Keep ATR or buy DC2?

[KillerBee]

Hi all, asking for advice from people who have experience of both accord type R and dc2 integra. I currently own a facelift ATR with a few simple mods, I love the car and have been on a few track days but I have an itch for the teg. Is the driving experience really worth the extra money that they go for over the ATR? At the time I bought the car the teg was out of my price range but now I'll be able to afford one but not sure if I'm going to spend more to get a similar driving experience. Any advice would be appreciated.

[300bhp/ton]

While I suspect some will prefer the ATR, the DC2 is smaller and will feel more nimble and more raw. But tbh, they are just different variations of the same thing. Don't expect a massive difference in personality or thrills.

[KillerBee]

Thanks for the reply. Sounds like it's best just to keep the ATR and go for something totally different for the extra cash.

[300bhp/ton]

Only you can decide that.

[KillerBee]

Haha decisions decisions!

[EskimoArapaho]

300bhp/ton said:

While I suspect some will prefer the ATR, the DC2 is smaller and will feel more nimble and more raw. But tbh, they are just different variations of the same thing. Don't expect a massive difference in personality or thrills.

Just to be clear, are you answering this from your own experience, or extrapolating from the cars' on-paper specs?

[havoc]

EskimoArapaho said:

300bhp/ton said:

While I suspect some will prefer the ATR, the DC2 is smaller and will feel more nimble and more raw. But tbh, they are just different variations of the same thing. Don't expect a massive difference in personality or thrills.

Just to be clear, are you answering this from your own experience, or extrapolating from the cars' on-paper specs?

My thoughts too.

I've owned 2x DC2s plus various other quick Hondas, yet surprisingly not driven an ATR - that and the FN2 are the only ones I haven't.

So my comments are mainly around the DC2 as I understand it's differences vs the ATR:-
- It's got a higher redline, so doesn't drop out of VTEC as readily as the ATR apparently does.
- It's 400cc light, and DOES feel a little thin in the midrange if you're in give-and-take driving - would expect the ATR to be more flexible.
- Headlights are naff unless you get a JDM with Xenons. Does the ATR have Xenons?
- Standard brakes are good enough, uprated pads with decent blanks are everything you ever need for FAST road use.

It has THE most engaging chassis / steering combination I've driven (excluding Caterham and possibly Elise, albeit the ITR is more playful/adjustable than an Elise for an average driver). If nothing else, find a decent one and drive it, see what the fuss is about...

[Turn7]

How about a DC5 ?

[KillerBee]

the fact the ATR drops out of vtec in 3rd and 4th is very annoying, I've heard people say if it does you're not driving it properly but I'd like to see it demonstrated. It's not helped by the 5 speed box which I doubt the ITR would be as affected by considering the weight difference too. Yes the ATR does have xenons. As for a DC5, I think a good example will be another step up in price from a DC2. I'm more drawn to the rawness of the DC2 although having not driven either I may be wrong in that assumption.

[havoc]

Driven 2x DC5s.

DC2 rides better, steers better (not as immediate but more feelsome and natural), sounds better (subjective I know but I prefer the animalistic roar of VTEC to the more metallic/touring car rasp of iVTEC) and handles* better.

DC5 is stiffer, pointier, MUCH nicer inside, more flexible engine and 'box makes it more habitable day-to-day (if you can deal with the ride), but it torque-steers a bit, esp. on bumpy roads, whereas the DC2 seems utterly unfazed by anything short of a full-on rally stage.

DC5 also looks better.

If you do a fair few trackdays a DC5 would make a lot of sense. If you do laddish cruises the DC5 will win you more kudos. Otherwise, if you just have to have the best, most involving/engaging/enthralling fwd car ever made on the planet, you know the answer...



* not grips - handles!

[Turn7]

havoc said:

Driven 2x DC5s.

DC2 rides better, steers better (not as immediate but more feelsome and natural), sounds better (subjective I know but I prefer the animalistic roar of VTEC to the more metallic/touring car rasp of iVTEC) and handles* better.

DC5 is stiffer, pointier, MUCH nicer inside, more flexible engine and 'box makes it more habitable day-to-day (if you can deal with the ride), but it torque-steers a bit, esp. on bumpy roads, whereas the DC2 seems utterly unfazed by anything short of a full-on rally stage.

DC5 also looks better.

If you do a fair few trackdays a DC5 would make a lot of sense. If you do laddish cruises the DC5 will win you more kudos. Otherwise, if you just have to have the best, most involving/engaging/enthralling fwd car ever made on the planet, you know the answer...



* not grips - handles!

For me, the issue is almost one of value.

A good DC2 is now the same money as an average DC5.....

So which to buy ? I think the 2 is posibly better, but Ive not driven a 5 yet, but the 2 is getting old now.....

[300bhp/ton]

EskimoArapaho said:

Just to be clear, are you answering this from your own experience, or extrapolating from the cars' on-paper specs?

Yes to both. And isn't the Accord essentially the same as a Rover 600 platform? Not saying this is a bad thing, actually rather a good thing, as the 600 was a good car too.

[EskimoArapaho]

300bhp/ton said:

Yes to both. And isn't the Accord essentially the same as a Rover 600 platform? Not saying this is a bad thing, actually rather a good thing, as the 600 was a good car too.

You've driven both? You should say what your actual driving impressions are. I ask because your first answer gave the distinct impression that you were telling someone how they drive based on their spec sheet.

[Rob747]

ATR is a nicely sorted Type R product, useable everyday but that means it lacks the last 10-20% rawness.

DC2 is basically a racing car with 4 seats. Not as useable every day. If you are going to track it then there's only one choice.

HTH

[300bhp/ton]

EskimoArapaho said:

You've driven both? You should say what your actual driving impressions are. I ask because your first answer gave the distinct impression that you were telling someone how they drive based on their spec sheet.

What points don't you agree with then?

[EskimoArapaho]

300bhp/ton said:

What points don't you agree with then?

The point that I have a problem with is this: when people ask for driving opinions, too many PHers with no actual experience weigh in with BS and guesswork. It's noise rather than signal.

(As a Honda fan who's considered buying both ITR and ATR in the past, I was hoping to lurk on the thread and get some insight from drivers of them. The OP had asked for advice from people with experience, after all.)

[300bhp/ton]

EskimoArapaho said:

The point that I have a problem with is this: when people ask for driving opinions, too many PHers with no actual experience weigh in with BS and guesswork. It's noise rather than signal.

(As a Honda fan who's considered buying both ITR and ATR in the past, I was hoping to lurk on the thread and get some insight from drivers of them. The OP had asked for advice from people with experience, after all.)

So like I said. What is your problem with my post?

[Squirrelofwoe]

I went in the other direction- I owned a DC2 for a few years and 35,000 miles which I sold back in 2012. Less than a year later I was having serious withdrawal symptoms but couldn't justify the price of another DC2, so I picked up my current '99 ATR.

I've now had the ATR for just over 2.5 years and have done around 25,000 miles in it. The ATR is mechanically standard apart from a Mongoose exhaust and K&N Typhoon. My DC2 was a '97 JDM import, modded with 98-spec brakes, Mugen exhaust manifold, ARC air intake, higher rev limit etc.

In my opinion there is very little to choose between the two, the main points being:

DC2

-Revs higher, and doesn't drop out of v-tec when changing gear.
-Lighter (but in the ATR I don't think you feel the extra weight).
-A bit more focused with fewer concessions to comfort, so slightly more 'in-your-face'.
-Surprisingly a bit more practical for carrying stuff due to the hatch & folding rear seats.

ATR

-Slightly more torque, but the extra makes a MASSIVE difference to how it drives day to day.
-Sounds even better in my opinion (obviously will depend on exhaust/intake setup).
-I would argue the steering is even sharper than the DC2, both are superb though.
-Interior has marginally more luxury making it more palatable as a daily driver.

For me the biggest difference between the two is the extra torque of the 2.2 in the ATR, this more than makes up the slightly lower rev limit. It means the ATR never feels a chore to drive to me, where the DC2 occasionally did.

You sit slightly lower in the DC2 although my driver's seat was lowered even further with a Bride rail, but the driving position in both is excellent. And although technically a 4-door saloon, the ATR drives like a focused hot-hatch, hiding the perception of it's size extremely well.

I used/use both as my daily driver so I've kind of judged them on that basis. If it is a weekend car only (or being used extensively on track) the DC2 might edge it slightly as you won't really care about the downsides, and it's rawness makes it that bit more special. But don't be under any illusion that the ATR is a significant step down because it really isn't, and the sound is just

In terms of cost though I paid £4,995 for my DC2 in around 2009, and then paid £1,800 for my ATR in 2013.

Is the DC2 better than the ATR? Yes in certain aspects.
Is it £3k better? No way.

I personally think the ATR offers 95% of the raw driving appeal of the DC2, alongside a better noise, whilst costing a third of the price for similar condition examples.

So whilst the DC2 is definitely something every car fan should experience, it probably won't blow your mind coming from the ATR- and you will need to pay a significant premium to find out!

Edited to add: I actually tried an EP3 Civic before buying the ATR, but I felt it lacked something that both the DC2 & ATR have- it didn't have the same sharpness, rawness, or general sense of occasion as the older cars. It was probably a better all-round car than the ATR and felt a lot more civilized, but to me it just didn't feel as exciting as the older ATR & DC2.

Edited by Squirrelofwoe on Thursday 24th September 15:11

[KillerBee]

I think I've made my decision. I'm going to keep the ATR. My reasoning being that I know the car inside out and it's in great condition and I feel it will be a bit of a gamble finding an equivalently good ITR. Also, not that the ITR is an everyday sight but I think the ATR has got that bit more exclusivity (I may be wrong on that) I'd love to drive one but don't want to mess a seller around just going for a test drive.

Thanks everyone for the advice

[havoc]

The sensible decision, I think.

DC2's are never going to hit stratospheric prices as they're Japanese and have no real 'competition' heritage (not outside of Japan, leastwise).