# spec-v or rsx-s? which would u buy HONESTLY.



## dropsentra94 (May 1, 2002)

ye i just wanted some opinions im gonna buy 1 of the 2 this summer. Take every thing into consideration not just speed and looks. thnx dudes.late


----------



## Guest (May 13, 2002)

Hey i was kinda having the same problem as you are having right now. I was really pumped about the rsx and i was so sure that it was the car i wanted. Then I took my older brothers advice who is a toyota mechanic, and he said to really look at the differences between the two. When I did i totally saw, ya maybe the acura was a better car but for the value you can't honestly beat the spec-v. In comparison the only real two advantages i saw with the rsx was the 20 extra horsepower which comes at a huge loss of tourque and the leather seating. Other than that the spec-v had same qualities and a way better sound system. I mean you can't beat the price, its just too big a difference. Up here in Canada to get a fully loaded spec-v, its about 28k after all taxes. the acura fully loaded and taxed up is just shy of 40k. thats 12 grand. think of the mods you could do with that much cash. When it comes down to it, its all about whats more important to you but in my opinion there isn't a car out there that offers so much for such a low price. 

But hey thats just me.


----------



## barnoun (May 7, 2002)

If you can afford both, I'd definately pick the RSX Type S. The quality on that car is really nice, especially the interior. It's a much better place to be in if you do a lot of driving, and just in general. As for the torque, yeah the Spec V has more, but it doesn't mean you can use it all(traction issues).


----------



## BORNGEARHEAD (Apr 30, 2002)

Buy the V-spec. It would be the smartest thing you could do with your money. Why would you buy a RSX when you could buy a WRX for the same price? If your comparing V-spec and RSX, the RSX is a waste of money.


----------



## morepower2 (Apr 19, 2002)

BORNGEARHEAD said:


> *Buy the V-spec. It would be the smartest thing you could do with your money. Why would you buy a RSX when you could buy a WRX for the same price? If your comparing V-spec and RSX, the RSX is a waste of money. *


I agree with this, there is no better car than the Spec-V for the price.

I drove one on the track during the SE-R convention in the advanced group and smoked everything in sight. It is an awsome car for the money.

For the price of the RSX, you could buy a WRX or the upcoming EVO 7.

Mike


----------



## Guest (May 14, 2002)

I might be partial to the spec.... after all I do sell them, but I have driven them both... they are both GREAT cars... period. Go for a test drive in the type-s turn hard... it pushes... go on the freeway... cruise at 3500 rpms.... around 70 or so... punch it.... hello, I said PUNCH it.... ok better downshift... now punch it... thats better... now the spec... turn hard "be careful" or your turn into the curb...  instant response... now to the freeway... punch it.... SWEET!  at 70 mph... in 6th it go's no need to downshift. wanna go fast with less effort ... and less $$$, go with the spec JUST DRIVE THEM.... you'll see what I mean.


----------



## dropsentra94 (May 1, 2002)

Wow u guys have been a big help and i think im gonna go wit the spec-v just wish it was in leather.thnx alot dudes.lata


----------



## Guest (May 14, 2002)

*Leather?*

Ask your dealer... Leather can be had from 900-1300  depending on the design. IE two tone... SER or SPEC-V logo's. Plus! You can write it in your loan, or lease. I sold a spec last month. A silver one, the cutomer had two tone silver(grey) and charcoal interior put in. It was CLEAN! All the cloth was gone even the door panels. Do it! ...I autocross and leather is slippery or I'd do it too.

Note.... If you went 60 months the leather would cost you about 25 dollars a month...


----------



## stealthb14 (Apr 30, 2002)

*Re: Leather?*



jdspecv said:


> *Note.... If you went 60 months the leather would cost you about 25 dollars a month...  *


 Nice Sales Pitch  Which dealer in SoCal do you work for?  I've driven the Spec V, and fell in love with the car. The shifts were crisp, and you could feel the torque, and it was screaming "More, I want more!" Inadvertantly on the test drive, I chirped the wheels in third gear, and the sales person just sort of cringed, and my best friend (who was with me) started laughing. I now have my heart set on that car (I can't afford a G35 ... yet), so I will probably be a proud owner soon.


----------



## myoung (Apr 15, 2002)

*diff*

Buy the Spec V... take the difference in the cost between that and rsx and dump it into the Spec V.... heck you'll make up the 20hp on header and intake alone...


----------



## Guest (May 30, 2002)

*Re: diff*

yeah but with the crappy paint nissan uses, you will need to use some of that price difference and put into getting it repainted in future years... and then there is the aftermarket issue.... with the acura, there was aftermarket even before the car was fully released on the market... with the spec v... there is basicaly nothing... a few intakes and such but overall... more or less nothing.

I have the spec-v and it is fun to drive, but the paint has soured me on the car.. that and the fact the nissan has no aftermarket yet



myoung said:


> *Buy the Spec V... take the difference in the cost between that and rsx and dump it into the Spec V.... heck you'll make up the 20hp on header and intake alone... *


----------



## Guest (May 30, 2002)

Ya well even after factoring in the paint job, hell twice you still save cash on the spec-v. As for after market products, its a brand new car, with a brand new eingine hell give them a little bit and all the favorites will be there.


----------



## Guest (Jun 6, 2002)

*wtf?!?!?*

People, people...this is a Nissan forum, correct? Then why are you guys even considering that waste of money, alphabet soup POS?! GOOD GOD.....keep it real with your roots and get the beast!!!!!

HSentra


----------



## Guest (Jun 14, 2002)

I would go for spec V vs. RSX 
However, if you would ask me spec V vs. WRX I would for WRX hands down. But I don't have that kind of money.


----------



## Guest (Jun 15, 2002)

*Re: wtf?!?!?*

I did go with the SE-R Spec-V and love it for the most part.. but nissan sure has some $h!tty a$$ed paint which makes me wish I had chosen the other car... I can say untill Nissan improves it's paint jobs I will not buy another one. And for alphabet soup... I would think SE-R Spec-V is a bit more alphabet soupish.. lots of letters there... even without adding the sentra part.






HSentra said:


> *People, people...this is a Nissan forum, correct? Then why are you guys even considering that waste of money, alphabet soup POS?! GOOD GOD.....keep it real with your roots and get the beast!!!!!
> 
> HSentra *


----------



## BORNGEARHEAD (Apr 30, 2002)

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THEIR PAINT??????


----------



## Guest (Jun 16, 2002)

BORNGEARHEAD said:


> *WHAT IS WRONG WITH THEIR PAINT?????? *




check www.freshalloy.com and www.b15sentra.net and you will see... the new ones have especialy poor paint these days, a 6 month old car looks like it has been driven for more than 3 years in many cases... hell.. some look worse than 6 year old cars.... go to those sites and do a search.. you'll see what people have to say about it.


----------



## Guest (Jun 16, 2002)

*Re: Re: wtf?!?!?*



Zokambaa said:


> *I did go with the SE-R Spec-V and love it for the most part.. but nissan sure has some $h!tty a$$ed paint which makes me wish I had chosen the other car... I can say untill Nissan improves it's paint jobs I will not buy another one. And for alphabet soup... I would think SE-R Spec-V is a bit more alphabet soupish.. lots of letters there... even without adding the sentra part.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You obviously missed my piont........alll of Acuras new cars are spelled out with a silly 3 letter name: MDX, RSX, ABC>123......if you even have a doubt that your Nissan is not as good as the RSX then , in my opinion, you should get rid of it and go with your heart. I personally though you made a very good choice.

-HSentra


----------



## Guest (Jun 19, 2002)

Check out www.nissan.com or www.nissandriven.ca. On one of these sites you can do a comparison. I personally would vote for the V-spec. For the buck and for what you can get its worth it. You decide.

voracho


----------



## mcampo (Jul 10, 2002)

BORNGEARHEAD said:


> *WHAT IS WRONG WITH THEIR PAINT?????? *


Check out the next red SeR/SpecV.....you'll see


----------



## BORNGEARHEAD (Apr 30, 2002)

I work at a Nissan dealer and have heard of no problems about the paint finish. I don't know if it has to do with being in a cooler state and less heat on the car.


----------



## Sicx13 (May 2, 2002)

ive test driven both. i love the spec v but the tranny could havr been alot better.i felt slower than a older ser.the rsx type s blew my mind get it!!!!!!!!


----------



## Guest (Jul 11, 2002)

If you have an extra 10k, you could buy the RSX-S but why bother? I drove both and the Spec V wins hands down. That's why i bought one 
And besides, IF you did have an extra 10k, you'd probably be buying a WRX 

As for the paint, the paint just plain sucks on my Spec. It's one giant orange peel...I could have painted it better in my garage


----------



## red SE-R (Jun 23, 2002)

*to wax or not to wax*

well contrary to the modern belief that cars with base and clear coat paint don't need waxing. BULLSHIT!! I have owned my aztec red SE-R for 6 months now and I get it waxed once a month with show car glaze and carnauba wax and it looks better than it did when i bought it new. The paint absolutely shines and I live in Houston!
not to mention Im a service writer for a well known car wash so i get all the free car washes i want, and for the messicans to wax it only costs me a 10 spot  (the tip) 
WAX YOUR CAR!!!
use gloss cleanser (P21S) then carnauba wax(also P21S).
especially with red!!! 

http://www.p21s.com/

I have studied detailing trickes to the concord level and even base coat clear coat paint needs to be waxed and treated semi frequently.(3 to 4 times a year)

And just a tip keeping a good couple of coats of wax helps against rock chips in the paint!!


----------



## Guest (Jul 26, 2002)

*White paint?*

Does anyone have a white one? If so, any issues w/ the paint?

Has anyone ever used protective film on their cars? I'm definitely going to look into this, any info would be great. Here is a company that makes paint and lens protective products that come with guarantees: http://www.bodydynamics.biz/products.htm.

red SE-R:
I'm in Houston too, where are these amazing waxers you are speaking of? Probably do it myself, but JIC.

PS: Hey all, first post. I'm shopping for one now an plan to get one within a week. Unless I go for a 2003, that is.


----------



## HoldenASpecV (Jul 27, 2002)

*PAINT JOBS*

I GUESS I GOT LUCKY WITH MINE OR I GOT THE EARLY BATCH BC MY PAINT JOB IS FINE. BUT IM SURE IT CANT BE THAT BAD AND IF IT IS TAKE IT BACK TO THE DEALER. HAVE THEM PUT ANOTHER CLEARCOAT ON OR SOMETHING CAUSE ITS UNDER WARRANTY.


----------



## UpChuck (Jul 20, 2002)

Based on looks alone...

RSX LOOKS LIKE SOME KIND OF FUGLY CIVIC!!!
the Integra was way better in my opinion.

At least the SE-R is a good looking car (again my opinion)


----------



## germex (Jan 15, 2003)

Zokambaa said:


> *check www.freshalloy.com and www.b15sentra.net and you will see... the new ones have especialy poor paint these days, a 6 month old car looks like it has been driven for more than 3 years in many cases... hell.. some look worse than 6 year old cars.... go to those sites and do a search.. you'll see what people have to say about it. *


I have had my Spec for almost a year now. The paint looks as good as the day I bought it. Of course I'm kind of a clean freak when it comes to my car. I wax it once a month in the spring, summer and fall months and then usally once during the winter. No complaints on paint here. My biggest complaint is the cheap plastic interior. And I do not like the stock seats (lava only on the '02 models). I have already had the seats replaced under warranty at 1,200 miles due to fraying. But I guess Nissan had to cut costs somewhere to keep the price down. Better there than in the drivetrain.


----------



## SilverBullitt03 (Apr 18, 2003)

*good ol paint*

Paint sucks on all new cars. A bird pooped on my door and it ate the paint.. I am a clean freak and I got it off a few hours later. Bird must of had some real acid problems. My mom has an old 93 sentra and the paint is solid as can be on that yet I see other 93's that look like they are 30 years old.. Guess it depends on how much wax you spank on..


Remember though this is a 16 G car. Last time I checked it wasnt a 40g+ car paint job.


----------



## theimportscene (Jan 29, 2003)

yea the price diff is way too big for comparison.... the rsx (non type-s) woud be a better candidate for a good spec-v run.... 

the acuras type-s' motor is sweet tho..... but i woud much rather consider a new-gen civic SI w/ a rsx-s motor.... possible type R...


----------



## ny-capo (May 16, 2003)

What do you guys think of the spray on wax jobs? Do you think they are as good as the good old rub on?


----------



## Silvspec86 (Apr 4, 2003)

what are you guys talking about? I have had no problems with the paint, maybe you people dont take care of your investment. i love my car and i love taking care of it and i take off any contaminants on the paints surface atleast twice a week or anytime is got crap on it. dont trust the spray on crap, those dont give any protection (the purpose of waxing). waxing with a quality wax like Meguiars or 3M will keep your car in pristine condition as long as you keep crap off of it with some detailer. good wax provide so much protection that it can protect against scratches and even light fender benders. wax your Spec-Vs


----------



## Lurker Above (Apr 21, 2003)

i'm happy with most of my paint so far, but there's noticeable orange peel along the inside of the pillars where it's hidden by the door. the outside is holding up well, and the car came with a paint and finish protection package (the name escapes me but they also put waterproofing on the fabric, etc)

frankly, the rsx-s didn't even figure into my car buying decision. i looked specifically at nissans, compared the spec v to the alty 3.5, and went with the spec v for its affordable 6mt and abs. i even looked at the 350z at the dealership, and between having only two seats and that damn two-by-four running right through the cargo area (where my dog would have sat), it wasn't gonna cut it. in retrospect, after reading that six cylinders are naturally harmonically balanced, and finding it rather frustrating that some of the aftermarket wheels i wanted to buy only come in five lugs, the alty has more appeal than before...but my pocketbook still nods its approval over my decision


----------



## Guest (May 27, 2003)

well i'll try to get this thread back on topic hahaha, ummm i like both cars persoanlly although if you have $40,000 to spend (canadian) i would go with the spec and fully bolt it up, it will be faster then the rsx and you would still probly save $5000, although if your taking out a lease or a loan of some kind, and you are finacing it then the rsx-s would be a very nice car more of a refined sports car in my eye although i think it is overpriced in my eye...(oh ya and DEFINATLY get the leather i saw the 2 tone leather seats with SE-R badges embroided in them and the car looks like a diferent car from the inside itss sooooooo fucking tight 1500 canadain, 1000 american......


----------



## CorNut (Apr 6, 2003)

Lurker Above said:


> * and finding it rather frustrating that some of the aftermarket wheels i wanted to buy only come in five lugs, the alty has more appeal than before...but my pocketbook still nods its approval over my decision  *



actually, if you buy the Stillen brake kit you can have that lug nut pattern you want along with some tight ass brakes... spendy yah, but I'm going to get em when I get the $... they are here:
http://store.yahoo.com/southwestautoworks2002-store/20nisspecsti1.html


----------



## 2003YellowSpec-V (Mar 26, 2003)

The RXS type S is junk, I test drove one and even more it has more HP, the Spec V kicks it ass....not to mention as much as $5000 cheaper, think about what you could do to a Spec w/ $5000. The new I-VTEC it shitty...that car is not half the car that the Type R was...IMO


----------



## MisterRatone (Sep 18, 2002)

download and see 

http://www.geocities.com/edsonmalaga/


----------



## Accord_SiR (May 13, 2003)

2003YellowSpec-V said:


> *The RXS type S is junk, I test drove one and even more it has more HP, the Spec V kicks it ass....not to mention as much as $5000 cheaper, think about what you could do to a Spec w/ $5000. The new I-VTEC it shitty...that car is not half the car that the Type R was...IMO *



Yes, the new I-VTEC is "different" than good old-fassioned VTEC, but it is not shitty. I gives you more power, and who doesn't want that. Yes, the "harshness" of the regular VTEC was and still is loved. Honda purposely made the cam transition smoother on the new engines. take into consideration the target market & who is going to be buying the majority of RSX's and TSX's and CL TypeS' ect.... they dont want a kickin VTEC action, they want driveablility and more overall smooth, refined, reliable, Power.
*the RSX is NOT JUNK.* it is quality and precision beyond your imagination. well, that's why they're so phuckin pricey. I just dont understand your comment about your test drive, do you speake english? the Type-R is a legend and is one in its own. True the RSX TypeS is not a replacement for the Type-R. You did know that Honda makes an RSX Type-R right? enuff of this battle that i started betweent the SpecV and TypeS. they are not in the same league (stock).


----------



## V Dude (Oct 22, 2002)

Performance- wise, they are in the same league stock. The RSX-S is not all that much faster. What does it trap at, 93mph? Well, the Spec V traps at 90mph and has the low end advantage. Also, the Spec V comes with a stiffer suspension and HLSD.


----------



## Accord_SiR (May 13, 2003)

V Dude said:


> *Performance- wise, they are in the same league stock. The RSX-S is not all that much faster. What does it trap at, 93mph? Well, the Spec V traps at 90mph and has the low end advantage. Also, the Spec V comes with a stiffer suspension and HLSD. *


hmmm..... trap speed? why are you so concerned with this? I have ridden a Honda 400ex with an FMF pipe and carb jets to the tune of a 12.68 second 1/4 mile, and do you want to know what my trap speed was? well?..... it was 64 mph! (its an ATV for those of you who dont know)
~and i have seen WRX's run low 13's with 90 mph trap speeds

anyways.... the TypeS has an LSD too. they are not in the same league, point proven again, you claim the spec has stiffer suspension but the RSX is an "ACURA", honda's luxury line in America. Does Infinity make a G20 SpecV? no but if they did it would have softer suspension than the Sentra SpecV wouldn't it. In my opinion, nissan has a lot of improvements to make to their car suspensions.


----------



## 2003YellowSpec-V (Mar 26, 2003)

Yes I do know that it's a different car from the Type R (integra) but it has been compared to the type r (around here anyway), personally I think it should be compared more to a GSR than a type R, I did like the Type S (the luxury end), i liked the leather, the power everything, the sub in the trunk, etc. I just didn't like the price tag. I just couldn't feel a big "pull" when the I-VTEC kicked in like I did in the Type R.

And no I did not know that there was an RSX Type R. Do you know where I can check one out?


----------



## Lurker Above (Apr 21, 2003)

rb26dett_4_me has a point, the rsx-s is a near-luxury sport, the spec v is an econo sport. the acura is bracketed by the spec on the low end and the infiniti g35 6mt on the high end (let's not go into how badly the g35 will kick the rsx-s's a$$), prolly a conscious marketing decision on nissan's part not to fill the same fwd luxo-sport niche. they used to do this with the altima and maxima bracketing camrys and accords; but interestingly they seem to have abandoned that approach, as the new altima goes head to head with the other makes while the maxima only has the avalon to play against


----------



## Lurker Above (Apr 21, 2003)

CorNut said:


> *actually, if you buy the Stillen brake kit you can have that lug nut pattern you want along with some tight ass brakes... spendy yah, but I'm going to get em when I get the $... they are here:
> http://store.yahoo.com/southwestautoworks2002-store/20nisspecsti1.html *


something's wrong...i checked it out at www.stillen.com and the brake kit shows four holes for the sentra series. besides, i think the lugs are attached to the wheel hubs, not the rotors, so i'd be looking at a hub swap (i feel another thread comin' on)


----------



## Accord_SiR (May 13, 2003)

2003YellowSpec-V said:


> *Yes I do know that it's a different car from the Type R (integra) but it has been compared to the type r (around here anyway), personally I think it should be compared more to a GSR than a type R, I did like the Type S (the luxury end), i liked the leather, the power everything, the sub in the trunk, etc. I just didn't like the price tag. I just couldn't feel a big "pull" when the I-VTEC kicked in like I did in the Type R.
> 
> And no I did not know that there was an RSX Type R. Do you know where I can check one out? *



Trust me all the real "honda" guys out there were also a little dissapointed with the "feel" of the new i-VTEC, but it's the new best thing, so i guess we have to get use to it. People are already doing engine swaps from the new Civic Si and RSX TypeS into the previous model civics and integras. they're also swapping the RSX Type-S engine into the the new Civic Si to make their own Civic Type R. Anyway, as for the RSX Type R, you could uhhh....... fly to Japan and test-drive one. However I do believe *King Motorsports* Has a Mugen Honda Integra Type-R, they are one of the very few authorized sellers of genuine Mugen parts(its Honda's "Nismo"). They're in Sullivan, Wisconsin. It's just outside of Milwaukee, over by one of those big ass Great Lakes. But who the hell wants to go there? Plus they wouldn't let you drive it, let alone drip any of your drool on it.


----------



## germex (Jan 15, 2003)

RB26DETT_4_ME said:


> *Trust me all the real "honda" guys out there were also a little dissapointed with the "feel" of the new i-VTEC, but it's the new best thing, so i guess we have to get use to it.
> 
> 
> Yeah, they're dissapointed alright. It's brilliant marketing strategy courtesy of Honda. Honda has about the most aftermarket parts available for their cars. So they figured "why not just slap together a car and let the aftermarket boys speed them up, because in doing so, they void a heck of a lot of warranties". The '02 Civic Si is actually slower than previous Si models. And they came with sh!t for OEM rubber. If you bought an Si and planned on doing any racing in it, one of the first things you did was scrap the tires. Getting less and paying more. Gotta love it.*


----------



## morepower2 (Apr 19, 2002)

2003YellowSpec-V said:


> *The RXS type S is junk, I test drove one and even more it has more HP, the Spec V kicks it ass....not to mention as much as $5000 cheaper, think about what you could do to a Spec w/ $5000. The new I-VTEC it shitty...that car is not half the car that the Type R was...IMO *


Yeah right junk my ass, my friends K20A powered type S puts out 240 whp with just a set of R&D cams, timing gears, a dyno tune, Comptech headers, AEM air intake, Greddy Exhaust, JDM ITR intake manifold, UR underdrive pulley and a Hondata ECU. This kicks the shit out of my all motor 200SX which was the fastest all motor SE-R in the country for many years until Andri Miko's latest creations. I have to hit my NOS to keep up with him.

This kicks the shit out of the old B series honda motors, the SR20VE and whatever NA. 240 wheel hp with just simple bolt ons. It runs high 12's in full totaly ungutted street trim with small 15x8x22 slicks. A Spec V with these same mods is lucky to get 180 to the wheels.

High Tech Exhausts RSX makes 268 to the wheels on 91 octane pump gas with their RSX with, headwork and their own cams and anti-reversion headers. This is with a STOCK bottom end. Lets see any NA nissan even come close to that even modded to the hilt!

Mike


----------



## Guest (May 29, 2003)

morepower2 said:


> *Yeah right junk my ass, my friends K20A powered type S puts out 240 whp with just a set of R&D cams, timing gears, a dyno tune, Comptech headers, AEM air intake, Greddy Exhaust, JDM ITR intake manifold, UR underdrive pulley and a Hondata ECU. This kicks the shit out of my all motor 200SX which was the fastest all motor SE-R in the country for many years until Andri Miko's latest creations. I have to hit my NOS to keep up with him.
> 
> This kicks the shit out of the old B series honda motors, the SR20VE and whatever NA. 240 wheel hp with just simple bolt ons. It runs high 12's in full totaly ungutted street trim with small 15x8x22 slicks. A Spec V with these same mods is lucky to get 180 to the wheels.
> 
> ...



the sr20de can take almost 400 crank HP, with a STOCK bottom end, getting it that high NA, might be ridiculusly expseive but it could take it...bam thats nissan buddy


----------



## V Dude (Oct 22, 2002)

morepower2 said:


> *Yeah right junk my ass, my friends K20A powered type S puts out 240 whp with just a set of R&D cams, timing gears, a dyno tune, Comptech headers, AEM air intake, Greddy Exhaust, JDM ITR intake manifold, UR underdrive pulley and a Hondata ECU. This kicks the shit out of my all motor 200SX which was the fastest all motor SE-R in the country for many years until Andri Miko's latest creations. I have to hit my NOS to keep up with him.
> 
> This kicks the shit out of the old B series honda motors, the SR20VE and whatever NA. 240 wheel hp with just simple bolt ons. It runs high 12's in full totaly ungutted street trim with small 15x8x22 slicks. A Spec V with these same mods is lucky to get 180 to the wheels.
> 
> ...



True about the RSX-S. It has a very bottled up engine. Just I/E and Hondata will have them getting low 14's.

But 180 whp on the Spec V isn't that hard. I/H/E, balance shaft removal, and cams will do it.


----------



## Accord_SiR (May 13, 2003)

superv said:


> *the sr20de can take almost 400 crank HP, with a STOCK bottom end, getting it that high NA, might be ridiculusly expseive but it could take it...bam thats nissan buddy *


yeah, it could take it with the lower compression of the stock bottom end cause it's built to be boosted. If you wanted to make 400 n/a hp you would have to run a lot higher compression, and that's no longer a stock bottom end. The SR20DE is built to be and always should have been the SR20DET, the "T" is for TURBO!


I would love to take a 250whp RSX for a spin sometime, im sure it would be very different than any other modded honda i've driven. I dont have much hands on experience yet with the new Honda motors. I'd like to get my hands on a new TSX and change a few little cosmetics and drive it around Accord TypeR style cause that's what it really is.


----------



## 2003YellowSpec-V (Mar 26, 2003)

I still don't like the Type S, I test drove it. I didn't like the ride, the room, and it just didn't seem as fast or as quick as the Spec V. IMO!


----------



## Accord_SiR (May 13, 2003)

2003YellowSpec-V said:


> *I still don't like the Type S, I test drove it. I didn't like the ride, the room, and it just didn't seem as fast or as quick as the Spec V. IMO! *


well, like you said, that's just your opion.

Screw the SpecV, (well, not really) but i drove the '04 Maxima the other day, 265hp 6spd. That car straight gets it! it's fast! or at least it feels fast as hell. push the little TCS button and it wont hesitate to smoke both tires with ease. The 4 seater sport option is cool too! HOPEFULLY Nissan will fix that damn waffle iron grill for next year though. Oh well you can always easily replace the grill. The projector HID's look sick at night too.


----------



## 2003YellowSpec-V (Mar 26, 2003)

OH yea!! I love the new Maxima, except for that damn grill in the front! and the price tag, What are they selling for? $26k+?


----------



## Accord_SiR (May 13, 2003)

2003YellowSpec-V said:


> *OH yea!! I love the new Maxima, except for that damn grill in the front! and the price tag, What are they selling for? $26k+? *


im curious to see what kind of numbers a car mag will get out of the new max, performance wise. 1/4 mile times, whp, 0-60, maybe even top speed. I think its limited at 146 mph and will do that in 5th gear probly

The Harsh reality of the cost of owning the exact maxima i want.

Black on Black Leather 6spd

1. Packages and Options: 
Elite Package $6400 
2. Accessories: 
Floor Mats/Trunk Mat (5-piece set) $150 
3. Base MSRP: $26,950.00 
4. Total Packages, Options, & Accessories $6,550.00 
5. Destination & Handling $540.00 
= *Total Designed MSRP: $34,040.00* 

~Not that i would ever buy one though,
thats more than the EVO or WRX STi(it's finally here) can be had for right now!!!


~the "Elite Package" is a $6400 option! 
but it's the only way to get the cool 4 seater

and you loose the LSD, but im sure you could have that installed by the dealer, along with what ever else you wanted that nissan wouldnt put on it when they buildt it. Nissan is a little odd to me about what they will and will not combine, check the build your own on the web site and you'll see what i mean.
www.nissan-usa.com








isnt that tight


----------



## germex (Jan 15, 2003)

RB26DETT_4_ME said:


> *well, like you said, that's just your opion.
> 
> Screw the SpecV, (well, not really) but i drove the '04 Maxima the other day, 265hp 6spd. That car straight gets it! it's fast! or at least it feels fast as hell. push the little TCS button and it wont hesitate to smoke both tires with ease. The 4 seater sport option is cool too! HOPEFULLY Nissan will fix that damn waffle iron grill for next year though. Oh well you can always easily replace the grill. The projector HID's look sick at night too. *


Yeah, my brother has the '02 model (was only 255 hp back then). You want to talk about smoking my Spec. They are a nice ride, agreed.


----------



## Accord_SiR (May 13, 2003)

germex said:


> *Yeah, my brother has the '02 model (was only 255 hp back then). You want to talk about smoking my Spec. They are a nice ride, agreed. *


Nissan and Kellogs teamed up for this years BTCC maxima race car


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

superv said:


> *the sr20de can take almost 400 crank HP, with a STOCK bottom end, getting it that high NA, might be ridiculusly expseive but it could take it...bam thats nissan buddy *


you know you're telling the SR20 GOD this, right? If he's defending the K20 in the RSX, there's something to be said about that.


If none of you know who Morepower2 is, the least I can tell you is he can tell you a helluva lot more about your car and how to drive it than 98% of you know. 

If I had 20k now and could get either an RSX-S or a Spec V, I would buy the RSX. More refined, cleaner, simpler, and smooth. The spec V is a great car, but the class just isn't there.


----------



## TurboB15sentra (Feb 11, 2003)

RSX Type S... it's a badass car.. no doubt


----------



## V Dude (Oct 22, 2002)

chimmike said:


> *you know you're telling the SR20 GOD this, right? If he's defending the K20 in the RSX, there's something to be said about that.
> 
> 
> If none of you know who Morepower2 is, the least I can tell you is he can tell you a helluva lot more about your car and how to drive it than 98% of you know.
> ...



You'd have to get a used one though. Or get the RSX base.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

V Dude said:


> *You'd have to get a used one though. Or get the RSX base. *



hehe, I've found some dealers with RSX-S's sittin on the lots for a while....I think they'll deal on them


----------



## morepower2 (Apr 19, 2002)

2003YellowSpec-V said:


> *I still don't like the Type S, I test drove it. I didn't like the ride, the room, and it just didn't seem as fast or as quick as the Spec V. IMO! *


Stock the Type-S is not all that impressive but a few simple bolt ons wakes it up like no other motor I have ever seen.

Mike


----------



## Guest (May 30, 2003)

chimmike said:


> *hehe, I've found some dealers with RSX-S's sittin on the lots for a while....I think they'll deal on them  *


That is the best way to go man. when I bought my spec v, it had been sitting on the lot for a month and a half. I paid $1,600 under sticker for it. You have to watch stuff like that if you really want a good deal.


----------



## 2003YellowSpec-V (Mar 26, 2003)

If I had $20K, SRT-4 here i come...he he he...but it's the Spec for the next 5 years. he he he


----------



## FletchSpecV (Nov 26, 2002)

I went and drove an RSX type S today. I own a spec v though. The RSX Type S is impressive and it was pretty fast. I would say though that for the approx. 5K dollar difference you could make your spec a lot faster and also cooler looking. Plus, I like Nissan more than Honda, . Later and good luck, whatever you buy.
Fletch


----------



## SpecVspeeD (Mar 29, 2003)

1 word TORQUE!!!!!!!

That is the selling point of the Spec V


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2003)

Well... I bought the Spec V.... Not disappointed in the least


----------



## Jtspecv2002 (Nov 14, 2002)

buy the spec v!!! i smoked a rsx, easily. spec v you will get your moneys worth. trust me!!!!!!!!! also it loves upgrades. dont let the paint issue make your decision, that is an easy fix. plus the spec v is in a class of it's own!!!!


----------



## SpecVspeeD (Mar 29, 2003)

Just out of question, what about the MSP or the SRT-4??


----------



## germex (Jan 15, 2003)

SpecVspeeD said:


> *Just out of question, what about the MSP or the SRT-4?? *


Like $19,995 I believe.


----------



## sr20dem0n (Mar 19, 2003)

germex said:


> *Like $19,995 I believe. *


I think he was asking the guy why he didn't list the MSP or SRT as choices, not what the MSRP is on the SRT 


TOO MANY ACRONYMS!!!! I can't take it any more....I need a drink


----------



## Tickwomp (May 27, 2003)

i like the rsx interior, yet the gauges blend together if i recall. just looks weird to me. ive heard they drive like civics too (which IMO isnt' really a bad thing), but yea i'd say spec V for the cheaper pricing. i like the way specv's look too. besides, there are rsx's everywhere...how many specV's you see, some but not as many as RSX's and Civic's and what not. be unique 

and damn that SRT=4 is nice...*drool*


----------



## germex (Jan 15, 2003)

sr20dem0n said:


> *I think he was asking the guy why he didn't list the MSP or SRT as choices, not what the MSRP is on the SRT
> 
> 
> TOO MANY ACRONYMS!!!! I can't take it any more....I need a drink  *


Ooops! I need to slow down and read a little closer. My fault.


----------



## nissan_dude (Apr 23, 2003)

both are good cars -- they are both more or less equal performance-wise from the factory -- the acura may be a lil more refined, but the nissan's torque makes high gear driving on the highway more relaxed. u can add bolt-ons to either one and get a good response from it. and im sure either one is fun to throw into a corner. interior will be of better quality in the acura and resale value will prob be better on the rsx-s since typically, hondas/acuras have better depreciation value than nissans.

personally, i like the 03 spec v's mainly conservative look and feel (prob cuz my 1st and only car so far is a nissan)...i am not too fond of the rsx as i was when it first came out b/c its as played out as an escalade riding on dubs (ill c 5 diff rsx's drive up & down my block in part of a day) and i don't like how the center dash was designed...(1) resembles that of a civic, (2) the controls are higher up than my liking. so for ~4-5 g's less, id take the spec v for the 4drs and the features, and use the extra $ to give it sum more well-deserved umph..


----------



## Spec V Tuner (Nov 8, 2002)

steveo said:


> * Other than that the spec-v had same qualities and a way better sound system. *


what the hell you been smoking? if you get the type s you get a bose system, far better than the cheap ass wanna be fosgate shiot we get. My spec v rattles, everything just rattles. My g/f's type s is smooth, no rattles no nothin'. It has pretty much the same mods as I do.


----------



## sr20dem0n (Mar 19, 2003)

yeah my interior rattles pretty bad, but I just finished off the sound system in my car so I can't hear a damn thing in the cabin anymore. I can't even hear my WAI with the windows down at WOT if I have it cranked up


----------



## V Dude (Oct 22, 2002)

Spec V Tuner said:


> *what the hell you been smoking? if you get the type s you get a bose system, far better than the cheap ass wanna be fosgate shiot we get. My spec v rattles, everything just rattles. My g/f's type s is smooth, no rattles no nothin'. It has pretty much the same mods as I do. *


Since when is the bose system far better? Nothing that I have read said its better.


----------



## tekmode (Feb 22, 2003)

The bose system actually sucks.


----------



## germex (Jan 15, 2003)

Bose is over rated and overpriced. The RF isn't really worth a shit either. Not too many factory systems are though.


----------



## Spec V Tuner (Nov 8, 2002)

the bose system sound ALOT better than ours, that is what I am saying


----------



## sr20dem0n (Mar 19, 2003)

from the stock Bose systems I've heard, they have no midbass and no highs....which gets REALLY annoying pretty fast.


----------



## Spec V Tuner (Nov 8, 2002)

i can only speak on personal preference, but it sounded alot better than my "fosgate" factory system


----------



## Spec V Tuner (Nov 8, 2002)

Tickwomp said:


> *i like the rsx interior, yet the gauges blend together if i recall. just looks weird to me. ive heard they drive like civics too (which IMO isnt' really a bad thing), but yea i'd say spec V for the cheaper pricing. i like the way specv's look too. besides, there are rsx's everywhere...how many specV's you see, some but not as many as RSX's and Civic's and what not. be unique
> 
> and damn that SRT=4 is nice...*drool* *


i see more spec v's and se-r's than rsxs. But then again, the closest acura dealership is an hour away in orlando


----------



## muphasta (Aug 12, 2002)

At first I did not like the look of the rsx, and also didn't have the $24k+ needed to get one. As much as I love my spec, I am thinking that I'd rather have the RSX-S. Maybe because my wife drives a brand new volvo, and it is pretty luxo, and the RSX is supposed to be luxo. The sentra is a cheaper car, w/a cheapo interior, and now that I make more $$, I may have purchased the RSX. I love my spec, but it could be a bit nicer on the inside. Then again, it wouldn't have cost as little as it did!


----------



## Spec V Tuner (Nov 8, 2002)

you can get an RSX for 22,500 out the door if you know what tou are doing. A guy in my club got his for 22 even out the door


----------



## tekmode (Feb 22, 2003)

My friend got his when they first came out. I think he paid around $25k. Those little cars are FAST with slight mods.


----------



## germex (Jan 15, 2003)

I now wish I had bought the RSX, or anything else for that matter. I'm about sick and tired of fuckin around with this lemon Spec V I have. Nothing but problems for 10 months of owning it now.


----------



## Guest (Jul 4, 2003)

Ive driven the focuses, cavaliers, srt-4s, rsx, si, nothing has as much potential as this spec v. whith the comming of NISMO this shit just got a whole lot more interesting. me and a buddy are working on devolping a kit for the sentra. we have a prototype and were testing it when it comes out our small sentra will be able play with the big dogs(WRX, EVO, Etc.) you'll see


----------



## SpecV03 (Jun 19, 2003)

Why would you want leather in a car that is ment for racing anyway. It get too hot and sticks to your legs in the summer and stays cold in the winter. Not to mention the cost of fixing it if you tear it.


----------



## Guest (Jul 5, 2003)

*spec-v*

I would buy the spec-v.

I bought a 03' spec-v a couple of months ago and I was in the same boat. 

I test-drove both cars and to be completely honest I was more impressed with the spec-v. The spec-v was roomier and had a more impressive sound system. Also you can't beat the price difference. 
As for performance I really could not feel the difference between the two cars. A couple of advantages that the spec-v has over the RSX type S are that the spec-v has more torque and limited slip. Both cars have a form of valve timing and yes the RSX has 20 more horsepower, but still I favored the spec-v.

thanks Paul

-moved into rsx thread


----------



## FletchSpecV (Nov 26, 2002)

SpecV03 said:


> *Why would you want leather in a car that is ment for racing anyway. It get too hot and sticks to your legs in the summer and stays cold in the winter. Not to mention the cost of fixing it if you tear it. *


Yeah, leather sucks. Unless it's heated and cooled, .


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

I'm still get the RSX. Much more refined. Nice low stance stock too.


----------



## V Dude (Oct 22, 2002)

You can get leather for the Spec V. Looks really nice.

RSX-S - 23k for a 15 second car, no LSD, softer suspension, doesn't even look that sporty for a coupe. I'd rather get the Celica GTS, or even the Tiburon and save 6k for a better looking car. But the aftermarket is great for the RSX-S.


----------



## Pablo14 (Jan 18, 2003)

*Lease the Spec only, Nismo is coming hard!*

Well, the person who started the thread said he'll be buying the car this Summer 2003, but with all the Nissan Performance Motorsports division just starting to lift up, I think is just a matter
of a short time before Nissan and Nissan Performance (Nismo) come with a Nissan Sentra Spec- Turbo, maybe 270 hp +, of course with 20 + gallons fuel tank, even if they have to use part of the back seat....Nobody will care, remember is performance!

It will be a smart choice to lease the car only, because you might feel tempted to buy the new version, maybe as soon as 2005.

I think the Acura RSX type S, has to be a more refined car in
some aspects, but I think that Nissan is better in others so
it is a close call, but in terms of price and value Nissan wins.

Thanks for reading


----------



## sr20dem0n (Mar 19, 2003)

I don't believe Nismo has EVER released a turbo kit for an NA car, and if they planned on starting I can almost promise you it would not be with the spec, it would be the Z


----------



## Pablo14 (Jan 18, 2003)

Think about it. Mazda has Mazdaspeed and a Protegé with a Turbo.

Subaru has the WRX's, Honda has the Type S.

Nissan is going to fight hard, maybe the reason for the delays is
the financial situation of the company, which is on progressive
stage after the changes made by the recently named CEO
Carlos Goshn.

Nissan was in bankrupcy, BUT IN AMERICAN ECONOMICS.

The Japanese economy is different.

Nissan is going to release more than 20 new models soon, even hybrids are on the future in which Toyota and Honda, in that
order, are ahead by a margin, and because they are more stable financially by far. Thanks for reading


----------



## sr20racer (Jun 29, 2002)

morepower2 said:


> *I agree with this, there is no better car than the Spec-V for the price.
> 
> Mike *


Even the SRT-4? 20K------215hp-----275 ft lbs


----------



## viprdude (Jun 27, 2003)

why even mention the wrx? the evo 8 is better, no electric babysitters to slap you on the head when u try to push a car anywhere near its limits. an evo 8 lets u drive it like it should be driven. if u cant drive then u shouldnt be in a evo 8. back to the topic, but a spec v, more bang for the buck so to speak and the rsk looks rather blah. like a cougar with new headlights. srt-4 is junk also. build quality is crap once again by dodge.


----------



## Marooka (Sep 5, 2003)

sr20racer said:


> *Even the SRT-4? 20K------215hp-----275 ft lbs *


but what you don't understand is that the srT-4 is TURBO. plus i went to a dodge dealership and they marked-up the price for the srt-4 $4000. A $4000 dollar mark-up on a dodge????? wow. you might as well get a sentra gxe or something for a lot less and drop a turbo in that and compare that to the srt-4. i'm sure the sentra would out perform it. and besides the srt-4 is just a base model neon with a turbo in it.


----------



## Marooka (Sep 5, 2003)

plus, i heard that the srt-4 is boosting 13-15psi STOCK!!!!! come on now, that's ridiculous. put that in a sentra and see the "infinite potential" it has.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

Marooka said:


> *plus, i heard that the srt-4 is boosting 13-15psi STOCK!!!!! come on now, that's ridiculous. put that in a sentra and see the "infinite potential" it has. *


wow, 13psi stock  you know that bigtime car, the EVO? Yeah, well, it's boosting 19psi STOCK.

Marooka. You don't know jack about the SRT4 engine, obviously....so....shut yer piehole. an SRT4 could rape you in stock form, even if you turbo your stock engine, the best you can get before blowing the internals is around 265whp. SRT4 can get FAR beyond that with just fuel system and turbo upgrades.

Sooooo, yeah, if you dump thousands into the spec V, it can be made faster, but hell, you can put forged internals in anything to make it faster than something else. That part is pointless.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

Marooka said:


> * and besides the srt-4 is just a base model neon with a turbo in it. *


no, it's not. It's a totally different engine.

I told you, you don't know what you're talking about. If you're going to be one of these Spec V supremacists, you better stop posting until you learn your shit.


----------



## sr20dem0n (Mar 19, 2003)

chimmike crackin the whip!

hehe, but he's right, the srt-4 is not just a base model neon with a turbo, it's a completely different animal


----------



## Marooka (Sep 5, 2003)

see, the srt runs a 14 1/4 mile. the evo runs 13.2 1/4 mile. so at least the boost is actually doing something. but once again, it's TURBO CHARGED. That's exactly why i respect the 350Z. The old 300zx runs about the same time as the 350z, yet the 350z is a NON-TURBO. so, if you decide to turbo charge or supercharge the 350 then you'll get a hell of a lot more power. that's my point.


----------



## wwmjax (Mar 24, 2003)

the evo runs a 13.2?! jesus fucking christ.... chimmike.... what are you runnin in your gxe?.... no sarcasm


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

Marooka said:


> *see, the srt runs a 14 1/4 mile. the evo runs 13.2 1/4 mile. so at least the boost is actually doing something. but once again, it's TURBO CHARGED. That's exactly why i respect the 350Z. The old 300zx runs about the same time as the 350z, yet the 350z is a NON-TURBO. so, if you decide to turbo charge or supercharge the 350 then you'll get a hell of a lot more power. that's my point. *


people pull 13.8s in stock SRT4s. 

Oh yea, I guess the POWER difference between the SRT4 and the EVO, along with AWD and FWD doesn't make any difference in the 1/4 time? Even car and driver said the EVO is on the ragged edge of what the engine and turbo can handle. NOT GOOD.

damn you're ignorant. I hope you get banned soon.

Umm last I checked, old school 300z TTs ran 13s stock. Oh, and if you s/c the 350z you will get good power, but it's also HALF A LITER BIGGER!

Grow the fuck up, you don't know what you're talking about.


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

wwmjax said:


> *the evo runs a 13.2?! jesus fucking christ.... chimmike.... what are you runnin in your gxe?.... no sarcasm *


no times yet.

some knowledgeable people say I could run mid to low 14s or a 14 flat.


----------



## Scott (Apr 15, 2002)

This thread is going nowhere and is nearly as old as the board. It's time for a rest...


----------

