New CTR has a rear beam?
Discussion
Crazy, eh?
There was a great play made when the last model CTR was introduced about it had double wishbone rear suspension and it was a product of Honda's F1 experience blah blah blah. Then they quietly get rid of it on the new one, mouthing some platitudes about the new beam system that replaces offers a better cost/comfort comparison (or some such nonsense) for Honda's customers.
evo reviewed the new CTR this month and it didn't fare especially well against the current hot hatch competition. While I don't take what evo print as being gospel by any means, I have to say that if I was in the market for a hot hatch up to £20K, andas much of a Hondaphile as I am, I'd still be chucking my money Ford or VW's way.
There was a great play made when the last model CTR was introduced about it had double wishbone rear suspension and it was a product of Honda's F1 experience blah blah blah. Then they quietly get rid of it on the new one, mouthing some platitudes about the new beam system that replaces offers a better cost/comfort comparison (or some such nonsense) for Honda's customers.
evo reviewed the new CTR this month and it didn't fare especially well against the current hot hatch competition. While I don't take what evo print as being gospel by any means, I have to say that if I was in the market for a hot hatch up to £20K, andas much of a Hondaphile as I am, I'd still be chucking my money Ford or VW's way.
Not sure about the Ford, but I had a look at The VW last weekend and so much on it is an option to get it up to the spec of some of the others takes it along way over 20K. I'll be interested to drive the CTR though when my local dealers finally gets one in.
Edited by Marc W on Friday 23 February 15:25
Just had the TG e-newsletter, which linked to their hot-hatch "ultimate review". What a load of b'll'cks...clearly just aimed at whatever seems to be flavour of the month, no substance at all. Glad I stopped subscribing to the rag.
(It had the CTR top ahead of Golf, Focus ST, two types of hot Megane, Clio 197, etc. etc. Which amuses me no-end given the actual 'driving reviews' I've read of it.)
(It had the CTR top ahead of Golf, Focus ST, two types of hot Megane, Clio 197, etc. etc. Which amuses me no-end given the actual 'driving reviews' I've read of it.)
Lurking Lawyer said:
Crazy, eh?
There was a great play made when the last model CTR was introduced about it had double wishbone rear suspension and it was a product of Honda's F1 experience blah blah blah. Then they quietly get rid of it on the new one, mouthing some platitudes about the new beam system that replaces offers a better cost/comfort comparison (or some such nonsense) for Honda's customers.
There was a great play made when the last model CTR was introduced about it had double wishbone rear suspension and it was a product of Honda's F1 experience blah blah blah. Then they quietly get rid of it on the new one, mouthing some platitudes about the new beam system that replaces offers a better cost/comfort comparison (or some such nonsense) for Honda's customers.
heck, the MK6 Civic (think Rover 400) has double-wishbones all round - but then i recall a 1.6VTi with aircon etc. was over £18k. they are correct in one respect - the new CTR has got a nice big boot with no floorspace intrusions (hence shorter car but more bootspace) - but it's not really going to sway it for type-R fans.
havoc said:
Just had the TG e-newsletter, which linked to their hot-hatch "ultimate review". What a load of b'll'cks...clearly just aimed at whatever seems to be flavour of the month, no substance at all. Glad I stopped subscribing to the rag.
(It had the CTR top ahead of Golf, Focus ST, two types of hot Megane, Clio 197, etc. etc. Which amuses me no-end given the actual 'driving reviews' I've read of it.)
(It had the CTR top ahead of Golf, Focus ST, two types of hot Megane, Clio 197, etc. etc. Which amuses me no-end given the actual 'driving reviews' I've read of it.)
The actual test in the printed mag was more of a driving review. The stuff in the newsletter was just a brief rundown.
fido said:
Lurking Lawyer said:
Crazy, eh?
There was a great play made when the last model CTR was introduced about it had double wishbone rear suspension and it was a product of Honda's F1 experience blah blah blah. Then they quietly get rid of it on the new one, mouthing some platitudes about the new beam system that replaces offers a better cost/comfort comparison (or some such nonsense) for Honda's customers.
There was a great play made when the last model CTR was introduced about it had double wishbone rear suspension and it was a product of Honda's F1 experience blah blah blah. Then they quietly get rid of it on the new one, mouthing some platitudes about the new beam system that replaces offers a better cost/comfort comparison (or some such nonsense) for Honda's customers.
heck, the MK6 Civic (think Rover 400) has double-wishbones all round - but then i recall a 1.6VTi with aircon etc. was over £18k. they are correct in one respect - the new CTR has got a nice big boot with no floorspace intrusions (hence shorter car but more bootspace) - but it's not really going to sway it for type-R fans.
The ED Civic (Like my old '88 Series II CR-X) had the independant rear suspension set-up that served a generation of Civics, Integras, Rovers and the MG ZS as well as the previous CTR (with some mods).
On the Honda varients it was set-up to give passive rear wheel steer nearly 10 years before Peugoet 306 GTi6 or Ford's "Control Blade" suspended Fosuc chassis attmepted it, and were they never lauded for it like the other "Jonny come lately" allsorans... probably due to less dogmatic marketing dept's.
It's not since the '82 and Triumph Acclaim/Civic Balade/Rover 213 that Honda used beam axel arrangement on a decent sized car... except of course on the ironically named FR-V "Joymobile".
The writing was in the wall when that came out. It showed Honda's new cynical side and it has now manifested itself in their best seller and explains why the i-VTEC conept had gone off the boil too, and I fear it will hurt them, especially if they don't release a Type 'RR' to allow the Civ' keep up with the crowd.
Reading EVO I felt severely let down.
Edited by danger mouse on Friday 23 February 21:04
I finally had a drive of one yesterday and I was very impressed. It's definately at the top of my list now, although I don't want to decide for certain until I've driven some of my other options. It certainly doesn't feel underpowered and the handling felt excellent with very direct steering. I didn't drive the old car but I'd be surprised if this didn't feel like an improvement, rear beam or not.
IMHO the true quality of a car's handling isn't necessarily apparent on a test-drive, but in the 'depth' of ability as you get to know a car and find yourself overstepping it's limits, by accident or design. This I think is why some magazines rave about it, where others have thought more about it's depth.
I was still pushing the 'teg harder and harder after 3 years of ownership, finding it could do more than I expected. With the Focus, I've found the limits of its' ability quicker, although it still entertains on the right road, and is beautifully adjustable on the limit, although more at the front-end than the 'teg (in which you could trim either end with practice).
I would suggest, respectfully, that 'excellent turn-in' and good straight-line performance don't make a first-rate hot-hatch...the Audi TT I drove for a week-and-a-half had both of those, but I was still bored of it within 48 hours.
But I concede I have yet to drive it.
I was still pushing the 'teg harder and harder after 3 years of ownership, finding it could do more than I expected. With the Focus, I've found the limits of its' ability quicker, although it still entertains on the right road, and is beautifully adjustable on the limit, although more at the front-end than the 'teg (in which you could trim either end with practice).
I would suggest, respectfully, that 'excellent turn-in' and good straight-line performance don't make a first-rate hot-hatch...the Audi TT I drove for a week-and-a-half had both of those, but I was still bored of it within 48 hours.
But I concede I have yet to drive it.
fido said:
Lurking Lawyer said:
Crazy, eh?
There was a great play made when the last model CTR was introduced about it had double wishbone rear suspension and it was a product of Honda's F1 experience blah blah blah. Then they quietly get rid of it on the new one, mouthing some platitudes about the new beam system that replaces offers a better cost/comfort comparison (or some such nonsense) for Honda's customers.
There was a great play made when the last model CTR was introduced about it had double wishbone rear suspension and it was a product of Honda's F1 experience blah blah blah. Then they quietly get rid of it on the new one, mouthing some platitudes about the new beam system that replaces offers a better cost/comfort comparison (or some such nonsense) for Honda's customers.
heck, the MK6 Civic (think Rover 400) has double-wishbones all round - but then i recall a 1.6VTi with aircon etc. was over £18k. they are correct in one respect - the new CTR has got a nice big boot with no floorspace intrusions (hence shorter car but more bootspace) - but it's not really going to sway it for type-R fans.
More boot space? No spare wheel part of the reason.
Catz said:
Marc W said:
The boot is huge (for that size of car) even with a spare wheel in place though.
Yeah and the rear seats flip up as well as back ... don't really see the use in that unless it was a 5 door tbh. Not easy to access for any purpose.
Yes the boot is large for the size of car - 415 litre with a space saver spare and 485 without a spare. My previous generation 5-door Civic has 370 of boot space with a spacesaver (or 360 with a full size (205/55-16) spare. all figures with rear seats 'up'.
Gassing Station | Honda | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff