Additional 2019 Sedan/Coupe Details Released

averagetrackdriver said:

But remember, there will always be those who want the sport look only and don't care about driving dynamics.

Click to expand...

Very true. The last 2 vehicles my dad bought... a stupidly base model '01 F-150 and a '15 Sonata that looked to be about as base model as you can get, both had 'Sport' written somewhere on their side and trunk lid respectively. Nothing about either one was sporty... but god love him, my dad was so proud of that Sonata he got for my mom... touting it being a 'sport model'. I guess it does have a sport button... for what it's worth, that either murders or resurrects throttle response.

dallasjhawk said:

The new yellow green color is puke

Click to expand...

X2.

I can imagine... dude comes up with the idea of mixing a great bright green color with an equally great bright yellow color... either one would have been something folks might of liked over the greenish yellow... or is it yellowish green...?

I'd brought this up before... but the K series engine is heavier than the L, though the addition of all the ducting, intercooler and turbo likely equals things out. The weight advantages in the LX are probably going to be negated by some of the options such as 18" wheels, amongst other things. I'm really interested to see what the final tally is. I don't see how it'll weigh in at 2770. I think it'll probably match the weight of a similarly equipped L15B7 powered car.

I remember the RSXs were riding on 16s or 17s... and they were *very* light for OEMs, when durability is a major consideration. The OEM 16s on the type s were 16-17 lbs as I recall. Bases had 15s I think. 17s were an avaiable option at one point, and similarly light. It' a shame they don't follow the same formula that did 15+ years ago with a similar car with the similar engine to hold weights/masses low. It let the base RSX be as tossable as possible with minimal mass to have to get back up to speed.

I had some heavish 18s on my type-S when i bought it used and it made the car noticably slower around town from all the mass. The K20C2 makes peak torque late, like any NA K makes. I actually bought a set of the OEM 16s for cheap and went back to them, as the base had the stockers and seemed peppier off the line (I owned them at the same time for a period of months so I got the chance to compare them directly... which is why I sometimes make a impassioned argument for or against. I drove the hot K and the mild K powered RSXs back to back). It was a good change. Having a car that doesn't make a lot of torque down low makes heavy wheels kind of a crappy thing to have when you're putting around town.

Remember LXs only have 4 speakers, had 16" steelies, different seats, smaller front sway bar... no moon roof... there's a lot of things that went into it being a light weight that could punch above it's class. Adding a lot of weight and rotational mass to an engine that makes modest power and peak torque late will probably make a present-LX run circles around it.

I would say no. I took an Si around a track earlier in the summer, and it didn't handle as well as an CTR that I drove on the track on the same day. Granted, both cars had different set-ups: the Si had Michelin PS4Ss on stock wheels with track brake pads and stock rotors, and the CTR had Firestone Firehawk Indy 500s on 18" Gram Light wheels with stock pads and rotors. Both had stock suspensions. IMHO, both had very good tires, and I'll defer to the tire experts here to provide a more granular analysis of the difference between the two. That particular day was 85 degrees with a fair amount of humidity and it had rained heavily the night before, so it was slick in certain places. In the Si, I noticed that it had more front-end push than in the CTR. I'm going to say that it's due to the LSD difference. I would appreciate any thoughts from the track drivers here.

There is a plus side for 2.0 owners though, if the sport ends up selling really well (which it most likely will) then there is bound to be more aftermarket support for the 2.0 engine as a result. Obviously there can only be so much support for a NA 4-cyl engine, but maybe we'll see new exhaust and intake options that actually do something besides make a lot of noise.

It’s not really all that shocking Honda is doing sport models with the base engine. Until the current gen, the accord sport used the base 2.4 and those sold very well. They were very attractive. Well priced. I see them everywhere. I know it seems counter intuitive to most enthusiasts to use a base engine for a “sport” model. But Honda and other companies have proven that the general public love the little bit of extra visual flair and minor upgrades that keep the price low but gives the car more presence than a typical base model car.

dallasjhawk said:

he has been wrong about each of them too. now he says we cant heel toe on the streets lol. I can do it on the streets, I can do it in the canyons I can do it at the local track. Of course I cant do it at all right now since my car is a cvt but still. So to bring it back to topic, The new yellow green color is puke and the Sport package is an abomination of the Sport Hatch and man that just makes me sad that people are going to drive around and equate a base model sport with an actual sport

Click to expand...

Totally agree, there is nothing sporty about it. It’s an appearance package basically.

Lol no just this account. It really is just an appearance package basically. That’s not a bad thing if you are going for a faster look.

Is this offering more HP like the Hatch sport via a different exhaust? That would be something at least. The lack of the turbo tho is the killer.

Strange they would have the Hatch Sport powered so differently from the coupe and Sedan Sport.

Ataricade said:

Lol no just this account. It really is just an appearance package basically. That’s not a bad thing if you are going for a faster look.

Click to expand...

Don't feed the troll.

best thing youve said yet.

An ex-t is 1000x more fun to drive than the lx though. You seem to forget I have driven both, more than once. And lx has nothing close to an ex-t in performance or comfort amenities, better audio, better tires from the factory, better wheels. everything about an ext is better than lx, hence why its a higher trim level. Its so funny how hard you reach to try to justify your lx. Just stop and be happy with what you have, quit telling stories about the turbo cars

Far more people are going to agree with me than you, I dont need multiple accounts to toot my horn, 2886 other people do it for me. Thanks.

Chief 08 said:

Don't feed the troll.

Click to expand...

A troll doesnt truly believe the garbage they spew. that guy truly does.

dallasjhawk said:

A troll doesnt truly believe the garbage they spew. that guy truly does.

Click to expand...

You might be right. I have tried really hard not to say anything, but I'm getting really sick of this crap. Some people prefer the NA motor, and that's ok, but to say that it's superior to the turbo in any way at all is just false.