RE: New Honda Civic Type R details

[GroundEffect]

mp3manager said:

Harryturbs said:

mp3manager said:

Honda of the UK can go and take a running jump off the nearest bridge, as far as I'm concerned.

Every UKDM Type R has been inferior and deliberately gimped compared to the JDM model and as the Japs have always kept the best Type R's for themselves.....I'll buy a JDM car when they are 3 years old.

I guess you don't understand why UKDM models are different to JDM...

I do, which is why I own a JDM DC5.

Nice first post btw and welcome to PH.

Pity the DC2 is better

[Ali_T]

Harryturbs said:

I guess you don't understand why UKDM models are different to JDM...

In regards to the EP3, because the marketing men defined the price at £15995 and they had to lose the niceties like Recaros and LSD as a result. In regards to the FN2, because they completely lost their way.....

[entropy]

First thing wrong is that it sounds awful. It sounds like its bogged down in the mid-rev range.

[Lewtyper]

redlinecal said:

At least Honda are still making a high performance hatchback! They could have just not bothered...and sat staring at pictures of old b series vtec engines remembering the good old days.

A new breed of Type R beckons...

+ 1

Come on guys, not sure why there is so much negativity here- this could be a really good car.

I've always said I'd still love my DC2 even if it had a VAG turbo diesel engine up front- contrary to popular opinion, Honda's engines are not the defining feature of the Type R line. So what if it's a turbo unit, it's quite refreshing that Honda are trying something different. Means easier tuning if that's your thing and are people forgetting the amount of boosted B and K series cars out there?

As for the comments re. the age of this generation of Civic once the R sees the light of day, people seem to be forgetting the fact that the 3rd generation Integra was 4 years old by the time the R hit the UK. Lets hope they have realised this next one could really make or break the brand and are taking their time for good reason.

If they do nail the ring record for a FWD then this can only be a good thing, they have always been built with the "race car for the road" philosophy in mind- yes you could argue that ring records wont convert so well to UK roads but all previous 'R variants have been pretty harsh as daily drivers- FD2 anyone?

I even quite like the look of the thing. Aggressive front, good profile and they seem to have done the best job they can with the rear.

I just hope it has some proper Recaros in it and not the kind of crap they put in the standard EP3 and FN2

I'm looking forward to it, hopefully will be in the position to buy one new once they do finally release it- providing it's any good. Still be keeping my DC2 though

[otolith]

Lewtyper said:

I've always said I'd still love my DC2 even if it had a VAG turbo diesel engine up front- contrary to popular opinion, Honda's engines are not the defining feature of the Type R line.

The engine and gearbox were all that was left to define them - the best thing about the EP3 and the only thing about the FN2.

[Mr2Mike]

Lewtyper said:

+ 1

Come on guys, not sure why there is so much negativity here- this could be a really good car.

I've always said I'd still love my DC2 even if it had a VAG turbo diesel engine up front- contrary to popular opinion, Honda's engines are not the defining feature of the Type R line

I completely disagree, the high revving normally aspirated engines were pretty much the primary defining feature of the Type R. What else about the Type R range was so different from the competition that it was a defining feature?

[motor mad]

Mr2Mike said:

Lewtyper said:

+ 1

Come on guys, not sure why there is so much negativity here- this could be a really good car.

I've always said I'd still love my DC2 even if it had a VAG turbo diesel engine up front- contrary to popular opinion, Honda's engines are not the defining feature of the Type R line

I completely disagree, the high revving normally aspirated engines were pretty much the primary defining feature of the Type R. What else about the Type R range was so different from the competition that it was a defining feature?

Yep I agree. The fact that Honda managed to engineer a 1.8 litre 190bhp engine capable of screaming to 8.5k when other manufacturers relied on forced induction. Also the fact it was reliable. There was a DC2 up for sale the other day with 182k miles on the clocks.

[Ali_T]

I wasn't that convinced by the EP3, at least in UK form. Great engine, though mine drank oil like Keith Moon drank vodka, and gearbox, but the suspension felt completely mismatched at both ends. My pet theory, due to reports of superb handling on the pre production cars with LSDs, is that they had to soften the front end at the last minute because marketing wanted a headline price and that meant losing parts that the car was already set up for. The front end just felt too soft compared to the rear, hence its propensity for swapping ends on lift off (and being very hard to catch) and bouncing around on UK blacktop.

[otolith]

Mine was pretty bomb-proof, and didn't consume any oil after the first service. Didn't rattle at all, even after I'd put about 60k on it, whereas yours was doing the skeletal onanist in a biscuit tin bit. I think yours must have been an earlier car (or they had a heavy Thursday night in Swindon).

[motor mad]

Ali_T said:

I wasn't that convinced by the EP3, at least in UK form. Great engine, though mine drank oil like Keith Moon drank vodka, and gearbox, but the suspension felt completely mismatched at both ends. My pet theory, due to reports of superb handling on the pre production cars with LSDs, is that they had to soften the front end at the last minute because marketing wanted a headline price and that meant losing parts that the car was already set up for. The front end just felt too soft compared to the rear, hence its propensity for swapping ends on lift off (and being very hard to catch) and bouncing around on UK blacktop.

That was never a complaint I had about mine. I remember reading your comments of CTRO. Mine didn't drink a drop of oil in five years.

[Lewtyper]

Mr2Mike said:

I completely disagree, the high revving normally aspirated engines were pretty much the primary defining feature of the Type R. What else about the Type R range was so different from the competition that it was a defining feature?

Ok - FN2 and EP3 (to some extent) are good points.

How about the chassis and suspension set ups?

Or the dedication to weight saving in the 90's models?

The limited slip diff in the DC2 sold over here and all JDM Type-Rs?

EP3 was a good car- to be honest although the k-series (at least in stock form) does rev high, it's not a particularly characterful engine, at least compared to the H and B series that came before it.

[Lewtyper]

Ali_T said:

I wasn't that convinced by the EP3, at least in UK form. Great engine, though mine drank oil like Keith Moon drank vodka, and gearbox, but the suspension felt completely mismatched at both ends. My pet theory, due to reports of superb handling on the pre production cars with LSDs, is that they had to soften the front end at the last minute because marketing wanted a headline price and that meant losing parts that the car was already set up for. The front end just felt too soft compared to the rear, hence its propensity for swapping ends on lift off (and being very hard to catch) and bouncing around on UK blacktop.

Don't remember mine being hard to catch, quite the opposite. Though it did like to drink oil and was very crashy on poor roads.

[otolith]

Lewtyper said:

Ok - FN2 and EP3 (to some extent) are good points.

How about the chassis and suspension set ups?

Or the dedication to weight saving in the 90's models?

The limited slip diff in the DC2 sold over here and all JDM Type-Rs?

EP3 was a good car- to be honest although the k-series (at least in stock form) does rev high, it's not a particularly characterful engine, at least compared to the H and B series that came before it.

Out of all that, I expect that the only thing this new car will have is a limited slip diff - which Renault has now made pretty much de rigeur for anything looking to be credible in the class.

[Lewtyper]

otolith said:

Out of all that, I expect that the only thing this new car will have is a limited slip diff - which Renault has now made pretty much de rigeur for anything looking to be credible in the class.

Yeah, you're probably right

[Martin_Hx]

My EP3 has been spot on for 6 years, facelift in the fastest colour of course

And dare i say... i like this new one, EU killed the N/A i hope Honda make this new 2L turbo the best out there !

[Mr2Mike]

Lewtyper said:

Ok - FN2 and EP3 (to some extent) are good points.

How about the chassis and suspension set ups?

Or the dedication to weight saving in the 90's models?

The limited slip diff in the DC2 sold over here and all JDM Type-Rs?

LSDs have been fitted into loads of hot hatches by different manufacturers, absolutely nothing special here.

The stripped down interior and weight saving measures aren't unique either, look at the Renaultsport cars for starters.

The front suspension on the DC2 and EK9 (and in fact all Civics, Integras, Accords and Preludes of the era, and some Rovers) was interesting because it was a double wishbone system when virtually all of the competition stuck with McPherson struts. However Honda fell back to the McPherson strut with the EP3 Type R, so it's clear that the purse strings overruled any kind of engineering purity they may have aspired to.

A Type R is almost certainly more than the sum of it's parts, but the part that really makes it a Type R in my mind is under the bonnet.

[Lewtyper]

Mr2Mike said:

LSDs have been fitted into loads of hot hatches by different manufacturers, absolutely nothing special here.

Now they have yes- but back when the DC2 then the DC5 were doing the rounds? Did the Clio of that era have one, the Golf, the Celica?

And were Ranaultsport not playing catch up? Unless i'm mistaken their offerings with extreme weight reduction came much later?

Edited by Lewtyper on Friday 13th September 16:11

[JDMDrifter]

PH does make me laugh:

Anti Civic Type R argument - Too revvy, not enough torque etc

Honda plan turbo Civic Type R:

New argument - Wont be as good as the VTEC, why turbo it etc etc

Come on people times are changing and we've got to accept it, sure we all yearn for a manual un assisted pure hot hatch but its 2013. Hot hatches are now proper weapons with serious turbo power and trick gearboxes.

Personally this new Civic looks mean and hopefully it will gobble up the rivals and bring the glory back to the Type R brand.

[Lewtyper]

JDMDrifter said:

PH does make me laugh:

Anti Civic Type R argument - Too revvy, not enough torque etc

Honda plan turbo Civic Type R:

New argument - Wont be as good as the VTEC, why turbo it etc etc

Haha- so true

[Luther Blisset]

What engine does it have? K series or R series or something else?