Civic Type S (2003 plate) Questions

msmalls74

msmalls74

msmalls74

Soldato
Joined
4 Aug 2006
Posts
7,917
Location
Stevenage , Wisbech
Anyone had (or has) a 2003 type 7 Civic Type S? Im looking to purchase one but would like to know a few things about it. Firstly is it a detuned version of the type R engine so is Chain driven? Or is it a belt driven like many of the type 7 Civics?
Fuel economy looks pretty good for the car, but is it realistic to think i would get that? My V5 mixed is sposed to be 30MPG but I seem to average 25-27 on my normal 8 Mile trips to work (50/50 M way/Town driving) how well would the civic do? Or any other car i should lookat for good economy, reliabilty, Spec and space, Focus are good cars but im trying to avoid if can as im looking for something different, i know civics are common but just want different .
Thanks for any help :)
 
Jokester said:
Type S is basically just a 3 door version of the 5 door.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the Type S is a 5 door (only?) car sold only in the UK, same car may be elsewhere but rebadged as something else. It has different suspension to a normal series 7 Civic so i have been told and a few other differences, but nothing tells me if its definte Cam or Chain.

St170 is a no no, higher tax band, higher insurance group less MPG, friend has had one and has nothing but hassle with hers.
 
Last edited:
Some fail in here.

Type-S is five door only, it has a K20A3 160BHP Chain driven engine, same engine that came in the USDM Civic Si so mods etc are available

Decent cars that are overlooked, I think lowered a little on some nice wheels and some breathing mods and it would be a much nicer car than the ST170 which is let down IMO
 
In what way is the ST170 a let down, apart from the fact it needed more power, hardly something the Type-S builds on???
 
Janesy B said:
In what way is the ST170 a let down, apart from the fact it needed more power, hardly something the Type-S builds on???
Click to expand...

In my personal opinion (something some people really struggle with on here)

A friend of mine had one, and at the same time I had a DOHC VTEC 1.6 VTI Civic, the ST was slower and unreliable in comparison to the Civic in fact my friend hated it, it was extremely un-impressive for a 2.0 engine the power delivery was extremely boring
 
Last edited:
Relentless81 said:
I my personal opinion (something some people really struggle with on here)

A friend of mine had one, and at the same time I had a DOHC VTEC 1.6 VTI Civic, the ST was slower and unreliable in comparison to the Civic in fact my hated it, it was extremely un-impressive for a 2.0 engine the power delivery was extremely boring
Click to expand...

Both engines need thrashing to get the best out of them, I don't see how one's power delivery was different to the other considering they are both high revving NASP engines.

Can't argue about the reliability, they are fundamentally sound but suffer from niggles.
 
Janesy B said:
Both engines need thrashing to get the best out of them, I don't see how one's power delivery was different to the other considering they are both high revving NASP engines.

Can't argue about the reliability, they are fundamentally sound but suffer from niggles.
Click to expand...

Ah ok, you must have owned a fair few VTEC Civics and either owned or been in the Focus a fair few times then too to form such an opinion

As for reliability the Focus suffered from flywheel failure, coolant leaks and alignment issues plus others which I forget, this was 3 years ago, what were doing three years ago? The Civics, in fact every single Honda I have owned, has suffered from no problems of any kind

Awaits predictable "It must have been a dog I can see it through the internets"
 
You must have missed the part where I mentioned reliability niggles are present so I will not disagree with you.

As for the power delivery, I have not been in an Honda with an overly aggressive VTEC switchover but both the Honda and ST170 will be fairly limp wristed until 5k onwards, the Ford's variable length inlet system giving a similar 'kick' at 4500RPM IIRC. I don't see how both are vastly dissimilar.
 
Last edited:
The ST170's power band was in the higher end of the revs but it was no where near the same thing, where as the Honda DOHC VTEC has a noticable kick the ST170 did not and the Civic was more aggresive and more entertaining to drive baring in mind that was a 1.6 and the Focus was a 2.0

Ironically the K20A3 in the Civic Type-S would be more like the ST170 in power delivery as its not a typical DOHC VTEC system and it doesnt rev to 8k RPM and wont have an aggresive kick, in fact most modern Honda engines dont have that kick anymore, not even the Type-R, its smoothed out so you barely notice it :(
 
Janesy B said:
Both engines need thrashing to get the best out of them, I don't see how one's power delivery was different to the other considering they are both high revving NASP engines.

Can't argue about the reliability, they are fundamentally sound but suffer from niggles.
Click to expand...

Is the Civic i VTEC?

Ie , VTEC and Variable cam timing? If so then its pretty obvious why.
 
Variable Valve Timing is just standard VTEC, B16A2 is DOHC VTEC so variable Valve Timing and Cam control

Edit : Sorry I see what you mean now, K series use I-VTEC which also does some other clever gubbins that i'd have to read into to remind myself of, is it ignition timing? I cant remember
 
Sorry its because its been years since I read into it all and these days I just break it down to

VTEC (typically Hondas that just say VTEC on them feature standard variable valve timing)

SOHC VTEC (As above put with SOHC cam profile)

DOHC VTEC (Old school VTI's and Type-R's

DOHC I-VTEC (as above but with whatever it was they added that I cant remember i'll read into it now)

And then there was supposed to be A-VTEC but it got cancelled I think, it was supposed to show in 2008 but never did :(

I dont own a Honda anymore either, was dissapointed with the CTR so went for VVTLI Toyota
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom