RE: Honda Integra DC2 Type R: Spotted
Discussion
Derek Chevalier said:
"Remember how special a 1.8-litre car producing 190hp at 7,900rpm was back in 1998, especially in comparison to every other Honda (NSX aside)? "
You could argue the engine was more special than the NSX lump.
Agreed. The NSX wasn't over 100hp/litre, wasn't hand built featuring hand-polished and ported intake ports, high compression pistons, undercut valves and revised intake and exhaust system. It also did not rev as high. You could argue the engine was more special than the NSX lump.
stew-STR160 said:
I really do miss the one I had. It was FAR from standard, but I think everything I upgraded just made it more the car it could have been. Remove some of the civlility, make it more raw, more engaging.
That looks like fun and the way I would go. The standard car was a bit too easy and lacking excitement for me. Once you have pushed it over the limit a few times, it lacked the depth to provide the connection and driving challenge IME.But we all want different things and have different expectations.
As another poster said, my £10-12k would go on a RS Megane. Or a BMW e.g. an older 3 or 130 with (quite a few) trick bits. Far more engaging and of course oversteerable!
chrismc1977 said:
SidewaysSi said:
The standard car was a bit too easy and lacking excitement for me. Once you have pushed it over the limit a few times, it lacked the depth to provide the connection and driving challenge IME.
And yet you still drove one for 80k miles apparently 
As I said it is a good car but as a £10k + weekend car, it doesn't stack up for me.
SidewaysSi said:
I did but it only cost me £4k. Depreciation was minimal and I had/have a Caterham and Elise to keep me sane. Also it was a daily drive year round and at that price point it was very good indeed.
As I said it is a good car but as a £10k + weekend car, it doesn't stack up for me.
So bought for £4K @ 40k miles. Had it been crashed? Even after the prices slumped that is ridiculously cheap. The el cheapo cars are/were generally dogsAs I said it is a good car but as a £10k + weekend car, it doesn't stack up for me.
Driven as a daily for 80k miles. Did you ever refresh it I ask again?
Edited by chrismc1977 on Wednesday 14th November 11:51
havoc said:
greenarrow said:
The other thing that has always puzzled me. The Teg R's legend seems to have grown many years after it was in production. I've all the old car magazines from when it was in production and whilst it was rated, it wasn't winning any "best drivers car" type competitions. I think its fair to say that it was overshadowed at the time by the similarly priced UK Mk1 Subaru Impreza Turbo, which was just a little bit faster everywhere and wowed testers more due to its bang per buck. That was certainly the case in all the group comparison tests.
Not sure where you're getting that from, except 0-60 where the 4wd is a benefit. The original (and comparable) Impreza Turbo 2000 was 208/215bhp and 100-150kg heavier, so a broadly similar power/weight (and better torque/weight), but greater transmission losses due to 4wd.(0-60 the Subaru is +/- 0.8s ahead, depending on source, 0-100 they're <0.5s adrift (most sources), suggesting that 60-100 favours the Integra slightly, which is probably a better metric of real-world straight-line acceleration as it removes any launch advantage)
...and that's before considering cross-country pace, where the Subaru would be lagging behind in the dry and probably not be that much quicker in the wet (again, only due to traction).
As you’d expect because of the similar power to weight ratios
Performance Car got a similar time
I think it would also depend on the track as to whether an ITR would beat the Impreza - perhaps somewhere like Cadwell the Honda might give the Impreza a hard time but at the fast, bumpy Combe in the dry the Impreza was quicker in CAR’s big handling test by 2 seconds, obviously on 205s rather than 195s
It certainly matched the similar power BMW 328 at Silverstone though - extra grip of the BMW negated by its extra 300kg
Certainly great cars though and ultimately the performance differences would be irrelevant on the road
I’d like a well restored one in my lottery garage
Test driver said:
So over rated these cars, £10K can buy you much, much more nowadays. The nsx on the other hand is a proper Honda classic.
This 10k figure has been pulled out of thin air! the car in question is less than 6k. Also the earlier post regarding it lacking depth to provide the connection and driving challenge and then the poster going on to say he would buy a 130 or older 3. Found that somewhat ironic.
Edited by cat220 on Wednesday 14th November 17:26
Test driver said:
So over rated these cars, £10K can buy you much, much more nowadays. The nsx on the other hand is a proper Honda classic.
Thing is, cars like these go to enthusiasts nowThey’ve been sold new once and people who buy a 20 year old car are buying it because they probably really want one.
It won’t matter they can buy a newer Megane for less money - if you really want an ITR DC2 or a S1 RS Turbo or old Alfa Junior you probably don’t care that much they can get a faster hot hatch or old Merc barge for half the money
You can always get a faster car for less money or a super bike if you just want to go fast
s m said:
havoc said:
greenarrow said:
The other thing that has always puzzled me. The Teg R's legend seems to have grown many years after it was in production. I've all the old car magazines from when it was in production and whilst it was rated, it wasn't winning any "best drivers car" type competitions. I think its fair to say that it was overshadowed at the time by the similarly priced UK Mk1 Subaru Impreza Turbo, which was just a little bit faster everywhere and wowed testers more due to its bang per buck. That was certainly the case in all the group comparison tests.
Not sure where you're getting that from, except 0-60 where the 4wd is a benefit. The original (and comparable) Impreza Turbo 2000 was 208/215bhp and 100-150kg heavier, so a broadly similar power/weight (and better torque/weight), but greater transmission losses due to 4wd.(0-60 the Subaru is +/- 0.8s ahead, depending on source, 0-100 they're <0.5s adrift (most sources), suggesting that 60-100 favours the Integra slightly, which is probably a better metric of real-world straight-line acceleration as it removes any launch advantage)
...and that's before considering cross-country pace, where the Subaru would be lagging behind in the dry and probably not be that much quicker in the wet (again, only due to traction).
As you’d expect because of the similar power to weight ratios
Performance Car got a similar time
I think it would also depend on the track as to whether an ITR would beat the Impreza - perhaps somewhere like Cadwell the Honda might give the Impreza a hard time but at the fast, bumpy Combe in the dry the Impreza was quicker in CAR’s big handling test by 2 seconds, obviously on 205s rather than 195s
It certainly matched the similar power BMW 328 at Silverstone though - extra grip of the BMW negated by its extra 300kg
Certainly great cars though and ultimately the performance differences would be irrelevant on the road
I’d like a well restored one in my lottery garage
You've got to say that 2 seconds is quite a gap at Castle Combe, even allowing it for being a fast track, rather than a twisty one. At Thruxton, Top Gear got their Scooby around 2 secs faster than a DC2 as well. Note also how close the 106GTI got to it at Castle Combe! Less than 1 second in it!!
As for the ITR being as fast as a Subaru once you remove the 4wd factor...hmm, the 5 door Autocar test car was one of the slower ones. Don't forget they're about 70KG heavier than the 4 doors too.
The Top Gear and EVO Mag 4 door Imprezas hit 100MPH in the mid 14 sec bracket, so under 9.5 seconds from 60-100, whereas the Teg was just over 10 seconds. Also, a number of brand new UK Imprezas were dyno tested at around 230BHP at the time.
The lap times In UK magazines at these fast circuits show the Impreza must have been the quicker car in a straight-line.
To answer another point made by Havoc. The Impreza slower cross country than the Integra? Why do you think that? The Imprezas legendary ability to smooth out bumps (important on British roads!) and its turbo torque out of the bends would certainly not leave it lagging behind an Integra in the dry.
Like I've said before, the DC2 was a brilliant car, but some of its fans do exaggeration its prowess. I for one was shocked it couldn't lap Silverstone faster than an SE Spec BMW 328i with a far poorer power to weight ratio.
Edited by greenarrow on Wednesday 14th November 17:29
As an owner- they aren’t wonderfully fast or powerful by today’s standards gents. It’s a N/A 1800 at the end of the day. BUT, it’s a seriously good N/A engine for its capacity.
Real world you are only talking 180-185hp tops & probably something under 130lbs/ft from a standard one. It never really feels flat if it’s set up properly though as it’s only pulling 1100kgs along. The fun is with its smoothness & willingness to rev & be constantly wrung out compimented by the sharp mechanical gearchange. The competition just didn’t offer such an immersive experience.
To even be comparable with the likes of Imprezas & Fiat Turbos is testament to the way they perform with such a relatively modest output. The chassis is the real gem given the laptimes with no forced induction or torque to speak of.
Driving a GOOD one on the road (or track), even today when they are ~20years old, I tend to find it’s still wonderfully capable and still punches well above its weight.
It’s a niche car now. Not for everyone clearly. Better/sharper/more focussed cars exist. However if you get a good one, put some decent rubber on it & can pedal it properly, then it’s still a very special and rewarding experience.
Real world you are only talking 180-185hp tops & probably something under 130lbs/ft from a standard one. It never really feels flat if it’s set up properly though as it’s only pulling 1100kgs along. The fun is with its smoothness & willingness to rev & be constantly wrung out compimented by the sharp mechanical gearchange. The competition just didn’t offer such an immersive experience.
To even be comparable with the likes of Imprezas & Fiat Turbos is testament to the way they perform with such a relatively modest output. The chassis is the real gem given the laptimes with no forced induction or torque to speak of.
Driving a GOOD one on the road (or track), even today when they are ~20years old, I tend to find it’s still wonderfully capable and still punches well above its weight.
It’s a niche car now. Not for everyone clearly. Better/sharper/more focussed cars exist. However if you get a good one, put some decent rubber on it & can pedal it properly, then it’s still a very special and rewarding experience.
greenarrow said:
Thanks for posting these. I've lost the Performance Car issue, but still have the others,
You've got to say that 2 seconds is quite a gap at Castle Combe, even allowing it for being a fast track, rather than a twisty one. At Thruxton, Top Gear got their Scooby around 2 secs faster than a DC2 as well.
Yes, was reading the Top Gear test after the recent 306 Rallye Spotted postYou've got to say that 2 seconds is quite a gap at Castle Combe, even allowing it for being a fast track, rather than a twisty one. At Thruxton, Top Gear got their Scooby around 2 secs faster than a DC2 as well.
Be nice to have a tidy example of each of those in my million pound warehouse - you'd have about 90% of your budget left for other stuff too!
s m said:
Was there really much between them - they were both very similar increments from 60-100. - the Subaru was overall a bit quicker in the Autocar tests from a standstill because of the added traction but it held the same advantage to 100
As you’d expect because of the similar power to weight ratios
As you’d expect because of the similar power to weight ratios
Thanks for the stats - the websites I found showed closer 0-100 times and similar 0-60 times, but broadly speaking whichever stats you look at there's not a lot between them once launched.
Lap times - interesting, and surprises me...the 'teg was lauded for breaking 2.0 class lap records around the place, didn't expect the Subaru to be that sort of pace.
Cross-country - I've owned 2 'tegs and virtually never found a road that would upset the suspension, even at :ahem: speeds...the only couple of times were roads so gnarly that they'd make a better rally stage than public road. But the lap times probably add more context to that also, so I'll concede that'd be more down to driver than car.
havoc said:
s m said:
Was there really much between them - they were both very similar increments from 60-100. - the Subaru was overall a bit quicker in the Autocar tests from a standstill because of the added traction but it held the same advantage to 100
As you’d expect because of the similar power to weight ratios
As you’d expect because of the similar power to weight ratios
Thanks for the stats - the websites I found showed closer 0-100 times and similar 0-60 times, but broadly speaking whichever stats you look at there's not a lot between them once launched.
Lap times - interesting, and surprises me...the 'teg was lauded for breaking 2.0 class lap records around the place, didn't expect the Subaru to be that sort of pace.
Looking at almost all the reviews, the thing that seems to go against the DC2 and that is mentioned the most, is the gear ratios not being suited to whichever track
Amirhussain said:
stew-STR160 said:
I really do miss the one I had. It was FAR from standard, but I think everything I upgraded just made it more the car it could have been. Remove some of the civlility, make it more raw, more engaging.
Not normally a fan of black cars but that looks 
I love these, I'm absolutely dumbfounded by those who are ragging on the performance figures, they're old cars (sorta) but they're still pretty brisk, but even still, it's not necessarily about the outright performance with these things, it's the whole driving experience, it was brilliant and I imagine that a well kept one still would be.
Fantastic car, great handling and grip, a fantastic engine, brilliant gearbox, this is what being a petrol head is all about IMO, a raw down to earth drivers car.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff