Both are very good clutches. The PG2 has at least 4-5 years of history and the RPS has about 2-3 years of history. I think it's safe to say that both have proven to be reliable. We have installed quite of the RPS clutches in cars from stock - 600 wheel horsepower. I use this on two of our high horsepower cars in house and have been very happy with the results. I love how the RPS being significantly lighter than stock allows the engine to free rev much faster - making rev-matched downshifts a pleasure.
A couple notes:
1. The RPS single disc clutch uses the same pressure plate / diaphragm design as the Comptech PG2, so the pedal effort will be similar. You will be able to find several reviews of the RPS online as it is a very popular clutch.
It's important to understand that in a clutch design, you can produce increased holding power over stock with surface area, friction, or clamping force. Both clutches are single disc, and have decent sized discs used. This design allows it to be used on either early or later cars (a twin disc carbon / organic clutch for extreme horsepower is now available which you can find on our site as well). The downside of making the friction liner with a high coefficient of friction (like Exedy clutches) is that the engagement is very static, making engagement and modulation in stop and go traffic very difficult. Both the RPS and Comptech clutch use a relatively stiffer spring rate to achieve the holding power they are capable of. This translates into the clutch pedal being stiffer than stock. The pressure required to depress the pedal is about 50% stiffer than stock. Most people are not bothered by this, but it is a point to consider. The upside with this design is that the clutches are very easy to engage (as smooth as stock).
2. The engagement of the clutches are very similar. I believe the RPS stage 1 clutch engages smoother than the PG2 - however it is so minor it may be insignificant.
3. There are a couple notable advantages of the RPS clutch including:
a. patented segmented flywheel design - reduces wear from warpage & reduces rebuild cost as it can be reused.
b. the clutch cover is machined billet aluminum on the RPS compared to the cast cover on the PG2. This increases the strength of the clutch.
c. the RPS features locating pins that centers the clutch precisely when it is spun balanced and then installed. I don't know if the PG2 is spun balanced, but I see this as an advantage if it is not.
A couple notes:
d. we offer the RPS below for a price that is less expensive than the PG2.
Based on this, I recommend the ScienceofSpeed dual disc clutch for customers that have increased performance requirements but want a clutch pedal that is close to stock. This clutch is best for 1991-96 NSX and can be found here:
http://www.scienceofspeed.com/products/drivetrain_performance_products/NSX/ScienceofSpeed/clutch/
For customers with higher horsepower requirements or for most customers with 1997-2005 NSX that don't want to pay the exorbitant price for a factory single disc clutch, I prefer the RPS:
http://www.scienceofspeed.com/products/drivetrain_performance_products/NSX/RPS/
By the way, this is the new RPS twin disc carbon fiber / organic clutch. It's out of scope of this discussion, but a neat thing to look at:
http://www.scienceofspeed.com/products/drivetrain_performance_products/NSX/RPS/twin_disc_carbon/
I hope this was helpful. Feel free to call us if you have any questions.
cheers,
-- Chris
