RE: Tell me I'm wrong: Honda Civic Type R (EP3)

[a11y_m]

Glad it wasn't just me then. Lifted word for word from my profile that I wrote when I sold mine 5 years ago:

"Moved from a Clio 172 to this Civic Type R - both brilliant cars! Interior was a league above the Clio, nice experience to drive, good handling. Main thing that annoyed me was the running costs: I averaged around 6mpg worse than my Clio yet was no quicker overall, and IMO less fun to drive... Oh, and the power delivery: cracking engine when you're in the mood for it, but it just wasn't for me. Nothing, nothing, nothing, 5800rpm, VTEC, woohoo! What an adictive noise, but I still preferred my Clio."

"


It was the power delivery: great when you were on it, but pretty mundane the rest of the time. I always compare it directly to my previous Clio 172, and the Clio was just more fun/special more of the time. The thing is I'm tempted with another EP3 in the near future as I fancy another hot hatch: as much as I want another Clio, I'd equally take a Civic for reasons I'm entirely unsure of!

[pagani1]

Just more Jap crap. The Japanese rarely produce a car with good ride/handling/suspension.
Agreed the spec is good but how did they get it to production like that?
The only Japanese car I ever owned was Mazda RX-7 and admired the Honda NS-X and that's it.

[AsianMpower]

Dear Chris,
Thankyou for this review.

Chris You are Wrong!

reason - honda designed a car that does several things:

1 - Commute us 20-40 year old guys and girls to work and back with reasonable economy especially if used in 6 gear.
2 - Weekend go to a local track event, take a helment and driving license and THRASH THE CAR AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE! WARNING - THIS MAY CAUSE EXTREME AMOUNTS OF FUN.
3 - Reliability - we all know french pocket rockets are great cars however they are not this!
4 - A car that actually for the money looks like a hot hatch rather than one that has alloys and a gti badge added
5 - If you think the steering can't cope with the power of the car then surely your familar with the infamous Focus RS steering and its nature of its darting left right left!

and last of all chris if you preffered the amazing 306 rallye so much - why o why did you get a focus rs?


Bye bye CH

[otolith]

pagani1 said:

Just more Jap crap. The Japanese rarely produce a car with good ride/handling/suspension.

The Germans don't make cars that ride well either.

[Richieboy3008]

I had one for about a year, loved it, but I see where you're coming from.

The steering wasn't much cop and the car did feel somewhat ‘detached’ on some roads.

However I still prefer it to the S2000 I replaced it with.

[roystinho]

elementad said:

I would like to see a hot hatch as good as this was to go on sale again tomorrow for £16k.

Renaultsport Clio 200 Cup

I've always liked the EP3, though always preferred the Renaultsport alternative. Don't think anything comes close for a N/A hot hatch. Currently in a Clio 200 and though it's a bit chubby, it's very capable. The Clio Trophy was the best version n/a hot hatch I've owned/driven

[LuS1fer]

The other point regarding the steering is that we're not all haggard journos or rich enough to have anything "sublime" to compare it to. Most drivers, I would suggest, are mainly happy with any feedback provided it's not entirely numb and the fact the wheels turn when the steering wheel does.

It's the overall package that counts, nothing is perfect...unless anyone knows different.

[RobCrezz]

otolith said:

RobCrezz said:

otolith said:

900T-R said:

Well, that does tie in with the general perception at the time of the Focus being a bit weak all round for a warm hatch, let alone a hot one...

I've got the Evo and CAR first drives in front of me, and they're both positive, and neither accuses the car of lacking low down torque.

I dont find it lacking in low down torque, in fact its a very flexible engine, pulls as well as any n/a 2.0 could do from 1500rpm and because the engine can rev so high, it allowed Honda to put in nice short and close ratios.

Not talking about the Civic, talking about the ST170 which had a very similar low rev delivery to the Civic without the Civic's top end, yet which never really got the same abuse for lack of torque.

I was kind of agreeing, not sure why I quoted really

[burger81]

Techn0 said:

Like any business Honda produced a car to make maximum profit and trade-offs are always present.

I thought I had read or been told from someone that Honda didn't make a profit on selling CTR's, they made a loss on each one??
Probably bulldust though.

[Niffty951]

My problem was actually with the engine. I found the lack of torque disappointing and ruled the whole experience. It didn't hurt quite as much in the civic as the s2000 but it does make it 1 dimensional.

I found it pretty giggle worthy punching through the close ratios deep in the v tec and if offered a lap on track I would jump at it, but the spinal surgery after each drive and hollow torque curve ruled out any chance of me actually owning one.

Mk5 golf managed to be just as good on a hoon but completed the set of qualities the type r lacked. If you wanted a more hard core experience at the sacrifice of a little comfort you could always take the seat leon

Edited by Niffty951 on Wednesday 11th January 15:33

[lauda]

AsianMpower said:

5 - If you think the steering can't cope with the power of the car then surely your familar with the infamous Focus RS steering and its nature of its darting left right left!

I think you'll find that Mr Harris is very familiar with the Mk I Focus RS and I seem to remember that he loved it, despite it's aggressive torque-steer! What's good for the goose...

I thought my EP3 was a fantastic car and represented excellent value for money both new and second-hand. But then again I don't profess to be a particularly spectacular driver and probably didn't very often extend the ultimate performance of the car to the extent that the issues that others have noted became apparent.

What I do know is that I really enjoyed driving the car for over 3 years, during which time I took the total mileage to over 100k without every replacing anything other than tyres and brakes and performing standard servicing. Not sure you'd be able to say that about some of the Civic's rivals.

[a11y_m]

hora said:

a11y_m said:

I'd equally take a Civic for reasons I'm entirely unsure of!

Practicality that it offers? It is practical compared to the Clio IMO.

Good point although that's not it, well not fully at least. My days of 2-seaters are probably numbered and the CTR has more pram/buggy space. I think my rationale - and I hate to admit having the stereotypical view - is that an older French hatch will be royally f**ked whereas an older Honda (even one that's been driven hard) should last far better.

[LuS1fer]

a11y_m said:

Good point although that's not it, well not fully at least. My days of 2-seaters are probably numbered and the CTR has more pram/buggy space. I think my rationale - and I hate to admit having the stereotypical view - is that an older French hatch will be royally f**ked whereas an older Honda (even one that's been driven hard) should last far better.

Just bear in mind my point that the seats jam on the roof when moved forward and access to the rear with a baby seat is so bad that we bought a Mazda 5. You then have to set the seat position again. For kids, a 5 door Focus/Golf might be a better bet.

[Flawless Victory]

burger81 said:

I thought I had read or been told from someone that Honda didn't make a profit on selling CTR's, they made a loss on each one??
Probably bulldust though.

I think that was the DC2, which was built in the same low-volume plant as the NSX and received a lot more care and attention...ie a hand-assembled engine, which obviously costs more.

Whereas the EP3 was thrown together on the same line at Swindon as EP1's & EP2's, so no extra quality control or costs went into it.
Although I do recall, JDM EP3's did receive more QC than UK EP3's.

[carsnapper]

mooseracer said:

Does the CTR suffer from synchro problems like the DC2 and ATR do?

...can do...if they've been owned by a box crashing 11 year old. Whilst the pre face lift ATR's and a few post can suffer from a dicky 5th gear syncro, i'd say that if the boxes have had good quality, regular 'box oil changes and have been looked after then they are much less likely to suffer from this issue in the long run. But, you're right it's worth considering.

[Mutton]

I purchased a brand new facelifted version back in 2004 and got rid of it about 10 months later as it was too compromised in certain areas.

Firstly the good bits:
The engine was a cracker – a real pleasure to work hard and it seemed like it would take full on punishment for an eternity. I also liked that it felt normal below the V-Tec zone when wanting a more serene drive.
The gearbox is the best I’ve ever used. Short throw, very accurate and a perfectly positioned gearlever.
Strong brakes.
Lovely supportive seats.
Exciting lift-off oversteer, although a bit too lively sometimes…
Great handling on very smooth roads and on track. However..

The bad bits:
The suspension was far too stiff for the type of country roads I tend to drive on with the car feeling extremely skittish across lumps and bumps with no wheel control whatsoever. The benefits of the fancy independent rear suspension were completely lost on this car.
The electric assisted steering is among the worst I have ever experienced. No feel at all which didn’t give you much confidence in what the front end was doing.
Lack of traction (even in the dry) – especially when transitioning into the V-Tec zone. Surprising considering the relatively low peak torque figures.
Poor interior build quality - was very surprised and annoyed by the amount of rattles and buzzes coming from various pieces of interior trim.

I ended up buying a year old Mk1 Focus RS and ran both for about a month. In theory the Focus should have suffered from the same handling compromises with the suspension as it was also very firmly set up. The reality was that the Focus was in a different league to the Type-R – much more composure over bumpy roads, better mechanical grip and better traction even though the torque was much higher. The steering was also a master class compared to the Type-R. It was even better built, which was a shock.

When I sold the Type-R I didn’t miss it one bit, even with that engine and gearbox combo.

[kingstondc5]

pagani1 said:

Just more Jap crap. The Japanese rarely produce a car with good ride/handling/suspension.
Agreed the spec is good but how did they get it to production like that?
The only Japanese car I ever owned was Mazda RX-7 and admired the Honda NS-X and that's it.

How can you talk about handling when you have only ever owned an RX7 or are you a car journo/get to drive all the different Jap cars? So the Integras, Evos, Scoobies, Skylines are all st at handling?

It funny reading this thread as you can generally tell who owned one and who test drive one

[Dagnut]

Mikeyboy said:

The turn circle made getting it around the standard multi storey a multi point turn event in tight continental car parks.

That's the price you pay for having a front LSD

[carsnapper]

Antj said:

How, the Accord is no where near as upgradable as the Civic and is a lot slower out of the box. being rarer its prices are actually more solid than the Ep3.

That is very true, the ATR H22 engine is pretty impossible to do anything to, which is not the case with the EP3. But to say that the ATR is 'a lot slower out of the box' - i'd dispute that. There really isn't much in it, especially out of the box. The ATR is heavier, it also has better handling. Horses for courses, a lot comes down to the driver and track conditions. There are both excellent value for money and a hoot to drive quickly

[Baryonyx]

kingstondc5 said:

How can you talk about handling when you have only ever owned an RX7 or are you a car journo/get to drive all the different Jap cars? So the Integras, Evos, Scoobies, Skylines are all st at handling?

Don't even gratify that kind of rubbish with a response, just the usual anti-Jap bks that is spouted around here.