[The MichelinMan]

ok people.......i guess its advice time, "one of my good close mate has got himself a 2003 type-r!, "and its time to drag"!
how will a mx6 gen2 94 with a cold air intake go agenst a type-r 03? stock!.......'i am a little worryed'

anyways........any advice will be good!

ty andy

 

[Ribfeast]

You'll probably get him off the line with your torque but once VTEC kicks in he will likely pull away. Drop in a KLZE and things will change Also depends if either of you are autos/manuals etc.

 

[The MichelinMan]

my mx6 is a manual.........

 

[Silver]

The Type-R will win, but not by much

 

[rodhog]

It should be close by 100km/h maybe mx-6 in front. They don't move untill they hit 3rd gear. They have are good on the move 2nd gear to 4th around 50km/h to 180km/h but after that or an anything with more then 1&1/2% gradent they gone. I've seen runs with a 74 HQ 5L monaro lighlty worked 98model type R and M5 -older model not original but with latter model V8. Type R was there between 100-170 but bye bye above that.
It may have top end but its only point to point on flat ground.
Once it loose VTEC any car can pounce on a winding road.
upto 100km/h neck and neck 400m Type -R up to 180 Type R after that it should be Mx-6. Any thing up hill Type R will loose ground.

 

[mx68u]

im a bit surprised here... i would put my money on the type R, the new models have a ****load more torque with the 2ltr's but still even with the older model engines i still would of thought a type R could easily take on a 6..

good luck, let us know how it goes =)

 

[rodhog]

im a bit surprised here... i would put my money on the type R, the new models have a ****load more torque with the 2ltr's but still even with the older model engines i still would of thought a type R could easily take on a 6..

good luck, let us know how it goes =)

But it's weight goes up. This time around it's not down to 1100Kg or less it's 1250KG+

Torque is pulling power but when you add more weight it needs to be matched with torque.
The big proof is when compared with the stokc Non-High camed VTEC with same torque less power. It shows how much the VTEC does for Kw's but little for torque. In this case nothing.
It makes big difference, with the way the Mx-6 KL makes it's torque in a more more modern flat curve, If you can belive honda and they say they have flat curve well. Then if so how come the car needs revs to go up hill. Where as even the simple 2.2L
Vectra motor can stay in higher gear same speed less revs.
Lower end torque.
This is why a fairly stock Mx-6 turbo 5 sped can get ahead by a couple of car lengths up to 80k's. So I say a Mx-6 V6 with simlar weight simialr lower end and mid range torque should make it interesting.

After all I don't thin kthey are 1200KG I think more 1300KG after seeing the plate on NEW 03 STI with 1880KG plated on it by Subauru. It was still maked as it was being sent over to FIJI, at 2 Ton.

 

[The MichelinMan]

well the drag happened tonight.....down melb famous beach road, not idea whats it called, "but the honda had its day", it was a good run, and it was close..........but the type-r won, once the V-tec kicked in, (it was pretty much stock vs stock) but im still proud of my gen2 .......she does me proud!

but ya, this is not gonna be the last drag we have

andy

 

[mx68u]

I wasnt aware the weight went up that much but have heard some pretty good things about the new vtec's with the larger capacity engines.

Older models really needed to rev hard to go up hills but apparently with the newer larger capacity models this isnt as necessary, they really do pull quite well from 3000rpm.

Against my mates stock vtec (guy who went to the last cruise around 17 years ago) and my car stock it was pretty much even. Since the newer ones are even quicker i would assume that a 2003 might even take on a stock mx6 1st gen?

Anywayz MichelinMan good run, i wouldnt worry too much, maybe its time for and exhaust and some extractors, that will put you a couple of lengths in front

btw.. how much did he take you by?

 

[The MichelinMan]

abit more then half a car.....

 

[timtx5]

I was under the impression the earlier DC2 type R's (1.8's) were quicker than the current DC5 2.0litres.

I raced a dc2 1.8 type R at the track, ran the same time as me, only I ran 5mph quicker in the process. Also both went on the dyno, 2kw in my favour. Shows that torque does make a difference, with my heavier weight, and slim power advantage, it was still capable of running a higher trap speed.

 

[rodhog]

Well all I know is the TYPE R we currently Get is the TYPE -S badged with TYPE R gear ETC but lacks the engine and I think some suspension. THE real Type R does high 13's according ot Honda,- so I woudl say low 14's.
The last 1.8L original Type R was a ripper and was complete J-spec version complied for Australia. It odes pull a High 14 which is clsoe to factory mid 14 which they claimed. But most Magazines never quite got there when averaged out.

The new ones are fakes but I will say over-all better build quality. The original well it's nice and all but it's so thing on the ground.
you close the door it's like closing a Hyundai Excel Door.
So in reality it's a $20,000 car with $40,000 car trimmings motor seats and suspension. EG prelude good bits with Intergra cheap bits. It's how I see it.
I know some might How can I say it well. I get you to do this Jump in every car at a motor show car dealer and treat it the way you would. Not even all Mazda's come up to scratch.

Plus one was struggling to excellerate away from the wagon up a hill. A new one as well. 200CC bigger and it made the difference. I know steep hill and from stand start at bottom. 140+Kw's didn't mean crap, add to it I had 4 heavy chrome wheels in the back.

TIMTX5 you know what 5MPH is on the move,
It means you ahead.

 

[Mr McGoo]

I'm not sure what the correct figures are for a standard gen 2, but I found Integra as follows:

"With its 147kW four shifting 1160kg, the Integra Type R has a decent power-to-weight ratio. With the right launch, it scrabbles from zero to 100 km/h in about 7.5-seconds and covers the quarter in low 15s. Top speed is reputedly 225 km/h."

So I guess the question is: How fast is an MX6? I've read anything from low 7's to mid 8's. What is the truth, anyone? My guess is that it would have been fairly damn close - I still like 6's much more

Cheers, Sam.
ps: I drove a 350Z the other day - it was a blast!

Oh yea, might want 2 have a look at
www.autospeed.com/cms/A_1592/article.html?popularArticle

 

[mx68u]

i image the mx6 2nd gen would be in the high 8's, but thats going by what i've seen on the road =)

oh yeah i remember hearing something about us gettin the type s version which is a real shame

oh McGoo did you try laying some rubber down on a corner as they did on the cinema add? what a beast to do something like that in stock trim

 

[rodhog]

There is a video floating around from Best motoring on the net
With Rx-8 S2000 Alfa GTA147 Golf R32 and Type R -Jap race version, I think it's on performance forums
It's shows how much the type-r gives away in HP but makes up for it in corners.
oh yeah RX-8 came 1st showing how much it really is a better RWD car then the S2000 considering on power weight it's pretty close.

 

[Losiho]

So I guess the question is: How fast is an MX6? I've read anything from low 7's to mid 8's. What is the truth, anyone?

According to USA's Car and Driver Magazine, August 1992

0-60mph in 7.2 sec
1/4 mile in 15.6 sec

 

[rodhog]

That's USA best one is to read the ones on Silver's page. closest to home.

 

[Losiho]

60mph = 96km/h, so it obviously takes a full second and a half to reach those extra 4km/h