You've got to be kidding me!!! His stock Si is slow as hell. I've driven both and his car was no doubt slower than mine even before it was chipped. I agree that Honda motors have loads of potential, as Audiboy said a lot more than ours. However, his stock K20A3 is pathetic. I've driven a stock integra (non-GSR so B16) that was hands down faster than his EP3. I've estimated that my A4 runs a 15.3 (chipped) and he runs 15.8 (which yes I realize is a better time than A4s are stock). When I beat him stock we only raced from stop to about 50mph. Well anyway, we can sit here and argue this forever. I know exactly how slow his car is and I also know how little traction he has with non-LSD and 195/60R15 tires.

 

I'm sorry juju4uofa, I was thinking about the older gen si's. And yes if you only raced to 50, then you probably could take the si. But if you raced from any speed at a roll, he would most likely take you, maybe even chipped.

 

Yea, I'd like to race him from about 70mph on. Hondas tend to have much better acceleration at higher speeds than at the bottom end. Plus, quattro kills our cars when it comes to higher speed acceleration. What I can't understand about about Civics though is why Japan gets the type R and we don't. Our Si (along with the base RSX) has the K20A3 which makes 160hp the RSX type S has the K20A2 which makes 200hp (with a 6-speed and no LSD) and the Si Type R has the K20A which makes 220hp (with a 6-speed and LSD). It just doesn't make sense why they would want to limit it's power. it can't cost them much more money to produce the K20 over the K20A3, the gas mileage is the same, and I would think they market for SIs would be a lot larger if they had more power. Oh well, that's just my $.02. The new Si which in person looks awesome IMO gets a newer version of the K20 making 197hp.