better to have it than not. Certainly makes for a more "fun-to-drive" car.
HP determines accleration, plain and simple.
It should be - HP wins races, but Torque will pull your *** out of a ditch.
However, if two cars have the same stats across the board, with one having more torque... that could be the deciding factor.
It's very hard to say exactly WHAT role torque plays, but it's better to have it than not. Certainly makes for a more "fun-to-drive" car.
Last edited by senseiturtle; Mar 5, 2005 at 11:29 PM.
