RE: New Civic Type R details

[NGK210]

havoc said:

NGK210 said:

C'mon folks, turbo engines aren't that bad, we already have an AMG 2.0-litre four that delivers 360bhp and 332lb-ft, with 161g/km and an NEDC combined of 40mpg - the future actually looks bright, surely?

Sound.
Throttle response.
Linear power delivery.
An appropriate level of torque that doesn't require the TC to keep cutting in to avoid wheelspin even in the dry.
Throttle response again, because quite frankly it's rather important.

A turbo'd engine lacks in all of the above compared to a similarly-powerful, properly engineered n/asp engine. It is easier and more pleasant to pedal a good n/asp engine than it is a turbo'd engine. Not any quicker, and probably less economical, but for those of us who enjoy driving (as opposed to enjoy going fast), a turbo'd engine is inferior. Probably always will be.


Not saying there aren't good turbos out there, but for each one I'll name a better n/asp engine...
(e.g. Nissan GTR - Lexus LFA; 911 Turbo - 458 Italia; BMW M5 - Merc x63AMG; 335i - 370Z; Huayra - Zonda)

All true, but you could also argue that a petrol turbo's whooshing 'n' sucking plus an exhaust that emits a meaty 'thrum' sounds good; keeping a turbo on-boost is on a par with keeping a VTEC-type N/A on-cam; throttle response is actually pretty sharp once on-boost - all of which can satisfy "those of us who enjoy driving (as opposed to enjoy going fast)".

And as for an N/A's linear power delivery, I haven't had the pleasure of driving a 458, but IME a 360 M's power is delivered in several distinct steps as various cams/modes kick-in/disengage, one of which replicates a smidgeon of mid-corner lift-off oversteer while actually pressing the throttle.

I guess that for B-road and on-track hoonery an N/A engine will always have its merits, but IMVHO a turbo is preferable as an every day all-rounder. And I definitely prefer motorway cruising at 80 at c. 3000rpm, compared to a VTEC's tinnitus-inducing 4500rpm.

Edited by NGK210 on Wednesday 24th July 15:41

[Mr Whippy]

otolith said:

Alfa159Ti said:

I was just drawing a comparison between the two as in my experience the Busso is comparable to a Vtec engine in some ways. Little torque low down, but a surge of power higher up the range, albeit for a longer spread of the revs.

The Alfa unit is actually more peaky.

data from rri.se, at the hubs

http://rototest-research.eu/popup/performancegraph...
http://rototest-research.eu/popup/performancegraph...

Good work.

But the rpm in the second one could be normalised between 0 > peak power rpm... and then the two curves would be give or take very similar.

Also add in the weight factor (so normalised power spread vs power to weight graph) and you'd get a really good idea of what is faster or has more performance potential at different speeds.

All said though a lot of these high torque cars are torque limited in low gears too, so something else to be aware of when comparing I guess

Dave

[britsportscars]

havoc said:

NGK210 said:

C'mon folks, turbo engines aren't that bad, we already have an AMG 2.0-litre four that delivers 360bhp and 332lb-ft, with 161g/km and an NEDC combined of 40mpg - the future actually looks bright, surely?

Sound.
Throttle response.
Linear power delivery.
An appropriate level of torque that doesn't require the TC to keep cutting in to avoid wheelspin even in the dry.
Throttle response again, because quite frankly it's rather important.

A turbo'd engine lacks in all of the above compared to a similarly-powerful, properly engineered n/asp engine. It is easier and more pleasant to pedal a good n/asp engine than it is a turbo'd engine. Not any quicker, and probably less economical, but for those of us who enjoy driving (as opposed to enjoy going fast), a turbo'd engine is inferior. Probably always will be.


Not saying there aren't good turbos out there, but for each one I'll name a better n/asp engine...
(e.g. Nissan GTR - Lexus LFA; 911 Turbo - 458 Italia; BMW M5 - Merc x63AMG; 335i - 370Z; Huayra - Zonda)

Agreed. I test drove various fast hatches before trying my old 05 CTR. The salesman kept saying "keep your foot down" and the bwwwwwaaaaarp noise cuts in when the Vtec goes Yo and I was sold, right there.

I've now got an S2000 for the same reason (revvy distinctive engine) and while the mid range isn't as keen as the K20A2 in the old civic, it's an utterly fabulous engine when you wring it out.

I'm sure a determined powerful diesel would keep up at times (as the sodding A3 driver seemed to want to prove last night), but it's more about the power delivery and the smile on my face rather than just having to hang on to the back of every car and "prove" my car is faster...

Also, these engines are going the way of the dinosaurs, so at least I'll be able to tell the grandkids I had a car with a properly special engine in it, rather than a run of the mill turbo or diesel POS.

[Darren61]

This looks very interesting. I can't wait for the official details and pricing.

I can assume they'll be an onslaught of repetitive comments such as "It's not a Type R unless its N/A" etc etc

The RS Clio has gone auto, 5 door, turbo'd....expect the Civic to be much of the same...

It also says a lot when a Jap firm are chasing a French record!

[Antj]

what i love about all this balldocks with a Type r taking the nurburgring FWD record is the fact that it assumes that RenaultSport, Ford, VW, Mini, Vauxhall, etc are all going to stand still until 2015.

I still doubt the Megane RS Trophie's time will be beat by Honda and i would expect a more track focused Megane coming back and cracking the 8 minutes. Thats the big one to go for.

Stll shocked Honda announced such a stupid challenge for themselves which will cause them massive stick if they do not achieve it

[dukebox9reg]

Darren61 said:

This looks very interesting. I can't wait for the official details and pricing.

I can assume they'll be an onslaught of repetitive comments such as "It's not a Type R unless its N/A" etc etc

The RS Clio has gone auto, 5 door, turbo'd....expect the Civic to be much of the same...

It also says a lot when a Jap firm are chasing a French record!

you not read the previous 4 pages?

[havoc]

NGK210 said:

All true, but you could also argue that a petrol turbo's whooshing 'n' sucking plus an exhaust that emits a meaty 'thrum' sounds good; keeping a turbo on-boost is on a par with keeping a VTEC-type N/A on-cam; throttle response is actually pretty sharp once on-boost - all of which can satisfy "those of us who enjoy driving (as opposed to enjoy going fast)".

And as for an N/A's linear power delivery, I haven't had the pleasure of driving a 458, but IME a 360 M's power is delivered in several distinct steps as various cams/modes kick-in/disengage, one of which replicates a smidgeon of mid-corner lift-off oversteer while actually pressing the throttle.

I guess that for B-road and on-track hoonery an N/A engine will always have its merits, but IMVHO a turbo is preferable as an every day all-rounder. And I definitely prefer motorway cruising at 80 at c. 3000rpm, compared to a VTEC's tinnitus-inducing 4500rpm.

Throttle response / power delivery - guess we've got different perspectives - the truly good n/a engines (Honda VTEC, even modern iVTEC, BMW E46 M3, 911 Mezger, etc.) have no delay to the pedal/response interface, while the modern turbo'd engine definitely has (as the electronics decide what to do and whether to give you the power you've asked for). Even on-boost, albeit to a lesser degree. You can feel it...that fractional delay in reaction, that split-second flare of revs when you dip the clutch without allowing for the turbo's delay. We are talking fractions, so depends on your priorities...

As for living with a car - yes, for commuting there is a benefit in higher gearing / lower peak rpm, for sure. But I've commuted in fast Hondas for almost all of the last 13 years (8 of them in a DC2 ITR!), and I've not got tinitus!
(In all honesty, after a bad day at work, just getting back into the 'teg (and the sheer 'rightness' of all of its controls, ride quality, responsiveness, driving position, etc...) was often enough to put a smile back on my face, often without even hitting VTEC. Which I know is getting away from n/asp vs turbo to a degree, but more a comment about engineering-out the 'involvement' in the driving process. The wife's Golf GTi (MkV, the highly regarded 'benchmark' hot hatch) never had the same effect - it's a good drive, but it feels like white goods in comparison...)



Chris Harris' comment about the new GT3 'box nailing the perfect 2nd-to-1st downshift with no effort/skill required from him sums it up well - yes, the new 'box makes it easier to keep the car balanced in-extremis, but do we want cars which do it all for us, which make Rohrl-like levels of point-to-point pace accessible to those of us with lesser skills???

[GS88]

For me, the big question: will it be more involving and fun than the FD2?

[Hellbound]

The sad thing is there will probably be another 20 or 30 articles just like this before the car is unveiled next year.

[davidcharles]

JonnyCFD2R said:

It is a bit disappointing to see the end of the Vtec engine. Ive lived with them for many years now and will aboslutely miss them when they are no more.

However, as much as a "non-article" this is; i do trust Honda when it comes to all things Type R. The badge is respected and has a long heritage which i am sure they will not want to tarnish (Cough cough FN2 Type R).

I won't be getting rid of my FD2 Type R for a long time yet, so long live the joys of vtec! I'll watch on with interest as new (proper)details emerge.......

nothing wrong with an FN2, could have easily "coughed" at ep3's and Accord type r's for not being "proper type r's"...the main problem will be sales, a "proper" type r will keep hardcore fans happy but they won't sell enough of them as joe public will find them to compromised.

[diddly69]

Hellbound said:

The sad thing is there will probably be another 20 or 30 articles just like this before the car is unveiled next year.

[Mr Whippy]

havoc said:

But do we want cars which do it all for us, which make Rohrl-like levels of point-to-point pace accessible to those of us with lesser skills???

Nope... that is the whole point of buying an exciting sporty car, to learn and be humbled by.

Any car can go fast and go too fast for the conditions. I've been left for dead in my Z4 by a 1.6 Zafira driven by a nutter down a back road... what should matter in a sports car is that it makes you as a driver enjoy the drive even if it's slower than an easier to drive 'slower' car!

Dave

[richtea78]

Hellbound said:

The sad thing is there will probably be another 20 or 30 articles just like this before the car is unveiled next year.

It's a particularly terrible article that doesn't give any details

Should read "New Civic Type R Speculation"

What a rip off article

[Mastodon2]

NGK210 said:

All true, but you could also argue that a petrol turbo's whooshing 'n' sucking plus an exhaust that emits a meaty 'thrum' sounds good; keeping a turbo on-boost is on a par with keeping a VTEC-type N/A on-cam; throttle response is actually pretty sharp once on-boost - all of which can satisfy "those of us who enjoy driving (as opposed to enjoy going fast)".

And as for an N/A's linear power delivery, I haven't had the pleasure of driving a 458, but IME a 360 M's power is delivered in several distinct steps as various cams/modes kick-in/disengage, one of which replicates a smidgeon of mid-corner lift-off oversteer while actually pressing the throttle.

I guess that for B-road and on-track hoonery an N/A engine will always have its merits, but IMVHO a turbo is preferable as an every day all-rounder. And I definitely prefer motorway cruising at 80 at c. 3000rpm, compared to a VTEC's tinnitus-inducing 4500rpm.

Edited by NGK210 on Wednesday 24th July 15:41

Luckily for this comparison, I too have had a Leon Cupra R, in fact I sold mine to buy an EP3. Keeping a turbo on boost does not sound anywhere near as good as a screaming NA engine, and certainly not a VAG turbo engine.

Throttle response in a turbo car, particularly a single turbo engine, will never match a good NA engine, be it a Ferrari V8 or a Honda VTEC. Even over boost threshold, the mechanics of pressurising the intake and building boost does not happen instantly. There is always an elasticity in the throttle. Some very high end engines have done their best to minimise this, but it is a fact of life due to how the turbo works that it cannot be eliminated. By opening the throttle on a NA car, the power is instantly delivered as you ask for it. In a turbo car, you open the throttle, the computers control the build of boost and then power is delivered. If turbo throttle response was as good as NA, rally cars wouldn't need to run antilag setups to keep the turbo spinning at full boost speeds.

I wouldn't want a Type R as a motorway slogger, but then Honda never designed it as such. If I had to do any significant motorway mileage, I wouldn't want any sort of hot hatch. Also, as standard, you will not suffer hearing damage in any Type R at motorway speeds.

It all comes down to driving fun at the end of the day. My Cupra R 225 was good fun, it was even better with 280bhp, but it was still nowhere near as satisfying as my EP3 is. Much faster in a straight line, but fast and fun are not mutually exclusive. The Cupra R was built to be fast, but not to be involving.

[sinbad666]

Alfa159Ti said:

Vtec technology is long in the tooth - about time they stopped clinging to the past and moved on.

I have a lot of respect for the old school 'master engine craftsmen' ethos but in practice an engine with no torque except in the final redline dash is not practical on anything other than an empty road.

The rest of the crowd moved on years ago and have been making some cracking blown hot hatches.

Lets hope Honda can get back on track with this and that the luddites actually drive it before derriding it.

Blinkers?
Max torque on a Vtec engine is reached well before the redline. Long in the tooth? Nearly all manufacturers use some sort of variable valve timing. There's no reason they cannot evolve there's as other manufacturers have.

There's no reason why the new engine cannot be Vtec and turbo. As with any tuned Vtec engine the switch to Vtec is lessened as the engine output is flattened to give a smoother delivery.

Honda designed what was said to be one of the best power units in 2008 but it never came to light when they pulled out of F1. Brawn went on to dominate the season with the Mercedes power unit. They've also done pretty good in the GT series in Japan with there prototype NSX so they know how to win.

I think it will be either a 1.6 or 2.0 Vtec turbo with some sort of energy recovery systems, flywheel and braking recovery to boost power. Both of the recovery systems and turbo offer free power and will help to keep emissions extremely low when compared to the power output. Honda Need to move to these if they want to keep up with and beat the competition. Honda are not new to turbo's so I don't know why there's shock at them putting one in the civic.

[sinbad666]

otolith said:

Yet your "muscular" Alfa is slower than the Civic.

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.

Is that common sense I smell lol

[Technomatt]

With Renaultsport now going all soft and losing its focus, it will be good to have something like the Civic filling the Meganes shoes. The next 2015 new RS Megane is bound to be another Clio type 5 door, heavy, auto cop out.

[redsport]

For Honda to want to be the fastest fwd on the ring, it will need to be credible. That means giving the car to sport auto and HVS will drive as he has the csl and others to provide the consistent benchmark on the same section they always use.
The real question is which manufacturer will break 8 mins? And will that car be more desirable with some carbon and missing trim in limited run?

I suspect anyone who has driven the last renaultsport Clio thinks.. With the megane turbo in this car stripped out...

I wonder if a magazine will build a fwd car and crack it first? Thus stealing the glory..

Honda must maintain face here; if they fail they risk the credibility of the type R brand, waiting until late 2014 may risk the headline, but the other consideration is releasing a car for test when weather at the ring is optimal.

A sign of the times when a small toll road Determines the value of a brand, but you can see by the response on here the interest in this is high,

Let the games commence

[AnonSpoilSport]

seefarr said:

Krikkit said:

seefarr said:

Pierscoe1 said:

if it were really about the environment.... http://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green...

/end-morning-rant.

You posted a link to a video about African deserts in response to a story about the Civic Type R?




Edit: sorry, I just got to the bit about where he shot 40000 elephants. The Honda link all makes sense now! Wait, no it doesn't.

Not really fair to quote half a post and have a go - he makes a valid point.

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!

You mean he posted a link to an article about a load of bks?

[Imafreeman]

johnthesifu said:

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?

A Grande Punto Abarth SS