Civic Type R / Type S / EX or another car?
- Thread starter AliP
- Start date
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
lol
What I mean is that until you really hit the VTEC band, you are in a fairly standard 2.0L hatchback.... it doesn't become "hot" until you hit 5700rpm or whatever it is.
Whereas with a turbocharged car (GTI for example) you are in the powerband from maybe 2k rpm
Depends what suits your driving style I guess.
True, but you don't need a hot hatch in town (IE, slow speed built up area) unless there's some fitties at the bus stop.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unqcoiVhKVY
You get the best of both worlds with the VTEC. You can drive it normally and you can thrash it's pants off and both can be satisfying ways of driving the car. That said, it's clear it's noteveryones cup of tea.
lol
What I mean is that until you really hit the VTEC band, you are in a fairly standard 2.0L hatchback.... it doesn't become "hot" until you hit 5700rpm or whatever it is.
Whereas with a turbocharged car (GTI for example) you are in the powerband from maybe 2k rpm
Depends what suits your driving style I guess.
Ah definitely, I was just being a Friday afternoon pedant.
I do miss the 1.8T for sheer ease of the daily commute, but it's no fun for spirited driving (woeful chassis aside). The CTR is a lot more focused and never fails to put a smile on my face when giving it some, saying that the K20 is a reasonable commute lump provided you're on the ball with the gearbox.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Dec 2003
- Posts
- 1,848
- Location
- Sunderland
The ride in the EX or Type-S is quite harsh as well, but obviously better than the type-r. Unless you go for a post 2007 car because the ride is so harsh in pre-2007 ones that I found it very unpleasant. They do handle like go-karts though.
I would personally get a diesel over the type-r (unless you go for a jap import or the championship white edition)
To be honest, there's not much between the diesel and the type-r in terms of power. With the diesel easily doing 60mpg, from a economy point of view, it's a no brainer really.
Not being pedantic, doing this for my benefit as a demo:
Let's take 10,000 miles as an average year,
An S Type 2.2 diesel which returns 52mpg. 10,000/52 = 192 gallons.
192 gallons = 872 litres.
Based on best Diesel price in Cambridge right now of 105.9: 872 litres = £923
Now for a Type R
31mpg. 10,000/31 = 322 gallons.
322 gallons = 1463 litres.
Based on Petrol price of 104.9: 1463 litres = £1534
So roughly ~£600 difference.
Add on £100 extra in tax,
And about £200 extra in insurance and we're at £900.
In reality I might well do over 10,000 miles in a year. I do a fair number of trips north, to the lake district etc. Plus extra service and parts cost - can see it tipping £1k quite easily.
Is it really worth the £2k premium for white paint and a LSD?
I doubt you will notice any financial impact by running the type R over the space of a year, especially since you can afford to buy at this level in the first place. It's easy to think "oh **** £1k more" but in reality it's not a lot spread over various areas of car ownership.
Saying that, I would definitely drive a type R before considering one, as you may not like the power delivery or the ride.
Saying that, I would definitely drive a type R before considering one, as you may not like the power delivery or the ride.
Last edited:
I never noticed much difference from running my 1.4 206 or my EP3 and I did 10k a year. Yes there was a difference and I never calculated it, but it never felt like I paid a whole lot more on a daily basis. I also did a lot of drives out with the owners forums and took it camping to Scotland fully laden twice.
The real cost difference can be tyres and brakes etc but the lower models usually use the same tyres (albeit 17" as opposed to 18"/19") so the costs are probably much the same per tyres, they can just wear out a bit quicker on the CTR.
Also, you could probably get a decent FN2 example for £11/12k and use the difference for running costs and or insurance. The question is, wil lyou use a Type-R for b road fun or will it live on the motorway. If it lives on the motorway, there are better cars out there. If you want a car that'll do both well, the CTR is more on the money.
The real cost difference can be tyres and brakes etc but the lower models usually use the same tyres (albeit 17" as opposed to 18"/19") so the costs are probably much the same per tyres, they can just wear out a bit quicker on the CTR.
Also, you could probably get a decent FN2 example for £11/12k and use the difference for running costs and or insurance. The question is, wil lyou use a Type-R for b road fun or will it live on the motorway. If it lives on the motorway, there are better cars out there. If you want a car that'll do both well, the CTR is more on the money.
Suck it up and buy the Type R if you want a car that's fun and rewarding to drive. If fun is not high on your list of priorities, then there's no point.
£1k a year is not really a lot of extra money to pay for the grin factor that driving a Type R brings IMO, especially compared the diesel.
Personally I'd be looking at other performance cars though.
Well I'm gonna chip in. I have a CTR its just over a month old so I can't comment on rattles and still that goes over time.
I'm getting around 30mpg with mostly commuting. I would agree that the ride is harsh you can really feel how crap British roads are but I wouldn't agree with the road noise comments. For a hot hatch I find it amazingly refined on a moterway run, it feels sturdy and well made with really quiet, this is coming from a Focus ST170 and Seat Ibiza Cupra.
Also I don't understand the comment about having to trash it all the time, I find it plenty fast under 5.5k RPM but once you hit the magic number the grin just gets bigger.
Rear visability is appauling but you can live with that.
As for the Limited Slip diff on the Championship White it will only really make a massive difference on a track imo, and I couldn't justify the extra cash for it (plus I don't like white cars).
Cheers.
I'm getting around 30mpg with mostly commuting. I would agree that the ride is harsh you can really feel how crap British roads are but I wouldn't agree with the road noise comments. For a hot hatch I find it amazingly refined on a moterway run, it feels sturdy and well made with really quiet, this is coming from a Focus ST170 and Seat Ibiza Cupra.
Also I don't understand the comment about having to trash it all the time, I find it plenty fast under 5.5k RPM but once you hit the magic number the grin just gets bigger.
Rear visability is appauling but you can live with that.
As for the Limited Slip diff on the Championship White it will only really make a massive difference on a track imo, and I couldn't justify the extra cash for it (plus I don't like white cars).
Cheers.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 18,048
- Location
- Shakespeare’s County
You mean everytime you drive it regardless at what speed/effort yeah?
But why would you, you could obviously afford it. It's a pshycological thing. Ignore it and buy the car you really want.
I dont feel limited in where I want to drive or how often because of cost and I don't (or didnt until recently) have the means to spend £14k on a car.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 8,259
Leon Cupra gets my vote
Just to add, dont expect to get 50mpg from the Diesel, my mates Civic, which I used for a trip upto newark, just about returned 43, and that was on a run, even my Accord, which has the the next gen Diesel, is just touching 40. I seem to be completely incapable of attaining anything close to the fantastic MPG figs that other get with modern diesels.
A work colleague has the CTR GT, and thats been miles better than my ST when it comes to MPG, its doing 33 ish, compared to my ST's 26-28.
A work colleague has the CTR GT, and thats been miles better than my ST when it comes to MPG, its doing 33 ish, compared to my ST's 26-28.