Which has better acceleration: a stock CX or DX hatchback?

[eggshell]

i've been doing some research on the 92-95 cx and dx hatchbacks. anyone know which of the two would be quicker off the line? the dx has more torque (98 vs 91) but is slightly heavier (2090 vs 2055). the biggest difference i see is the cx has max torque at a low 2000 rpm while the dx is 5000 rpm.

i know these are just numbers so if anyone has real world experience with either of these cars, please post. thanks.

[\\ Forgiven //]

I would think it would be a drivers race, although I dont know of anyone who would care to run a stock CX against a stock DX so I cant tell you from experience.

[sohclubkid]

DX would win.

[one6]

They're both slow as balls, but stock vs. stock the DX would take it.

[Inigo Montoya]

DX would win.

x2.

92hp vs 70hp and ok tranny vs shit tranny

[sohclubkid]

x2.

92hp vs 70hp and ok tranny vs shit tranny

PLUS DX is easiest/ best to mini-me... :D

[ryanM]

i didnt know either of those cars could accelerate :what:


:laugh:

[hondafan2]

seems like it would be an even race. torque and weight comparisons are the same. off the line where you need torque, it would probably be an even race. as you get up in speed, the dx horsepower advantage would pull it ahead.

[Lavii]

there economy cars , why would you even consider racing it?

[92CivicCX]

DX would win. I've driven a DX, and I own a CX. No contest. Unless the driver in the DX absolutely can't drive, he would win. 35 pounds heavier wouldn't make a difference to 30 more hp.

[MANNYBOY23]

man i had a cx for about 3 months that crappy piece of shizz couldn't beat a geo going downhill if i was you ill get a cx or dx and just swap some ponies into it

[c_diddy]

i didnt know either of those cars could accelerate :what:


:laugh:
:rolf:

there economy cars , why would you even consider racing it?
just about every civic out there is an economy car...