RE: Honda Civic Type R

RE: Honda Civic Type R

Author
Discussion

CarZee

13,382 posts

267 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
Yes - Red apples are much quicker, more economical and reliable than green apples IMO, but green apples come with soft top option which is a winner for me..

Overall, they have entirely different core characteristics.

campbell

2,499 posts

283 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
I beleve there is a crunch factor to take into consideration
But please don't forget about the tast too
Hoo and the Civic, cant say I have driven one yet, but they do look a bit ugly compared to the Accord.
See YAA

PetrolTed

34,425 posts

303 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
quote:

Yes - Red apples are much quicker, more economical and reliable than green apples IMO, but green apples come with soft top option which is a winner for me..


I went karting last year and amongst the numpty excuses being reeled out was "Well, the red karts are definitely faster than the blue ones".

cockers

632 posts

281 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
Oranges handle better when you peel off the main roads.

No, of course you can't get a new Chimaera for 16k - I was just pointing out an alternative use of scarce resources.

I accept the point about most modern Pugs, actually - 206 GTI was a let-down and there isn't a hot 307. 106 GTIs are still on sale new and I have yet to drive a hot hatch that is more fun (faster, yes; grippier yes; more fun, no), but even I wouldn't buy one brand new, because it will probably be replaced soon, so the residuals will crash.

I'm just still bitter about Honda's "Bye bye GTI" campaign!

CJN

230 posts

273 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
Having just sold my Elise, I have my CTR due later this month.
MAD???
Well, the Liz was my one & only car & I had been using it for my daily commute & weekend blast for pretty much one year. Fantastic in the dry, although a few more horses wouldn't go amiss, but in the wet it was a pain in the arse to drive at a reasonable pace.
I now need more space than the Elise could offer, so it had to go. Period.
CTR was the top of my shopping list from day 1 - being slower to 60 than Liz but two seconds faster to a ton. 3 year guarantee (extend to 6yrs for £295), reasonable fuel consumption, (relatively) cheap servicing, it won't break - ever & the right price at £16k ish. I wanted a new car, so what alternatives did I have??
172 - 172 only with Super UL!, been out a fair while & a bit too shopping trolley like.
Leon, too big & squidgy.
Golf TDI, I'm a 'Petrol'head
307, no sports model.
WRX, I'm not that keen on petrol stations or the dealer (7.5k services!)
Cooper S, only 163bhp!

guysh

2,249 posts

283 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
Slightly off topic all though 'Hot Hatch' related. I'm expecting delivery of my new shopping trolley shortly, which will arrive well ahead of my toy (M12).
It's Golf V6 4 motion. No just a quiry here but is this the same basic engine and gearbox as in the Audi RS2 etc minus turbos? 'cause if it is can you imagine a Golf with 400 plus BHP (I don't intend doing this to the car but it would fun know what it would be like......

civic esi

19 posts

266 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
I would like to see any of the other cars get better fuel economy and emmissions, also the point of VTEC.

It is engine technology designed to remove the need for more cubes, and add a revvy nature to the engine. Of course you could buy a bigger engined car, like a Chimera, but it wouldnt give you 30mpg or other benefits.

Another part to note, the Elise has a VTEC derived engine, honda helped develop it!!!!

Also please note that since Honda pioneered VTEC, every main manufacturer out there has copied it and introduced it. Toyota, BMW, Rover, Jaguar, Mercedes, Ford to name but a few, all have it now. It is fantastic technology, and should be admired as such. Whether you like the revvy nature is down to taste and prefference.

I occasionaly get annoyed at waiting for it to come on song, but when it does it gives a thrill few other engines do. Yes you have to change gear more to get the best of it, but when they give you a great shift it isnt an issue, just part of the fun. Sometimes the fact it is tamer below 5k is good, when you are stuck in traffic or pootling to the shops, who needs a 200bhp engine (or 130 in my case).

AndyShillito

1 posts

264 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
Now then.

The review was entertaining, but my question is this, has he ever spent time with a CTR ? or has he just had a quick test drive and made the very common mistake of judging without ever spending quality time with Honda's glorious machine. The CTR may not appear to have that much torque on paper, but when you drive it properly (not on a quick test drive !) it pulls like hell.
You simply need to use all 6 gears, that's why Honda gave us 6 to choose from. As for the VTEC zone, if, as I mentioned previously you drive it properly, it's geared to allow you to stay in the VTEC zone practically in every gear apart from 1st right up to a ton fifty.

And lastly, as for the shopping trolly remarks, well, i for one welcome a car which is as excellent as the CTR, has room for 4 adults and some luggage. I nerly bought a 2 seater elise until I had a 'proper' test drive of the CTR and couldn't resist the harmony of practicallity and performance, not to mention the price.
Thank God i saw past the looks and took a CTR for a spin, it's the best car i've ever had - no contest.

kevinday

11,623 posts

280 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
quote:

I would like to see any of the other cars get better fuel economy and emmissions, also the point of VTEC.

It is engine technology designed to remove the need for more cubes, and add a revvy nature to the engine. Of course you could buy a bigger engined car, like a Chimera, but it wouldnt give you 30mpg or other benefits.




I would contend that if you drove the type R in the 'VTEC zone' of 6-8,000 rpm all the time, you would get much less than 30mpg, more like 10mpg. A Chimaera can return 30mpg+ on a long motorway run cruising at 75-80, and its power is easily available. Also at 6-8,000 rpm all the time you would have a monster headache when you got out of the car!

JonVickers

121 posts

284 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
Well, I haven't driven a type-r (I seem to be in good company here: "I don't like it, but I haven't driven it..."). However, I did try a Civic 1.6 the other week.

This was my first time in a Honda (no, I wasn't having sex), and I was really disappointed. When driving I found that the ergonomics were fine (even the dash-mounted gearstick), loads of room (I would say more than in my old Cav) but there was no weight to the controls, making it difficult to drive smoothly - it was the best part of an hour and a half before I could think about 'handling'. The engine was fine (if unremarkable), it revved easily and I hit the limiter a few times, it seemed quite low-geared, but not as fast as I had hoped.

Then I had a stint in the back: again loads of room but I was shocked by the lack of quality. Not just the low-grade plastics but the fact that the roof lining was coming away around the hatch. I'm not so keen on Hondas now...

kevinday

11,623 posts

280 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
quote:

[Q]Fair point. I was trying to highlight that the discrepency between power and torque with the VTEC paints a false picture of the car's capabilities. [/Q]

On the contrary, peak torque figures tell you very little about a car's capabilities when driven hard. Peak bhp/tonne is a far far more important figure.

At 60mph, while a torquey low reving car has to be in a gear with say 15mph/1000rpm, a high revving powerful car can be in a gear with 10mph/1000rpm, and hence produce more torque at the wheels from less torque at the engine. Torque at the engine doesn't make you accelerate - torque at the wheels does.

I'll stop blathering on now. I'm only jealous of your big pengises.

Tom




Tom, utter bs Driveability of a car is all about torque, not max power. A car with a flat torque curve such as a TVR is much more driveable than a car with low torque, max power at high revs. Torque = acceleration, bhp = top speed in a simple correlation. Add in weight of course. A TVR will accelerate at a vast rate in any gear at any speed, a type R will not. The ultimate I have experienced of this was a 427 AC Cobra (genuine), the acceleration from 15mph in top gear was phenominal, in fact you only needed to change out of top to start from stationary.

plotloss

67,280 posts

270 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
quote:

but is this the same basic engine and gearbox as in the Audi RS2 etc minus turbos?



In a word, No!

The RS2 engine was an inline 5 cylinder engine that Audi used on all their S Class cars, but then Porsche played with it a bit and it ended up with an enormous KKK turbo and about 340bhp, rocketship quick once the turbo's kicked in. The V6 4Motion engine is just that, a V6.

Matt.

>> Edited by plotloss on Thursday 4th April 14:52

dougal

597 posts

284 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
Thommo, agreed on the points you raised re servicing, consumption and general costs of the Scooby and yes the interior is quite frankly pants,all of which I was well aware of before buying, but it's practicle the boot is bigger (very important for those trips to B&Q for fenceposts etc) it has 3.5/4k useable power in each (longer)gear (compared to 2/2.5k)in shorter gears therefore can go from 30-80 without a gear change on full tilt (good for overtaking safely). Performance wise I would imagine there isn't much in it once rolling (off the line I is gonna kick yaw ass, but mechanical sympathy prevails an all that), just that the CTR driver will be working harder. It's just my practicle every day car, I paid 15k OTR for it (from Holland, full UK spec etc)brand new just over a year ago, have done 27k, one set of tyres and was offered.....15.5k for it trade in against a new Scooby......not such bad value after all????
Did think of chopping it in for a CTR just for something different, but didn't want to give up the wet weather handling/safety that the 4WD gives, but I haven't completely written it off as an option, as there isn't really much competition, well not in the same league anyway, which I think is praise indeed.

Alex

9,975 posts

284 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
quote:

Another part to note, the Elise has a VTEC derived engine, honda helped develop it!!!!



No they didn't. The Rover K-Series had no Honda input.

mattjbatch

1,502 posts

271 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
quote:

Having just sold my Elise, I have my CTR due later this month.
MAD???
Well, the Liz was my one & only car & I had been using it for my daily commute & weekend blast for pretty much one year. Fantastic in the dry, although a few more horses wouldn't go amiss, but in the wet it was a pain in the arse to drive at a reasonable pace.
I now need more space than the Elise could offer, so it had to go. Period.
CTR was the top of my shopping list from day 1 - being slower to 60 than Liz but two seconds faster to a ton. 3 year guarantee (extend to 6yrs for £295), reasonable fuel consumption, (relatively) cheap servicing, it won't break - ever & the right price at £16k ish. I wanted a new car, so what alternatives did I have??
172 - 172 only with Super UL!, been out a fair while & a bit too shopping trolley like.
Leon, too big & squidgy.
Golf TDI, I'm a 'Petrol'head
307, no sports model.
WRX, I'm not that keen on petrol stations or the dealer (7.5k services!)
Cooper S, only 163bhp!



Did you not consider an MG ZS? 180bhp, 139mph, 60 in 7.3s, not a dressed up mini MPV (OK its a dressed up small saloon but I like it!! And its British)

jeremyc

23,432 posts

284 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
I'll mention the 'T' word again:
Seat Leon Cupra 20V T: 173 lb ft
MG ZS 180: 177 lb ft

Nope - not driven either of them, but have driven a Civic Type R and noticed the (relative) lack of torque outside the magic 'VTEC Zone'.

Now then, how about the Seat Leon Cupra R: 210 bhp, 199 lb ft @ 2100-5000 rpm. It's more expensive than the Civic, but much more exclusive (250/year) with a lovely flat torque curve.

guysh

2,249 posts

283 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
Isn't it amazing how a test drive in this type of car can spark off such a huge debate. If it had been a test drive in a Clio 172 I can see excatly same thing happening or Seat Leon or what ever you call them! Test drive something more interesting (flame proof hat and cloak doned) and no one seems inclined to argue or not as much as they have in this thread.

From this I conclude that any car with just two seats and a reasonable power to weight ratio which can be used on a public road in the UK must a good car!!!

pikey

7,699 posts

284 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
Just a thought... I'm off to Pistonheads 2002 Folembray trip tomorrow in my CTR and will be spanking Ted's arse (If he's polite I may let him have a go in it to change his mind!), then I'm driving it to Val d'Isere for a bit of snowboarding, and then home again... ...and I have complete confidence this will not be a problem.

Lovely

PetrolTed

34,425 posts

303 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
Leave my arse alone!

MattC

266 posts

275 months

Thursday 4th April 2002
quotequote all
{KevinDay}
quote:


Tom, utter bs Driveability of a car is all about torque, not max power. A car with a flat torque curve such as a TVR is much more driveable than a car with low torque, max power at high revs. Torque = acceleration, bhp = top speed in a simple correlation. Add in weight of course. A TVR will accelerate at a vast rate in any gear at any speed, a type R will not. The ultimate I have experienced of this was a 427 AC Cobra (genuine), the acceleration from 15mph in top gear was phenominal, in fact you only needed to change out of top to start from stationary.



Sorry Kev, but I agree with Tom. Torque at the wheels gives you acceleration. The more power you have, the more you will accelerate - you just need to have the right gearing. I think the (most)relevant physics is:
power=mass*acceleration*speed
(which you can get to by rearranging the more common equations).
The reason that wide flat torque curves are nice is that you have a finite number of gears. But the ACTUAL peak torque figure is irrelevant. As long as you have plenty of grunt when you change UP, you have a wide enough torque curve. Diesels have HUGE torque figures, but it often isn't over a wide enough range => crap real world performance.

Discuss