Type R and VTEC owners

My 90% comment was based on many things I've read. Including a guy on the S2ki forums who's views I value. He owns a GT86, an S2000 and an NSX.

I just completely disagree with how anyone can think the new CTR can be better than an NSX-R. This is my point and this only- it seems others are confused by the look of it which is basically a civic with a big engine and the compare it to an NSX :S. The rear spoiler looks like it was designed by James Dyson.

As I said earlier, it won't be near a DC2 let alone an NSX for handling dynamics. The 'magic seat' rear seats just ruin the opportunity for 'proper' rear suspension. Look what a mess the FN2 was for road use, far too stiff.
 
I
rjkoneill said:
Don't go comparing Hondas to Rovers in this thread.

I can't believe you are all going on about the new CTR one upping the NSX when the real focus should be on the mention of the new CT being better than the ATR which anyone who knows anything is the ULTIMATE TYPE R

Accord Type R. The Power of Dreams
Click to expand...

See this is what 'kicked it off'. You coming out with the accord crap again. The video I watched just kept repeating 'this will be the best ever' with no real reasons. Maybe it's a teaser or maybe he forgot about the other type Rs honda made beyond the civic.

You do realise many honda and rover parts are shared. Your s2000 has rover 600 rear calipers for a start.

Not sure how the rear suspension suddenly changes depending on the badge of the car either.

Lastly. The 2nd gen NSX-R (regarded as the best ) was launched in 2001. Hardly 25 years old
 
Last edited:
Listening to Greg James recently?

I shouldn't have used the Rover 25 comment as I didn't intend to start that off... It's the same as my insight though. Or the same as VW put on the rear of the non performance Golfs. Torsion beam with 2 bushes and 2 springs. The 9G civic now atleast has the fluid filled bush to try improving things... That said, so is the Megane.

I was hoping my opinions referenced enough solid foundations but that doesn't appear to have been the case and instead a silly flame war has happened rather than discussion, for example a radio 1 nerd alert rather than validating the engineering remark I questioned. Read Gordon Murray's book on the F1, it paints a good picture.

.... Back here talking CTR in 6 months? :p
 
Last edited:
Simon said:
I

See this is what 'kicked it off'. You coming out with the accord crap again.
Click to expand...

Actually it was me with the Accord, but I couldn't consider it to be crap. My opinion on it was, that it's a great Type-R which seems to be unloved. I prefer it much more then the EP3. Yes, it didn't have the styling, but it bloody goes well for a saloon sports car.

When Honda created the Type-R, they initially wanted it to be a race car for the road. This is why I feel the Integra/NSX is the closest thing to a racing car. I've not been in a NSX, but have in an Integra, and they make you feel like you are actually driving a race car. N/A engine which revs well adds to that feel.

With having said the above, the new CTR with the turbo may not feel as special. Although if they add a LSD, and great suspension then It might just be another great type-r.

The best type-r? No, I wouldn't think so. Type-R to me has always been a high revving N/A with great handling characteristics.
 
Simon said:
Oh I completely agree with you. Just seems people make out the ATR is a screw modded 306.
Click to expand...

Well internet opinions will always be different. The problem is people will give an opinion, either; based on others perceptions about a car, or their own experience, or neither. The latter is quite common, especially when it comes to the ATR in this thread. :p

I just feel, with the new Type-R, it's more about keeping up with the BHP with other manufacturers car, rather then the driving experience. It is a shame if Honda go down this route, but then again, with them coming back to F1 in '15, I feel some of the tech might be incorporated in the new CTR.
 
People mocking the ATR, the ATR is vastly superior to the EP3, the only thing the EP3 has going for it is the drivetrain, the engine and gearbox are sublime, the rest of the car is a POS, a car designed to attract the masses and turn the brand into mainstream, whereas the ATR was enjoyed by people who actually valued engineering and was much closer to the original philosophy of what a Type-R is.

But its all irrelevant, market dictates some things need to move away from original concepts to succeed. Just look at what BMW has done with M cars too. Bolting a turbo on the new CTR will give it a more wider appeal and a chance of better sales and profit, which they badly need.
 
lemonade said:
the only thing the EP3 has going for it is the drivetrain, the engine and gearbox are sublime
Click to expand...

Probably the biggest boxes that need ticking in terms of a hot hatch, no?

The Germans were the go to marques if you wanted to pay more for comfort/interior quality and have a slightly slower/less fun car to drive.

Unfortunately, for the new CTR, the Germans now offer the same [or better] for the same [or a bit more] £££.
 
AndrewNR said:
Probably the biggest boxes that need ticking in terms of a hot hatch, no?

The Germans were the go to marques if you wanted to pay more for comfort/interior quality and have a slightly slower/less fun car to drive.

Unfortunately, for the new CTR, the Germans now offer the same [or better] for the same [or a bit more] £££.
Click to expand...

Not debating the virtues of whether its a good hot hatch or not, just taking a shot at the ATR haters. :p

The EP3 was the beginning of the cost cutting and dumbing down of the Type R brand and to a certain extent HUK and HUE as a whole as they moved away from some of their core values. Is it any wonder why they have not made any profit in years and should have shut shop long time ago, there is so much weighting on this new CTR, I would hate to think what would happen if it is a sales flop.
 
Don't get the Accord Type R hate, they are brilliant cars. And at least they have an LSD and proper steering. Probably more deserving of the type R badge in that respect.
 
Destined to be a flop isn't it? Releasing the hot version toward the end of the models life cycle, with no USP or price advantage over the competition, and styling only a mother could love..
 
GT3 said:
Don't get the Accord Type R hate, they are brilliant cars. And at least they have an LSD and proper steering. Probably more deserving of the type R badge in that respect.
Click to expand...

Yep, they also have a proper sorted chassis and a superior suspension setup with vastly superior handling. The EP3 has mcphersons at front lol (the FN2 is even more of a joke) and the double wishbones at the rear were so poorly setup that the engineers who worked on them should have been lined up and shot.

The ATR is a superb car out of the box, you don't even need to do anything to it, great old school VTEC engine, slick gearbox, sublime chassis and suspension, great great steering, very light (for its size), fast and engaging to drive, the Rover 25 Type R is like a postman pats van in comparison, and a lot of owners end up spending £££'s to get it driving the way they want, that engine and gearbox deserved a far better overall car. But it was a sales success so who am I to argue. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom