AZuser

Wouldn't removing the AC and adding a roll cage also change the car's weight distribution as well... maybe move it closer to 50/50 from whatever it is stock?

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

It's a very capable car for sure!

If this was offered at around $35K, which it should, I would never get one still.

It's a FWD car, it's not entirely about how fast it is. I would get a RWD or AWD car over the new CTR. I would even take the used S2K or the new Miata over it.

oonowindoo

of course. Tires are the foundation of all things.

oonowindoo

could be... who knows what else was changed.

After all, Honda is in the market selling cars, not a R&D consulting firm.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

Here's the Honda EU's official statement:

"The lap time was achieved during the final phase of pre-production testing in May 2014 by a Civic Type R development car. The development car was in a standard state of engine tune, with suspension, drivetrain, exhaust, brakes and the aerodynamic package identical to those of the production Civic Type R.

The removal of equipment such as air conditioning, the front passenger seat and audio equipment offset the additional weight of a full roll cage (installed specifically for safety reasons and not to add rigidity). "

Of course. it's totally up to you to believe or disbelieve an official statement.

Again, here's how I see it. Honda claimed that a pre-production model did a 7:50 at the Ring. This pre-production model is supposed to be very close to a stock, production vehicle.

People are not very convinced and that's understandable since that figure is in line with a brand new M4. Then this AutoExpress track battle shows up. Though it's on a short track, it somewhat proves that Honda's claim is perhaps legit.

Will it help to have even more track tests done by reputable publications? Hell ya for sure! But that alone IMO is quite an achievement for the CTR. Who in the right mind would have thought that a 300hp fail wheel drive Civic would be competed against a highly rated M4?

oonowindoo

Yah, i am not arguing the capability of the CTR. I am sure it is a good performer regardless if it is at M4 or level or not.

But as in any business, including the one i am working for. The marketing language is always ... for the lack of better word, Deceiving in favor of the product they are selling.

for Example "The development car was in a standard state of engine tune, with suspension, drivetrain, exhaust, brakes and the aerodynamic package identical to those of the production Civic Type R. "

I can read it as "it has all the production car's components but we are not going to disclose everything we added extra other than the roll cage, like weight reduction"

Unless the roll cage is made of paper, otherwise it will have added effective to the overall performance of the car.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

Like I said, that's fine. Like you, all I'm saying is that the CTR is a really good performer on a track, just like many other Type R's.

TacoBello

Fixed.

SixtwoPinoy

Can I ask you why? If a fwd car can go as fast if not faster then an awd or rwd car in a circuit why would you not buy a fwd car?

oonowindoo

To answer you question:

There are mainly 2 reason why people prefer RWD/AWD over FWD.

1. FWD has its limitation due to the steering is connected to the front wheel and when you have power also at the front wheels. You will feel EVERYTHING (torque steer and understeer).
Do you think it is more efficient to juggling with your feet while walking or juggling balls with your hands and walk with your feet?
The more power you add to the Front wheel, the worse it gets.

This is not the main reason why people prefer RWD/AWD.

2. SInce most of the people do not do time attack against other drivers. The main reason why people prefer RWD/AWD is how the car FEELS and it is more fun when the weight is balanced. Let the front wheels do what they do best, Steer. and let the other wheels do the acceleration.

This has NOTHING to do with how fast you can go around the track since most of us do not do racing for a living.

even if you do racing for a living, FWD will not be the ideal choice, see reason #1.


That is why the world fastest cars are either RWD or AWD. You just can't have 1000HP at the front wheels, i can't even imagine how it would feel when you try to make a turn.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

lol still think the FN2 Type R is fast eh?

TacoBello

While not the best type r out there, it still holds it's own very well. Have you driven one and compared it to other Rs? Or are you just going by what you've heard of other peoples opinions?

I've heard more good things about it then bad. From numerous sources.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

I have seen video clips of it being beaten by the FD2 Type R at various tracks with different publications (5th gear and Best Motoring).

Don't get me wrong, the FN2 is a capable car. If anything, it's the FD2 that is on the very extreme side of things.

kurtatx

Good post. This is why the Subaru BRZ/Scion FRS exists. It won't win a lot of races, but it's lively and fun.

TacoBello

Exactly. It's like a modern reincarnation of what made Japanese imports so popular in the late 80s through to the very early 2000s. High revving, low powered, excellent handling, fairly minimalistic cars.

I'm glad Subaru and Toyota decided to bring that car out, although, I believe sales numbers are suffering these days. It's a damn shame.

oonowindoo

It really needs a little bit more power.

Fun and all are important but in 2015, you gotta have to have some Power.

Me for one will be very interested in it if it had 50 more hp.

TacoBello

I'm guessing you haven't driven one to its limits. It's easy to go fast in a straight line. It's another thing to go fast in a corner. You don't need a lot of power to corner like a crazy motherfucker. Just driving skill.

Costco

As the owner of one, I agree with him. +50 horsepower would be perfect. Been keeping my fingers crossed that they would drop a 2.5L in the FR-S/BRZ.

An intake, header, and E85 tune have done a lot for my car. But it should have been like this from the beginning.

I'm sure the CTR is loads of fun to drive, but I just had this conversation today. Older guy with a K24-swapped ITR said it himself, he would forego the CTR if it landed stateside and get something with RWD/AWD.

oonowindoo

except in reality most of us do not live on the track.

there are not a lot of opportunities for me to corner like a crazy motherfucker without the possibility of hitting a center divider.

So driving fast in a straight line is almost just as important as cornering for us average drivers who live on the 10 Freeway.

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

Just drove the headerback + E85 tuned FRS yesterday at the canyon run. That car dynoed 220whp vs 175whp stock. That car was faster than a AP2 S2K in the straightaway. It's pretty damn awesome but it didn't really push me to get the same mods as much as I thought it would.

Just go faster in the corners.

Now, a Jackson Racing Supercharger 270-280whp set up is

oonowindoo

I think the SC is a little too much for me to really push the car.

N/A 250 crank HP is perfect for me.

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

What does that mean? I'm genuinely curious. The JRSC looks like an intake system for this car. haha The power delivery is extremely linear. It can run about 260-280whp on a fairly conservative CARB legal tune (91oct).

With about $800 (header+tune), you can make about 230 crank HP on 91. It's pretty cheap. It really wakes up the car, kills the tq bump as well.

oonowindoo

Same as as i prefer NA S2000 over FI s2000

Linear or not, the car will have too much torque for me to do "Pedal to the metal" out of an Apex.

Also N/A will almost always have better response times than FI.

sometimes torqueless actually has its advantages which is what i prefer in cars like Miata, S2000 and BRZ.

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

We call our cars on/off machines at Buttonwillow because that's how we have to drive to get the good laptimes.

But yeah, it's about dem feelz. I see your point. Laptime doesn't equal how fun the car actually is.

Some idiots don't understand that. MY CAR DID X:XX AT THE RING BRA!!! IT'S DA BEST, IT'S BETTER THAN YOUR CAR FOR SURE! I can guarantee that you will NEVER be able to drive your car anywhere near that time, what's your point?

oonowindoo

Honestly, I would have preferred a highly tuned KA24 in the CTR than the turbo.

Something like 280hp KA24 with 9k redline.

Honda could have saved the turbo engine for TLX.

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

Turbo sells cars these days. And Honda doesn't give a shit about TLX.

Mizouse

Booya4139

Its probably a similar deal to the JRSC setup on the 8th gen civic Si's... its the perfect FI compliment to that car. I thought real hard about going that route, but deciding after I/H/E + tune that i wasn't embarking deeper into the wormhole. But i liked the idea of the bypass valve so DD mileage doesn't take a huge hit, and you just get that linear bump in HP/TQ.... As I remember it was in the high 200's WHP, and if you got the smaller pulley you could get over 300, and an intercooler you could get to 320-330ish... But at some point the cost/benefit of power/reliability gets a little funky.

Costco

Adding on to that, people say the JRSC drives very similar to stock, just with more power. It uses a Rotrex blower (centrifugal), a la Procharger.

Funny thing is while the Roots-style blowers (like the one Comptech uses in Honda/Acura) makes much more torque down low in the RPM range, the JRSC makes more peak power and torque, in addition to having much better reliability. Compared to the other offerings for the FR-S/BRZ, that is.

If you look at the people that track their car on a regular basis, if they're S/C'd, they most likely have the JRSC.

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

Yep. It keeps the same linear powerband characteristic of the NA engine. I test drove my friend's JRSC-ed BRZ in the canyons. It was still running the conservative CARB tune, but it was fucking fast. People don't realize that adding almost 100whp to a 2700lb car can completely transform the car. It's a reliable kit even for tracking.

Yep. It does deliver the power very similar to stock. I was shocked at how smooth the car is, it just sounds and pulls like a beast.

The Rotrex S/C is definitely the way to go. It's more up to date and reliable kit than the roots style.

People in my track group who are supercharged are running the JRSC, no other supercharger system. If it's a turbo, it's a Greddy kit. These guys take their boosted FRS/BRZs to the track regularly (once a month through the year) without any issues.

coco

New Civic hatchback prototype spotted showing full tail lights, lightweight wheels, triple exhaust. Parts said to possibly be for Si or Type R models.

http://www.civicx.com/threads/new-ci...pe-r-parts.97/

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

Looks like it's riding on 22's.

oonowindoo

So at least it has exhaust tips.... even tho it seems all 3 of them are difference sizes.

MSZ

Type-R dyno

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PSls55Npx8

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

313hp at the crank. Impressive!

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

Stock Type R Turbo dyno k20c1 - 2015+ Civic type R Turbo - k20forum.com K20A K20Z K20C Community

Don't know if I'm reading it right but is that 296whp and 273lbft at the wheels?

oonowindoo

I don't know how many times i have to say this.

A baseline dyno # without comparison means absolutely NOTHING. It does not prove anything other than it has some power. I would like to see that they put some of the other stock cars (s2000, BRZ, Si or whatever) on the same dyno to provide a reference point. If they dyno a stock s2000 with 230whp, then we know it is too high or 180whp then we know the dyno reads low.


You can dyno the same car on a different machine and it might read 250 or another one might read 320. How do you know which one is accurate or if there is even an accurate baseline dyno?

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

ECU performance has a FB page that shows dyno plots of other cars that they tune.

I think they have a S8 there with 520whp..not sure if stock or not as there's a second plot that shows 659whp after mods.

Some other examples:
330D: 229whp
328i: 245whp
535i: 293whp
Panemera Turbo: 491whp
X6M: 545whp
M3 E92: 386whp
C63 AMG: 439whp
550i: 408whp

oonowindoo

This is what i am saying... It is not accurate because there is no freaking way a stock E92 M3 has 386 WHP.. why do you think Kimchi passed one up?

While i am sure the "gains" and the "differences" are consistent but just the baseline # itself might not be.

JS + XES

iTrader: (1)

M3 E92 usually dynos around 350whp on dynojet which reads high. So yeah, this is why there's no reason to get too technical with the dyno done by a tuning shop.

But I'm sure that engine puts out nice numbers!