RE: New Civic Type R details
Discussion
HedgehogFromHell said:
The idea that a car should be made a better crash mat for a pedestrian is perverse, how about start teaching peds to f
king look where they're going, or how about better driver training to reduce accidents?
Been a lurker here for sometime, but I actually registered so I could reply to this ...king look where they're going, or how about better driver training to reduce accidents? Edited by HedgehogFromHell on Wednesday 24th July 10:25
Would you take that attitude if a family member of your was hit by a car? Or perhaps one of your children (I'm guessing you don't have any to come out with something like this). The mind boggles really.
As for the new Type-R, I was wondering if they may try and link this in with the new F1 engine they are developing for 2015 which will be a small turbo with extra KERS allowed. A lot of the manufacturer's like to have some kind of link between their F1 program and road cars ...
Imafreeman said:
I'd rather have an electric engine than a small turbo petrol one (have a 1.4 turbo atm, and don't like it). They really aren't very nice to drive compared to a screaming vtech or supercharged. Turbos should stay on diesel barges.
I've had a go hot hatches with 1.4t engines and smaller and cant really complain (glanza v, mk3 punto abarth), both cars felt very nippy and quite fun. What is it you're driving?otolith said:
Good job that recent Type-R engines are absolutely nothing like that then.
To clarify the last Vtec I drove was a late plate S2000 so not the most modern of the Vtecs, but pretty recent. It felt limp at low and mid revs and not particularly quick even when dashing to the redline. It was a good example that had been recently service and the owner was pretty fastidious so I have no reason to suspect it was poorly. I just checked the figures for the latest Civic Type R which shows peak torque of a weedy 142 lb ft @ 5,600 so exactly what I was saying in my original post.
I am not trying to troll - I like revvy engines when they have a bit more torque. My Busso engined Alfa is like a more muscular Vtec with all its torque above 4k revs and its a hoot. That does have a good 3k revs of surging poke though.
I just think that a lot of the love of Vtec engines is misplaced and based around the myth, not the reality.
Alfa159Ti said:
otolith said:
Good job that recent Type-R engines are absolutely nothing like that then.
To clarify the last Vtec I drove was a late plate S2000 so not the most modern of the Vtecs, but pretty recent. It felt limp at low and mid revs and not particularly quick even when dashing to the redline. It was a good example that had been recently service and the owner was pretty fastidious so I have no reason to suspect it was poorly. I just checked the figures for the latest Civic Type R which shows peak torque of a weedy 142 lb ft @ 5,600 so exactly what I was saying in my original post.
I am not trying to troll - I like revvy engines when they have a bit more torque. My Busso engined Alfa is like a more muscular Vtec with all its torque above 4k revs and its a hoot. That does have a good 3k revs of surging poke though.
I just think that a lot of the love of Vtec engines is misplaced and based around the myth, not the reality.
kambites said:
Benbay001 said:
seefarr said:
Watch the video and talk to me! It actually talks about the need to eliminate the use of fossil fuels and that carbon is the major cause of climate change. It's not even BP funded denial propaganda!
The day when the world comes to an end due to MAN MADE carbon emissions, i will take my hat off and eat it in front of a live audience.
Are Honda copying Renaultsport???
1) Replace revvy 2.0 n/asp with a boring, overly-torquey 1.6 turbo that has "a great mid-range" (i.e. no top-end)? Check
2) Replace interactive manual box with flappy-paddle twin-clutch? Check
3) Market the car as 'quicker' and 'sportier' to disguise the major drop-off in driver involvement? Check
4) Add ePAS in place of hydraulic? On no, they did that years ago!
I'm sorry, I know emissions regs are a fking nuisance, but FFS, manufacturers are turning cars into Playstations with wheels... That BMW, Renault and Honda have gone down the FI, automated 'box and ePAS route leaves no mainstream manufacturer offering a genuinely involving, analogue car...
Game over???
1) Replace revvy 2.0 n/asp with a boring, overly-torquey 1.6 turbo that has "a great mid-range" (i.e. no top-end)? Check
2) Replace interactive manual box with flappy-paddle twin-clutch? Check
3) Market the car as 'quicker' and 'sportier' to disguise the major drop-off in driver involvement? Check
4) Add ePAS in place of hydraulic? On no, they did that years ago!
I'm sorry, I know emissions regs are a f
king nuisance, but FFS, manufacturers are turning cars into Playstations with wheels... That BMW, Renault and Honda have gone down the FI, automated 'box and ePAS route leaves no mainstream manufacturer offering a genuinely involving, analogue car...Game over???
DeadMode said:
Been a lurker here for sometime, but I actually registered so I could reply to this ...
Would you take that attitude if a family member of your was hit by a car? Or perhaps one of your children (I'm guessing you don't have any to come out with something like this). The mind boggles really.
As for the new Type-R, I was wondering if they may try and link this in with the new F1 engine they are developing for 2015 which will be a small turbo with extra KERS allowed. A lot of the manufacturer's like to have some kind of link between their F1 program and road cars ...
Thanks for that, already happened though, you missed it by a few years. The point I was going for amongst my rant was that you can make crash mats as big and soft as you want (metal is still metal regardless of how high or what angles it has - and im all for 20mph limits in certain areas), but unless you deal with what the source is... What's going to realistically change?Would you take that attitude if a family member of your was hit by a car? Or perhaps one of your children (I'm guessing you don't have any to come out with something like this). The mind boggles really.
As for the new Type-R, I was wondering if they may try and link this in with the new F1 engine they are developing for 2015 which will be a small turbo with extra KERS allowed. A lot of the manufacturer's like to have some kind of link between their F1 program and road cars ...
It's still going to happen and will still result in bad s
t. If my child ran into the street and was hit - the motorist was not speeding or driving without due care - i would be to blame.Personally, I feel eduction is partly to blame, alongside parenting. The amount of idiots (of all ages) you see playing chicken with cars on main roads these days is ridiculous. Even seen it on dual carriageways. Ive never felt the need to do it, so why do they? If people were brought up to respect speed, cars and their parents reigned in their antisocial and limited brain function actions - we'd not only reduce RTAs but also have less dramas socially. Similarly, idiots with their chavved up tat pressing on in places they shouldn't, with a "Whatever, it's not my problem" attitude can be addressed by the above too.
Piston heads - where baiting people matters... I'm not going to respond back to this topic, realistically, it's done.
Back on topic...
Honda have IMO lost the edge for years now, they were releasing heavier and only slightly more powerful cars when others were breaking the moulds. I think it will take some time for them to rebuild their reputation.
As for deadmodes idea of KERS, it'd be nice to see, but I'm doubtful of a production car in this class being affordable with a KERS unit attached.
Edited by HedgehogFromHell on Wednesday 24th July 13:02
beasto said:
Trouble is that Honda replaced the good-looking last-gen Civic Hatch with a grisly pos.
It's hard to believe that even a Type-R will turn the present sow's ear into a desirable silk purse.
<<<<This. And the lack of a Type S variant means my options to replace my current 2009 CTS GT with the current gen are the frankly dull as dishwater standard Civic, or the 'focused' (read loud, harsh, expensive to run)Type R. Looks like I will probably be looking elsewhere then.....It's hard to believe that even a Type-R will turn the present sow's ear into a desirable silk purse.
HedgehogFromHell said:
DeadMode said:
Been a lurker here for sometime, but I actually registered so I could reply to this ...
Would you take that attitude if a family member of your was hit by a car? Or perhaps one of your children (I'm guessing you don't have any to come out with something like this). The mind boggles really.
As for the new Type-R, I was wondering if they may try and link this in with the new F1 engine they are developing for 2015 which will be a small turbo with extra KERS allowed. A lot of the manufacturer's like to have some kind of link between their F1 program and road cars ...
Thanks for that, already happened though, you missed it by a few years. The point I was going for amongst my rant was that you can make crash mats as big and soft as you want, but unless you deal with what the source is... Would you take that attitude if a family member of your was hit by a car? Or perhaps one of your children (I'm guessing you don't have any to come out with something like this). The mind boggles really.
As for the new Type-R, I was wondering if they may try and link this in with the new F1 engine they are developing for 2015 which will be a small turbo with extra KERS allowed. A lot of the manufacturer's like to have some kind of link between their F1 program and road cars ...
It's still going to happen and will still result in bad s
t. Piston heads - where baiting people matters
Back on topic...
Honda have IMO lost the edge for years now, they were releasing heavier and only slightly more powerful cars when others were breaking the moulds. I think it will take some time for them to rebuild their reputation.
As for deadmodes idea of KERS, it'd be nice to see, but I'm doubtful of a production car in this class being affordable with a KERS unit attached.
Edited by HedgehogFromHell on Wednesday 24th July 12:39
Alfa159Ti said:
To clarify the last Vtec I drove was a late plate S2000 so not the most modern of the Vtecs, but pretty recent. It felt limp at low and mid revs and not particularly quick even when dashing to the redline. It was a good example that had been recently service and the owner was pretty fastidious so I have no reason to suspect it was poorly.
I just checked the figures for the latest Civic Type R which shows peak torque of a weedy 142 lb ft @ 5,600 so exactly what I was saying in my original post.
I am not trying to troll - I like revvy engines when they have a bit more torque. My Busso engined Alfa is like a more muscular Vtec with all its torque above 4k revs and its a hoot. That does have a good 3k revs of surging poke though.
I just think that a lot of the love of Vtec engines is misplaced and based around the myth, not the reality.
So the S2000 which can crack 60 under 6 seconds felt slow? But your Busso Alfa felt more muscular? You are missing the point completely. I just checked the figures for the latest Civic Type R which shows peak torque of a weedy 142 lb ft @ 5,600 so exactly what I was saying in my original post.
I am not trying to troll - I like revvy engines when they have a bit more torque. My Busso engined Alfa is like a more muscular Vtec with all its torque above 4k revs and its a hoot. That does have a good 3k revs of surging poke though.
I just think that a lot of the love of Vtec engines is misplaced and based around the myth, not the reality.
Revvy engines dont have torque, torquey engines dont have revs. Its physics. People love the revvy nature of the Vtec engine, its ability to delivery 120bhp per litre, rev to 9,000rpm and yet be COMPLETELY reliable. Nobody else does that. Its unique and wonderful to play with.
Alfa159Ti said:
otolith said:
Good job that recent Type-R engines are absolutely nothing like that then.
To clarify the last Vtec I drove was a late plate S2000 so not the most modern of the Vtecs, but pretty recent. It felt limp at low and mid revs and not particularly quick even when dashing to the redline. It was a good example that had been recently service and the owner was pretty fastidious so I have no reason to suspect it was poorly. I just checked the figures for the latest Civic Type R which shows peak torque of a weedy 142 lb ft @ 5,600 so exactly what I was saying in my original post.
I am not trying to troll - I like revvy engines when they have a bit more torque. My Busso engined Alfa is like a more muscular Vtec with all its torque above 4k revs and its a hoot. That does have a good 3k revs of surging poke though.
I just think that a lot of the love of Vtec engines is misplaced and based around the myth, not the reality.
The absolute level of torque at the flywheel is irrelevant. What matters is power, gearing and the shape of the torque curve (assuming that you don't try to drive it in the wrong gear). 142lbft @ 5600rpm is exactly as good as 284lbft@2550rpm if you have half the rev range and thus have to run gears twice as long.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff