archemitis Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 just a thought, i have driven everything before the svx, and after 81, but never an rx. how much slower are they than an xt6, not much? alot? im talkin mostly stock. thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbone Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Thats a no brainer. Both being stock engines, the XT6 has 145hp compared to the RX @ 111hp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calebz Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 115 for 87+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DerFahrer Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Yep, no contest. Two more cylinders is two more cylinders. 30 more hp, and probably a similar torque spread too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idosubaru Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 if it's anything like the EA82 in the XT (same motor), then way slower. no comparison. much better gas mileage but no comparison for power, pulling, acclerating...etc. did you mean to compare the rx turbo and xt6 or NA rx? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJM Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 no such thing as NA RX. STOCK vs STOCK, 87+ RX vs stock XT6 both MT 4WD...I would think they would be close to even...but undoubtly the XT is would be faster. Stock an RX will onyl get to 120 MPH...and thats pushing it. It areodynamically and high RPM power challenged. The XT6 has the power/TQ to get on up there, PLUS a HUGE advantage in areodynamics. I belive it is said it can do 140+ MPH stock....the SVX can do well past 160 in stock form due to aredynamics. Speaking on XT6...i just built (in my head on the long road tripe yesterday)a VF22/8.5:1/rods/crank/MS+DIS/etc...ER27 that i tihnk will put out about 500 HP...all in an 85 DL sedan with FT4WD conversion/stripped out/rollbar...thats about 2200 lbs with 500 hp! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myxalplyx Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 just a thought, i have driven everything before the svx, and after 81, but never an rx. how much slower are they than an xt6, not much? alot? im talkin mostly stock. thanks An RX would be crushed. Alot slower I'd say. I'm talking high 16 second 1/4 mile vs 18-19 second 1/4 mile (for RX turbo). An RX would be even slower. :-p A closer competitor would be a manual trannied RX turbo. Even still, a manual trannied RX turbo would get the can-oh-whoop-arse. I have both and it's no comparison. And I REALLY like the RX turbo. It just doesn't have the low end torque. My FTWD RX weighs around 2700 while the autotrannied AWD XT6 weight just over 2900lbs. Even with the weight difference, by the time the turbo spools up, the XT6 is gone. I'll show you what I mean stock for stock. These are hp and torque graphs of my stock AWD auto XT6 and stock RX turbo FTWD. Pay no mind to the bottom line in the graphs as the AWD XT6 was dyno'd in FWD mode (fuse installed) since the AWD wouldn't shift gears. Autos are hard to start at low rpm so that's why the XT6 starts above 4000rpm. Anyways, when the XT6 has 109hp, the RX turbo only has 74hp. That's a 35hp difference. Yikes! On the torque front, where the XT6 has 122lb-ft of torque, the RX turbo has 81lb-ft of torque. That's a 41lb-ft difference in torque. That's a difference you can feel. I just picked a random point in the dyno graphs to show the difference. I'm kinda wishing I had a manual trannied XT6 so I can really dyno the differences between mods. I'm starting to get used to this manual stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archemitis Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 i was hopin youd chime in since you currently own a couple of each. thats good info. thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now