QUOTE(charliew @ Sep 26 2007, 10:15 AM) 
QUOTE(Brett W @ Sep 24 2007, 05:35 AM)
QUOTE(Chris Hamilton @ Sep 23 2007, 08:39 PM)
Rice burners are just like any other kind of car, there are fast ones, slow ones, and everything in between. I think the type-S I drove could have been quite competitive at the autocross if I could dial some of the understeer out of it with a rear bar.
Probably so. Realtime Racing had great success with those cars. All front drivers need more rear bar.
QUOTE(Blood red 914-6gt @ Sep 24 2007, 12:10 AM)
Are you guys still talking about this?
Seriously 
Sure why not. Bench racing is cool. Plus as the owner of both types of cars, I feel the need to clarify some common misconceptions.
QUOTE
I assume you're talking highly modified?
Nah, more or less stock. Its my daily driver. 30mpg city and all that.
We went from a 3.4 v6 fiero to a 98 integra gsr for my son to go to college. Put a good header and exhaust an a cold air intake on it and when it went to vtech mode it sounded like a 302 z28 at about 6500 from the late 60's not as fast but plenty fast enough 34 miles to the gallon at 4k rpms at 80 mph all day long. No oil leaks and a 4yr old could speed shift it. Not quite as fast as a older prelude with 100k on it I tried out but really neat if you like to hear 8k and still have the air on.
I'm building a 914 with a subie but you gotta respect reliable 8k performance. Check out the mechanical engineering of any vtech and you will see new technology is the only way to beat the crap out of a performance auto and not have to lay under it more than you drive it.
Charlie
Hard to tell if anyone is really interested in the answer to the original question that started this thread, but, if so, I think I can shed some light on it.
I have a 914-6 with a 3.0 cis engine that has had the catalytic converter/smog punp/egr/decel valves removed, a lower-restriction exhaust added, and the mixture richened for better power. I've never had it measured on a dyno, but it probably produces about 200hp. I have a 916 gearbox that has the exact same ratios as the stock 911SC, and tires with the same rolling radius as the stock SC. Since essentially everything in the drive train is the same as the SC, the accelerative force should be close to the same, and therefore the acceleration produced should be equal to that of the 911SC times the ratio of the mass of the SC to that of my 914. To show that this is true, consider two equations from freshman physics:
f = ma and v = at
where,
f = force (i.e. the torque at the wheels)
m = mass
a = acceleration produced
v = velocity
t = time
An equation of the form, f = ma, holds for both the 914 and the 911SC. If the forces for the two are the same, then:
m1a1 = m2a2
where,
m1 = mass of the 914
a1 = acceleration of the 914
m2 = mass of the 911SC
a2 = acceleration of the 911SC
So that,
a1/a2 = m2/m1
or,
a1 = a2(m2/m1)
The second equation, v = at, then says that, for a given velocity like 60mph,
a1t1 = a2t2
where,
t1 = time for the 914 to reach this velocity
t2 = time for the 911SC to reach this velocity
or,
t1 = t2(a2/a1) = t2(m1/m2)
It isn't really this simple, of course, since the force and resulting acceleration aren't constant with respect to time, but, since the equations are linear, the same relations apply to the averaged values, so the relationship should still be accurate, at least to first approximation.
According to the R&T road test of the 1978 911SC, the 0-60 time was 6.9 seconds and the test weight was about 3100lbs. My 914 weighs 2250lbs without a driver, so maybe 2450 with. This would say that the 914 should have 1.27x greater acceleration, which would mean the time to go from 0-60mph would be shorter by the same ratio. This would predict a 0-60 time of 5.45 seconds, which is in-line with what I measure on my car with a G-Force computer - I've seen 5.5-5.7 seconds fairly consistently.
I haven't raced anyone in a Civic, new or old, but this would say that the 914 should pull the Civic by a rather comfortable margin.