RE: Honda Civic Type R (FN2) | PH Used Review
Discussion
The ride/handling balance on this generation of Civic is poor, as it is on almost everything with a cheap nasty torsion beam thumping around at the back. Nothing has spoken to how undiscerning most car buyers are than the move back to torsion beam rears on so many hatchbacks over the last decade or so.
Also, before someone jumps in with "you can't tell the difference", you really really can tell the difference, particularly if you have the misfortune to be a rear seat passenger.
Also, before someone jumps in with "you can't tell the difference", you really really can tell the difference, particularly if you have the misfortune to be a rear seat passenger.
I had one for 4 yrs and it was an excellent ownership experience. Nothing went wrong with it all despite bouncing it off the limiter almost daily.
Valve clearances need doing every 25k but Honda only charge £99 fixed price for this.
Springs and more aggressive geo setup help to give the handling a bit more sparkle and take a little edge of the ride.
Brakes weren’t up to track work but apart from that I had plenty of fun in it and it cost peanuts to run at a time in my life I couldn’t be plowing £k’s into cars.
Valve clearances need doing every 25k but Honda only charge £99 fixed price for this.
Springs and more aggressive geo setup help to give the handling a bit more sparkle and take a little edge of the ride.
Brakes weren’t up to track work but apart from that I had plenty of fun in it and it cost peanuts to run at a time in my life I couldn’t be plowing £k’s into cars.
Edited by JamesL on Tuesday 3rd September 11:39
stickleback123 said:
Also, before someone jumps in with "you can't tell the difference", you really really can tell the difference, particularly if you have the misfortune to be a rear seat passenger.
The only way anyone would be able to tell if the ride and handling balance was directly attributed to the car having a torsion beam instead of independent rear suspension would be to test 2 of the exact same cars back to back except one would be torsion beam, one would be independent. All other ways are speculation.
But besides, not once during my 3 years of ownership did i catch myself thinking whilst driving it "God, I wish this had independent rear suspension". Most of the time it was, "when can i send it in to Vtec next?"
Personally I thought this was a terrible shape design of civic (The mugen version goes some way in saving it). The door handles always looked to me like they belonged on an American fridge and the lack of BHP increase to the engine was just daft. The previous version (EP3) and the FK2 are the better designs.
stickleback123 said:
The ride/handling balance on this generation of Civic is poor, as it is on almost everything with a cheap nasty torsion beam thumping around at the back. Nothing has spoken to how undiscerning most car buyers are than the move back to torsion beam rears on so many hatchbacks over the last decade or so.
Also, before someone jumps in with "you can't tell the difference", you really really can tell the difference, particularly if you have the misfortune to be a rear seat passenger.
I don't buy that for one second.Also, before someone jumps in with "you can't tell the difference", you really really can tell the difference, particularly if you have the misfortune to be a rear seat passenger.
Torsion beams are perfectly fine. Don't a lot of lower end Golfs have them? Spring/damper rates and tyre sidewall are going to have a much more noticeable impact on ride quality than whether a car has twist beam or independent rear suspension.
I bet most people that claimed they could notice a difference would say that because they knew the car had an "inferior" rear suspension set-up.
Worst car I've ever owned. Underpowered, terrible steering, awful ride quality just useless all round.
Compared to Renaultsport models of the same era its terrible.
Perhaps the later model with the LSD might be passable but if your thinking of getting one of these IMHO don't bother there are plenty of other cars far better out there for the money.
Compared to Renaultsport models of the same era its terrible.
Perhaps the later model with the LSD might be passable but if your thinking of getting one of these IMHO don't bother there are plenty of other cars far better out there for the money.
I had an new 58 plate for two years, chassis wasn't the best (I fitted eibach springs with a slight lowering which helped) but the engine was spot on as always, plenty poweful enough despite all the criticism (any more powerful and you wouldnt have been able to enjoy that redline as much as I did) and the interior felt properly special at the time. Alcantara (or similar) with the mesh inner panels, wicked cool dials and fantastic ergonomics.
At 19 I thought I was the coolest kid on the block! Swapped it for a Mk2 Focus RS and found the turbo boost possibly more addictive that the screaming vtec but I still loved my time with it.
At 19 I thought I was the coolest kid on the block! Swapped it for a Mk2 Focus RS and found the turbo boost possibly more addictive that the screaming vtec but I still loved my time with it.
I remember the Clarkson review of these at the time they came out, and distinctly remember disliking them. Not only did I think it looked way uglier than the EP3 but the suspension setup and same power for extra weight just didn't make sense.
Looking at them now though and I think they've aged incredibly well - dare I say it... better looking than an EP3? It looks like a contemporary car but without all the fussiness. I'd be tempted at the right price, but even though they're cheap relative to the EP3, they seem to start just north of £5k which is a lot to pay for a decade old Honda which (apparently) isn't as good as it's predecessor.
It's weird how cars mature over time.
Looking at them now though and I think they've aged incredibly well - dare I say it... better looking than an EP3? It looks like a contemporary car but without all the fussiness. I'd be tempted at the right price, but even though they're cheap relative to the EP3, they seem to start just north of £5k which is a lot to pay for a decade old Honda which (apparently) isn't as good as it's predecessor.
It's weird how cars mature over time.
Edited by alex.baker89 on Tuesday 3rd September 13:12
Edited by alex.baker89 on Tuesday 3rd September 13:14
Matt Wills said:
Compared to Renaultsport models of the same era its terrible.
Compared to RenaultSport models of the same era, it also works reliably pretty much all the time with fairly cheap parts when it does occasionally go wrong. Also doesn't rattle like a baby's toy after a few thousand miles.
I've had a 2007 or 2 and a half years/around 55k miles.
I love it and hate it in equal measures.
I think the ride is really too firm, not for the sake of 'better' handling either, i think its just too firm for the sake of it.
The engine is fantastic if your'e in the mood for it, but half the time it feels slightly under-powered for the size of the car. The K20 from the Integra DC2 had 240bhp i think, and this would have transformed the car, or certainly something approx 220bhp to bridge the gap. It also sits at approx. 4.5k revs at about 75mph which is a bit tiring on a long motorway journey, especially since at those revs it still needs a shift down the gears for a spurt of acceleration if you really need to get moving.
The car is cavernous inside. Rear passengers have plenty of room behind my driving seat, and im 6ft 2. The fold flat seats are great and its amazing what you can fit in the back of them.
Mine has been supremely reliable with nothing more than basic servicing. Its redlined every day too. The only issues ive had are a leaky boot, and a snapped drive shaft. apart from this its been the usual tyres, discs and pads.
I would recommend one, but im sure there are sharper, comfier, faster hot hatches out there for similar money. The Civic seems to occupy a good middle ground and compromise between everything.
I love it and hate it in equal measures.
I think the ride is really too firm, not for the sake of 'better' handling either, i think its just too firm for the sake of it.
The engine is fantastic if your'e in the mood for it, but half the time it feels slightly under-powered for the size of the car. The K20 from the Integra DC2 had 240bhp i think, and this would have transformed the car, or certainly something approx 220bhp to bridge the gap. It also sits at approx. 4.5k revs at about 75mph which is a bit tiring on a long motorway journey, especially since at those revs it still needs a shift down the gears for a spurt of acceleration if you really need to get moving.
The car is cavernous inside. Rear passengers have plenty of room behind my driving seat, and im 6ft 2. The fold flat seats are great and its amazing what you can fit in the back of them.
Mine has been supremely reliable with nothing more than basic servicing. Its redlined every day too. The only issues ive had are a leaky boot, and a snapped drive shaft. apart from this its been the usual tyres, discs and pads.
I would recommend one, but im sure there are sharper, comfier, faster hot hatches out there for similar money. The Civic seems to occupy a good middle ground and compromise between everything.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff