The new Civic makes a strong case for itself if you value something different from the obvious Euro-boxes. Ubiquity has dulled the impact of its predecessor, but there’s still an appealing package to be had in the new Civic. And the premium-feel shines through in this new model, particularly the upmarket cabin. Some of the innovations, including the magic rear seats are genuinely useful, too.
Detractors might bemoan a lack of fizz and slightly awkward styling, but in 2.2 diesel form, this Anglo-Jap concoction appeals in its own offbeat way. The oil-burner is priced at a heady £26,495 in the top-line EX GT guise tested though, which nudges BMW 318d territory. Being a bit more parsimonious on spec would certainly lessen the shock at trade-in time.
However, square a more mildly-specced oil-burning Civic up to a Golf 2.0 TDI and it makes a better case for itself – it’s a touch gruntier and there’s a more generous 90,000-mile warranty on offer. Ultimately though, fans of the current Civic expecting another exponential leap forward in design, might feel short-changed by this latest iteration.
Here are a couple of pictures taken from the Mugen Euro facebook page (not yet on their website), the caption on facebook says "Mugen products for the new 2012 Civic will be released later this year. Watch this space".
The new Civic makes a strong case for itself if you value something different from the obvious Euro-boxes. Ubiquity has dulled the impact of its predecessor, but there’s still an appealing package to be had in the new Civic. And the premium-feel shines through in this new model, particularly the upmarket cabin. Some of the innovations, including the magic rear seats are genuinely useful, too.
Detractors might bemoan a lack of fizz and slightly awkward styling, but in 2.2 diesel form, this Anglo-Jap concoction appeals in its own offbeat way. The oil-burner is priced at a heady £26,495 in the top-line EX GT guise tested though, which nudges BMW 318d territory. Being a bit more parsimonious on spec would certainly lessen the shock at trade-in time.
However, square a more mildly-specced oil-burning Civic up to a Golf 2.0 TDI and it makes a better case for itself – it’s a touch gruntier and there’s a more generous 90,000-mile warranty on offer. Ultimately though, fans of the current Civic expecting another exponential leap forward in design, might feel short-changed by this latest iteration.
Yup - the usual journo drivel. You'd get a 3er with a milking stool for a seat for that dough.
Fails to mention you can nearly see quite well out of Bagpuss. That makes it a LOT faster than the old car, regardless of power.
Interior IS a lot better, unless you look down. But that's equally true of the Golf, which has got worse.
It's no EG or EK, but it's still a decent car compared to modern rubbish.
These spy pictures could be the first evidence that Honda is working on a new version of the revered Honda Civic Type R. Our photographers spied two test cars near Honda’s technical center at the Nürburgring, both wearing a large, unsubtle spoilers over their rear windows. [...]
At last year’s Tokyo motor show senior Honda sources confirmed to Autocar that the hot hatch is likely to make a return, probably in 2013.
Manabu Nishimae, president of Honda Motor Europe, admitted that “customers are keen to see sporty models and while we can’t deliver immediately we are going to develop and deliver those products. [...]
If Honda is working on a Type-R, I hope they ignore the power race (200bhp is already more than enough), and concentrate on making it a sharp and fun drive. The pictured car is a bit odd, it has a whacking great cobbled-on spoiler on the back, but wheel and tyre choice looks fairly conservative (look like standard-spec items).
If Honda is working on a Type-R, I hope they ignore the power race (200bhp is already more than enough), and concentrate on making it a sharp and fun drive. The pictured car is a bit odd, it has a whacking great cobbled-on spoiler on the back, but wheel and tyre choice looks fairly conservative (look like standard-spec items).
I disagree. Unless you can make the car significantly lighter than the previous Type-R, 200 hp is not going to be enough. The competition is improving on all fronts and trying to sell the car with the same horsepower it came with 10 years ago is a losing proposition.
To be fair the Euro Civic Type-R is more of a Civic Si, than a true Type-R. But even then, Honda should be aiming to raise the bar, not lazily building to the same level they offered last time around.
If Honda is working on a Type-R, I hope they ignore the power race (200bhp is already more than enough), and concentrate on making it a sharp and fun drive. The pictured car is a bit odd, it has a whacking great cobbled-on spoiler on the back, but wheel and tyre choice looks fairly conservative (look like standard-spec items).
I disagree. Unless you can make the car significantly lighter than the previous Type-R, 200 hp is not going to be enough. The competition is improving on all fronts and trying to sell the car with the same horsepower it came with 10 years ago is a losing proposition.
To be fair the Euro Civic Type-R is more of a Civic Si, than a true Type-R. But even then, Honda should be aiming to raise the bar, not lazily building to the same level they offered last time around.
200hp was insufficient for the previous-gen Civic Type R. As the FD2R (and our project Si) proved, the Civic's chassis can easily manage far more than 200hp. The FD2R was a completely different animal from a run of th emill Si (or the Euro pseudo "Type R") - another tier up on the performance ladder. That is a car that's worthy of the "Type R" badge. The Euro Civic Type R was simply a psuedo-R, a pretender.
With that said, I don't know if the Type R needs much more than the "225" horsepower (my god I think that they drastically underrated that engine - I would say it made more like 240-250hp easily). If Honda can figure out how to deliver that level of potency in a cleaner and more efficient package than the now-departed K20A, then they would be able to resurrect a winner and regain a lot of credibility. It's just a damned shame we never got a taste of that FD2 Civic R or its level of performance outside of Japan.
If Honda is working on a Type-R, I hope they ignore the power race (200bhp is already more than enough), and concentrate on making it a sharp and fun drive. The pictured car is a bit odd, it has a whacking great cobbled-on spoiler on the back, but wheel and tyre choice looks fairly conservative (look like standard-spec items).
I disagree. Unless you can make the car significantly lighter than the previous Type-R, 200 hp is not going to be enough. The competition is improving on all fronts and trying to sell the car with the same horsepower it came with 10 years ago is a losing proposition.
To be fair the Euro Civic Type-R is more of a Civic Si, than a true Type-R. But even then, Honda should be aiming to raise the bar, not lazily building to the same level they offered last time around.
200hp was insufficient for the previous-gen Civic Type R. As the FD2R (and our project Si) proved, the Civic's chassis can easily manage far more than 200hp. The FD2R was a completely different animal from a run of th emill Si (or the Euro pseudo "Type R") - another tier up on the performance ladder. That is a car that's worthy of the "Type R" badge. The Euro Civic Type R was simply a psuedo-R, a pretender.
With that said, I don't know if the Type R needs much more than the "225" horsepower (my god I think that they drastically underrated that engine - I would say it made more like 240-250hp easily). If Honda can figure out how to deliver that level of potency in a cleaner and more efficient package than the now-departed K20A, then they would be able to resurrect a winner and regain a lot of credibility. It's just a damned shame we never got a taste of that FD2 Civic R or its level of performance outside of Japan.
I agree completely. It would need more power. However, since Honda has completely abandoned high-revving engines, the only way they could do it would be with boost.
Also, your assertions about the K20R seem to be pretty accurate, as the dynos of stock K20R's I have seen put it at about 200WHP pretty routinely. That jives with 240HP. Moreover, compared to the Si's K20Z3, it offers an identical powerband shape, but a bit more usable torque everywhere, which I think helps a lot with making it feel a lot faster.
Also, I agree that it is pretty well proven that the Civic chassis could handle much more than 200HP with the last Si, which can handle upwards of 240-250WHP without much fuss. However, as you well know, the "torqueless" high revving approach helped with this because it was less likely to overwhelm the front wheels.
The Vauxhall Astra VXR is going to have 276bhp, and the RenaultSport Megane 265 Cup has 261bhp. However, I've seen rumours (in magazines) that the next Golf GTi may not rise much and will have 210bhp or so (don't know how accurate that'll be, but there you go). So, if the customers are that strongly influenced by the numbers, there are going to be a bunch of Renaults and Vauxhalls sold (at ~£25k). Then there were Focus RS's and are Golf R-series, the BMW M135 (316bhp, £30k) etc. Perhaps they reside in a category above ? The range of fast hatches is much bigger than it used to be.
However, the CTR does close to 150mph, and 0-60 in 6.6s or so, and generally goes like a bat out of hell if you rev it. I can't see the point of more, except for the sake of it. In fact, I can see the point of less (on the road). Maybe I'm a Jazz Type-R customer ! I'm willing to believe this is not necessarily a popular view, but what's the point of more and more and more power ? You can't use much of the VTEC zone in 3rd without going very quickly, never mind 4th to 6th. 205GTi's (1.6 and 1.9) were just either side of 140bhp / ton, which is also where the old MX-5 sits (I think). A base Elise is around 155, and the Euro CTR's (new and old) are 159 and 166.
As to whether it deserves a Type-R badge, it's about as mental a hot-hatch as there is, it's firm riding, has _that_ engine and red-line and goes pretty damn well. If you're chucking the FN2 out, you may as well chuck the EP3 out (they're very similar, yes I know, no double-wishbones at the back on the FN2, but it's still effective, and some FN2's get an LSD). Don't know much about the really old (Japanese) CTR, and not sure whether the Accord merits the badge on this revised scale or not. You may be left with NSX-R, Integra-R (both generations, or just DC2 ?), and newer Japanese CTR (FD2). Well, these are the (even) more extreme end of the range, I guess it's up to where you want to draw the line.
Anyway, that lot's just my opinion. An interesting question is, what engine can they use in the new one ? Is there a 2.0 in the new engine range or only a 1.8 ? There is a 2.4 as well according to the Earth Dreams news item.
200hp was insufficient for the previous-gen Civic Type R. As the FD2R (and our project Si) proved, the Civic's chassis can easily manage far more than 200hp. The FD2R was a completely different animal from a run of th emill Si (or the Euro pseudo "Type R") - another tier up on the performance ladder. That is a car that's worthy of the "Type R" badge. The Euro Civic Type R was simply a psuedo-R, a pretender.
With that said, I don't know if the Type R needs much more than the "225" horsepower (my god I think that they drastically underrated that engine - I would say it made more like 240-250hp easily). If Honda can figure out how to deliver that level of potency in a cleaner and more efficient package than the now-departed K20A, then they would be able to resurrect a winner and regain a lot of credibility. It's just a damned shame we never got a taste of that FD2 Civic R or its level of performance outside of Japan.
See? You're kowtowing to reality... even after making those fundamental statements about "Type R'ness".
More than 200bhp... Oy Vey man... who buys these things?
If you remember, the ITRs were a sales failure in the US. The 97 ITR with had no AC, radio and rear wiper and did not sell very well.. there was no USA 98 and when the ITR came back as a 99 it came with those things (I'm not sure if they put back the sound deadening firewall material...). Today, I can't recall ever seeing a 97 ITRs outside of AHM, but there are two REAL 99s in my area ( one yellow, on white) - I've seen a couple of fake ITRs at UCI.. they were GSRs in disguise.
So, if your definition of a "real Type R" is the JDM, then I don't know that it would sell very well outside Japan as the car is made for Japanese customers who seem to be content with track ready cars - which is most odd because Japan is the last place where you could put that power down on a public road... Okinawa being a different place.
Perhaps HMC could sell export them as "body in white" for racers everywhere.. and then, yes, push the engine to 250bhp++.. although I'd think that racers would do their own thing to the engine -hence the whole side issue with the K24'd Si in the US. That would provide the "halo car" while a few loss leader homologation 200bhp cars could be shipped -or maybe the local version of the car would serve.
But, 200bhp/MT6 is really quite reasonable in a light car under 2700 lbs. If you go to 240bhp, IMHO, that's all you will need on the street. Delicious, yes, but where will you get to use it?
Unless, of course, you insist that the Type R be a road car which IMHO will make it impractical halo car -too expensive, too insulting to the greenies who make laws. In which case, yes, go for 260bhp but be prepared to sell very few and get ready for the wrath of the Climate Change Society For Anti Cars And Anything That's Fun
Not to mention that everytime auto manufacturers go on a horsepower race, insurance companies and bureaucrats step in a kill it. I think it's better to keep it borderline insane (even if it means underrating the power ) and not kill the golden goose.
The Vauxhall Astra VXR is going to have 276bhp, and the RenaultSport Megane 265 Cup has 261bhp. However, I've seen rumours (in magazines) that the next Golf GTi may not rise much and will have 210bhp or so (don't know how accurate that'll be, but there you go). So, if the customers are that strongly influenced by the numbers, there are going to be a bunch of Renaults and Vauxhalls sold (at ~£25k). Then there were Focus RS's and are Golf R-series, the BMW M135 (316bhp, £30k) etc. Perhaps they reside in a category above ? The range of fast hatches is much bigger than it used to be.
However, the CTR does close to 150mph, and 0-60 in 6.6s or so, and generally goes like a bat out of hell if you rev it. I can't see the point of more, except for the sake of it. In fact, I can see the point of less (on the road). Maybe I'm a Jazz Type-R customer ! I'm willing to believe this is not necessarily a popular view, but what's the point of more and more and more power ? You can't use much of the VTEC zone in 3rd without going very quickly, never mind 4th to 6th. 205GTi's (1.6 and 1.9) were just either side of 140bhp / ton, which is also where the old MX-5 sits (I think). A base Elise is around 155, and the Euro CTR's (new and old) are 159 and 166.
...
Given the growing fascist approach to CO and fuel efficiency shown by Western European Lawmakers... Do you think that the automakers can get away with a horsepower war for these cars for long? How long before it all gets chocked by regulations?
How soon before a "hard" -re: hardware imposed- 130mph limit is imposed on these "middle class" cars?
After all, we're not discussing a few "cars for the rich" here, you know, Ferraris, BMW M, AMG... we're talking about cars that "normal taxpayers" could strive to afford and that are sold in larger numbers.
I'd think that a 160mph, 276bhp rocket for the middle class would be anathema to most Western European Bureaucrats.
The new Honda Civic Type R will be confirmed for production at the Paris motor show in September, company insiders have confirmed to Autocar. It is then likely to be previewed at the Geneva motor show in March next year before going on sale in about 12 months’ time.
Engine details of the new Type R are still under wraps.
The new Honda Civic Type R will be confirmed for production at the Paris motor show in September, company insiders have confirmed to Autocar. It is then likely to be previewed at the Geneva motor show in March next year before going on sale in about 12 months’ time.
Engine details of the new Type R are still under wraps.
Another Honda we will never see in the U.S. Meanwhile, Ford is introducing the 154 m.p.h. Focus ST for consumption EVERYWHERE!
JAS Motorsport are currently developing the European Honda Civic five-door racing car which will use a new 1.6 litre 4 cylinder direct injection turbo-charged petrol engine.
TonyE wrote: I'd think that a 160mph, 276bhp rocket for the middle class would be anathema to most Western European Bureaucrats.
And Most EU bureaucrats would like to lower the speed limits, but none of that is happening anytime soon.
In fact, it's much more likely that speed limits in the UK will be raised to 80 MPH!
I just came back from the UK, and spent a fair amount of time listening to talk radio while driving a Turbo Diesel Focus on the wrong side of the road. And what I heard was a significant backlash against all this CO2 stuff.
While more people are driving things like my rented Diesel Focus, they lust after hot hatches and the like.
My guess is that if Honda goes that way, they will have to think turbo or compact V6. Sadly, I think my rev-happy F20 and K20 are turning into collector's items.
It should also be remembered that diesel engines in passenger cars has only a limited future - due to NO3 emissions. All the European manufacturers are busily working on hybrids to lessen their dependance on diesels.
I don't think they will decrease speed limit in Euro-zone. While Germany has always been famous for no "federal" speed limit its neighbour Poland - the co-host of football Euro2012 raised it not so long ago from 130kmh(81mph) typical for Euro countries to 140kmh (87mph) with additional 10kmh room for error. So you can basically travel 150kmh (93mph) on highway without getting into trouble. Obviously the European Parliament raised questions about safety of such move but that was countered with better performance of today's cars etc.etc. The time will tell however if such moves won't be blocked thru emissions control etc.etc.
The new Honda Civic Type R will be confirmed for production at the Paris motor show in September, company insiders have confirmed to Autocar. It is then likely to be previewed at the Geneva motor show in March next year before going on sale in about 12 months’ time.
Engine details of the new Type R are still under wraps.
This is interesting, very interesting.
I wonder which engine they are going to base on. Would it be a new ED engine or old R18 or R20, or would they revive K? Very interesting. I have no idea.
I didn't think they would do Type R anymore. I really wonder if it is going to be a high revv. (I don't think so, though)
I'm finally seeing a few of the 9th-gen Euro Civics running around, they've been fairly rare until now, though there are lots of the previous generation ones around. For fun, I thought I'd have a look at the reviews the latest generation Euro Civic has received in the UK.
Firstly, autocar. Their reviews consist of a number of shorter "first-drive" reviews, and a larger overall review which re-uses some of the first-drive material.
autocar (Nov 2011) : 1.8 petrol pluses : much improved ride, refinement, steering over previous generation, cabin quality.
minuses : needs revving to perform, bit expensive, "a Golf or Focus makes a more convincing proposition both on paper and from behind the wheel, but the new Civic shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand"
autocar : overall review, 9th-gen Civic pluses : interior quality, dash, boot space, flexible seat space, throttle response, shift quality, noise level, handling good-ish, little understeer, reliability historically excellent, 1.6 diesel economy
minuses : secondary control ergonomics, headroom, petrol engine figures and usability slightly lag competitors refined turbos, agility/poise/ride just short of class leaders
It's hard to give a fair overview of the above reviews, so click on the links if you want the full story. Here are some quotes ...
Can Honda take an old Civic and so transform what was never a very good car even when new into something than can take on the best brand new designs and the established class leader? In a word, no. But to a certain sort of customer, a family man or woman who most values interior space, fuel consumption, mechanical refinement and safety I expect it might yet craft a compelling case for itself.
a Golf or Focus makes a more convincing proposition both on paper and from behind the wheel, but the new Civic shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand. Far from it. It’s more rewarding to drive than before but has a nice cabin and retains useful practicalities such as a huge boot and the clever ‘Magic Seat’ system in the rear which gives an extremely flexible load space. It’s also very well finished and solidly screwed together, but for the money you’d hope it would be
[1.6 i-DTEC] This, and the 47kg saved over the heavier 2.2-litre engine, takes a noticeable 54kg out of the car’s nose [...] character of the engine is much more petrol-like and much less of a typical slogging diesel. The reduced weight in the car’s nose is also noticeable, making the front end keener to change direction. The whole car feels very well and tightly engineered [...] one of the least ‘diesel’ four cylinder diesel engines on sale.
[1.6 i-DTEC] There’s more to recommend about this Civic than any of the others in the range. The new Civic has always been a refined car, and that refinement is taken to an even higher level here, while also being a good deal sharper to drive [...] Get over the way it looks and if you’re not put off by other irks — such as the ride quality and driving position — then you’ve got yourself a decent and cheap-to-run (if not buy) alternative to the Ford Focus and VW Golf mainstream.
despite having been built in the UK for more than a quarter of its life now, the Civic has never featured among Britain’s top 10 annual best-selling new cars
[conclusion from the full review] At the ninth time of asking, Honda has produced a compact five-door hatchback that seems well suited to European tastes. It measures up to relevant European market standards; the Civic represents a strong value proposition; and it seems sufficiently well rounded and mature in its performance, ride and handling to make it a convincing alternative to the Golf, Focus, and Astra. Now, in most of the ways that matter, the Civic can be considered a real contender. Slightly poor passenger accommodation and some poorly chosen cabin equipment are all that separate the new Civic from a four-star rating. In most other respects, it is every bit as good as the cars that dominate Europe’s family hatchback class. In its refinement, intelligent packaging and material quality, in fact, it’s little short of outstanding.
I have a feeling that if the conclusion was rewritten now, they'd be a bit less positive. The general tone seems to be that the Civic's good with improved ride / handling / steering, the 1.6 diesel is better again, but autocar does love the Golf and Focus and the Civic is just short of these two and a bit expensive. It also has somewhat odd styling. The 1.6 diesel does, however, make quite a good case for itself if you want to step away from their default choices.
Holy thread resurrection; anyone would think it were nearly Easter!
There's some oddities going on in those reviews; Autobore criticises Bagpuss' ergonomics, but never mention that you sit in it & not on it like a barstool Golf, or Civ's vastly superior pedal placement & gearchange.
The UK press' obsession with the Golf is quite funny.
Over to the two magazines I give most credence to, Car and evo (of course Car used to be better written than it is these days, but it's still just about OK).
Car (Nov 2011) : 1.8 iVTEC EX-GT pluses : roomy, good fit and finish, quieter, engine and gearchange sublime, steering accuracy.
minuses : styling not as good as 8th-gen, road-noise could be better still, ride inconsistent, steering feel.
Car (Dec 2011) : 2.2 iDTEC pluses : good fit and finish, smooth and refined, gearchange quality, ride mostly OK, flexible rear seats.
minuses : styling not as good as 8th-gen, rear visibility, high seating position, ride unsettled over high frequency undulations.
the steering had a lovely, honest heft to it, the ride was good, the 106bhp 1.6-litre DOHC revved sweetly, the turn-in was sharp and crisp with moderately low but easy-to-judge grip levels, and the whole car moved with a lightness that the new model can’t match – in fact, the old car is about 300kg lighter than the new one
Oops !
evo (Nov 2011) : 2.2 iDTEC pluses : throttle response, supple non-wallowy ride, steering is direct.
minuses : 1.8 petrol gutless in comparison, struggles with big suspension movements at speed.
The main reason for buying the Honda however is that it resolutely isn’t a Golf. It looks conspicuously different to any other hot hatch on sale, and in an age where it’s all too easy for one generic shape to blend into another that has to be a good thing.
evo (Dec 2012) : Ti (1.8 VTEC) pluses : "positivity to the controls that reveals this as a car developed by people who do actually like driving", precise steering, slick gearbox, Ti spec is good value.
minuses : steering feel.
A video review from evo,
pluses : quite enjoyable and fun to drive, nice direct steering, ride supple, distinctive styling.
minuses : rear visibility, 1.8 i-VTEC not powerful enough against small turbo engines.
Surprisingly positive stuff from the performance-oriented evo. I also found this autocar video review, which is also (surprisingly) quite positive.
So ... overall the reviews indicate quite a good car to drive, refined, smooth, distinctive. Perhaps a bit expensive, the styling's not as clean as the 8th-gen, and the 1.8 petrol engine is a bit underpowered compared to the competition. The torsion-beam based rear seems to be reasonably effective, but nonetheless still garners some negative remarks as a retrograde engineering step (interesting to see how the new low-spec Golfs will be treated). The rear-vision and slightly tall driving position are also irritants to some. The new 1.6 diesel is very good, and the car benefits from it's lower weight and some of the other revisions made to sharpen it up ("quicker steering box and stiffer front suspension bushings"). Somehow it seems the Civic's kind of forgotten in the UK, Golfs and Focuses rule. It's up to the (much needed) 1.6 i-DTEC to turn that around a bit.
Holy thread resurrection; anyone would think it were nearly Easter!
Ha ! This thread is treated as a dumping ground for all my Euro Civic ramblings :-)
Nick GravesX wrote: There's some oddities going on in those reviews; Autobore criticises Bagpuss' ergonomics, but never mention that you sit in it & not on it like a barstool Golf, or Civ's vastly superior pedal placement & gearchange.
The UK press' obsession with the Golf is quite funny.
I remember when a friend bought back a VW about 10 years ago when he came back from work in another country. Not sure or remeber which model it is, (sedan) and I sat in it to check it out since I was reading so many good things about it and VW is rare in my town.
But after sitting in it, sure the door seems more solid and heavy like all German car (something I don't especially like) but otherwise feel a bit let down as it did not feel or seem that special when you sit in it. (didn't drive it though - didn't even check if it is diesel or not)
The Vauxhall Astra VXR is going to have 276bhp, and the RenaultSport Megane 265 Cup has 261bhp. However, I've seen rumours (in magazines) that the next Golf GTi may not rise much and will have 210bhp or so (don't know how accurate that'll be, but there you go). So, if the customers are that strongly influenced by the numbers, there are going to be a bunch of Renaults and Vauxhalls sold (at ~£25k). Then there were Focus RS's and are Golf R-series, the BMW M135 (316bhp, £30k) etc. Perhaps they reside in a category above ? The range of fast hatches is much bigger than it used to be.
However, the CTR does close to 150mph, and 0-60 in 6.6s or so, and generally goes like a bat out of hell if you rev it. I can't see the point of more, except for the sake of it. In fact, I can see the point of less (on the road). Maybe I'm a Jazz Type-R customer ! I'm willing to believe this is not necessarily a popular view, but what's the point of more and more and more power ? You can't use much of the VTEC zone in 3rd without going very quickly, never mind 4th to 6th. 205GTi's (1.6 and 1.9) were just either side of 140bhp / ton, which is also where the old MX-5 sits (I think). A base Elise is around 155, and the Euro CTR's (new and old) are 159 and 166.
...
I'd think that a 160mph, 276bhp rocket for the middle class would be anathema to most Western European Bureaucrats.
I don't think driving at 250 kmh (155 mph) on streets or even highways is safe anywhere. The only place you could really go that fast is the track, which how many people do again? I don't think the average Civic buyer will be racing their car on long, open roads. 200hp is more than enough for regular driving in the previous Civic Type-R. I'm used to driving a CR-V with only 166hp and 4WD, and I think it's more than enough power. There is no need to push the Type-R engines over 200hp. Just keep it there while improving the fuel economy. Also, keep it sort-of high revving and naturally aspirated. A 7000rpm redline is the sweet spot.
xBeastx wrote: I don't think driving at 250 kmh (155 mph) on streets or even highways is safe anywhere. The only place you could really go that fast is the track, which how many people do again? I don't think the average Civic buyer will be racing their car on long, open roads. 200hp is more than enough for regular driving in the previous Civic Type-R. I'm used to driving a CR-V with only 166hp and 4WD, and I think it's more than enough power. There is no need to push the Type-R engines over 200hp. Just keep it there while improving the fuel economy. Also, keep it sort-of high revving and naturally aspirated. A 7000rpm redline is the sweet spot.
You can still do 250kmh legally on some German Autobahns, but I agree, not necessarily safely.
But 7000 is not enough rpms, for a Honda performance model, regardless of whether it has a turbo or not. 8000 would be an absolute minimum :D 200hp may have been sufficient when Hondas were light, but they are not and 250 would probably be insufficient for the power to weight numbers Honda must be chasing.
The Vauxhall Astra VXR is going to have 276bhp, and the RenaultSport Megane 265 Cup has 261bhp. However, I've seen rumours (in magazines) that the next Golf GTi may not rise much and will have 210bhp or so (don't know how accurate that'll be, but there you go). So, if the customers are that strongly influenced by the numbers, there are going to be a bunch of Renaults and Vauxhalls sold (at ~£25k). Then there were Focus RS's and are Golf R-series, the BMW M135 (316bhp, £30k) etc. Perhaps they reside in a category above ? The range of fast hatches is much bigger than it used to be.
However, the CTR does close to 150mph, and 0-60 in 6.6s or so, and generally goes like a bat out of hell if you rev it. I can't see the point of more, except for the sake of it. In fact, I can see the point of less (on the road). Maybe I'm a Jazz Type-R customer ! I'm willing to believe this is not necessarily a popular view, but what's the point of more and more and more power ? You can't use much of the VTEC zone in 3rd without going very quickly, never mind 4th to 6th. 205GTi's (1.6 and 1.9) were just either side of 140bhp / ton, which is also where the old MX-5 sits (I think). A base Elise is around 155, and the Euro CTR's (new and old) are 159 and 166.
...
I'd think that a 160mph, 276bhp rocket for the middle class would be anathema to most Western European Bureaucrats.
I don't think driving at 250 kmh (155 mph) on streets or even highways is safe anywhere. The only place you could really go that fast is the track, which how many people do again? I don't think the average Civic buyer will be racing their car on long, open roads. 200hp is more than enough for regular driving in the previous Civic Type-R. I'm used to driving a CR-V with only 166hp and 4WD, and I think it's more than enough power. There is no need to push the Type-R engines over 200hp. Just keep it there while improving the fuel economy. Also, keep it sort-of high revving and naturally aspirated. A 7000rpm redline is the sweet spot.
People who buy a Type-R would definitely be taking their cars to the track in significant numbers. Back around 2000-2003 often times there would be 8-10 Integra Type-R's at local track events, which is a huge amount considering how few of them were sold here.
The Integra Type-R had about 200 hp over a decade ago, coming to the table with a 200 hp CTR now would be a guaranteed failure. Even 200 hp in the Civic Si is not really enough considering all of the competition in the segment is pushing a lot more power than that for similar prices.
The Vauxhall Astra VXR is going to have 276bhp, and the RenaultSport Megane 265 Cup has 261bhp. However, I've seen rumours (in magazines) that the next Golf GTi may not rise much and will have 210bhp or so (don't know how accurate that'll be, but there you go). So, if the customers are that strongly influenced by the numbers, there are going to be a bunch of Renaults and Vauxhalls sold (at ~£25k). Then there were Focus RS's and are Golf R-series, the BMW M135 (316bhp, £30k) etc. Perhaps they reside in a category above ? The range of fast hatches is much bigger than it used to be.
However, the CTR does close to 150mph, and 0-60 in 6.6s or so, and generally goes like a bat out of hell if you rev it. I can't see the point of more, except for the sake of it. In fact, I can see the point of less (on the road). Maybe I'm a Jazz Type-R customer ! I'm willing to believe this is not necessarily a popular view, but what's the point of more and more and more power ? You can't use much of the VTEC zone in 3rd without going very quickly, never mind 4th to 6th. 205GTi's (1.6 and 1.9) were just either side of 140bhp / ton, which is also where the old MX-5 sits (I think). A base Elise is around 155, and the Euro CTR's (new and old) are 159 and 166.
...
I'd think that a 160mph, 276bhp rocket for the middle class would be anathema to most Western European Bureaucrats.
I don't think driving at 250 kmh (155 mph) on streets or even highways is safe anywhere. The only place you could really go that fast is the track, which how many people do again? I don't think the average Civic buyer will be racing their car on long, open roads. 200hp is more than enough for regular driving in the previous Civic Type-R. I'm used to driving a CR-V with only 166hp and 4WD, and I think it's more than enough power. There is no need to push the Type-R engines over 200hp. Just keep it there while improving the fuel economy. Also, keep it sort-of high revving and naturally aspirated. A 7000rpm redline is the sweet spot.
Acclimatisation; it's remarkably easy to become used to driving at big speeds. You just don't do it straight off, like learning to run.
Finding roads empty enough & with sufficient sight lines to do so safely is very tricky in much of the World, however.
The Vauxhall Astra VXR is going to have 276bhp, and the RenaultSport Megane 265 Cup has 261bhp. However, I've seen rumours (in magazines) that the next Golf GTi may not rise much and will have 210bhp or so (don't know how accurate that'll be, but there you go). So, if the customers are that strongly influenced by the numbers, there are going to be a bunch of Renaults and Vauxhalls sold (at ~£25k). Then there were Focus RS's and are Golf R-series, the BMW M135 (316bhp, £30k) etc. Perhaps they reside in a category above ? The range of fast hatches is much bigger than it used to be.
However, the CTR does close to 150mph, and 0-60 in 6.6s or so, and generally goes like a bat out of hell if you rev it. I can't see the point of more, except for the sake of it. In fact, I can see the point of less (on the road). Maybe I'm a Jazz Type-R customer ! I'm willing to believe this is not necessarily a popular view, but what's the point of more and more and more power ? You can't use much of the VTEC zone in 3rd without going very quickly, never mind 4th to 6th. 205GTi's (1.6 and 1.9) were just either side of 140bhp / ton, which is also where the old MX-5 sits (I think). A base Elise is around 155, and the Euro CTR's (new and old) are 159 and 166.
...
I'd think that a 160mph, 276bhp rocket for the middle class would be anathema to most Western European Bureaucrats.
I don't think driving at 250 kmh (155 mph) on streets or even highways is safe anywhere. The only place you could really go that fast is the track, which how many people do again? I don't think the average Civic buyer will be racing their car on long, open roads. 200hp is more than enough for regular driving in the previous Civic Type-R. I'm used to driving a CR-V with only 166hp and 4WD, and I think it's more than enough power. There is no need to push the Type-R engines over 200hp. Just keep it there while improving the fuel economy. Also, keep it sort-of high revving and naturally aspirated. A 7000rpm redline is the sweet spot.
I'm curious have you ever driven a Type R? I agree that driving at excessive speeds on public roads is not safe but just because you have the power doesn't mean that you have to use it all the time.
A Type R is special, not made for average buyers and lots of owners take them to the track. That's part of the reason there is an entire industry for tuners. At this point I'm not even sure that 200hp is enough for an Si these days considering the weight and competition.
I drive a CRV as well and it's a great commuter/grocery getter but not a performance vehicle. I've usually had two vehicles and a Type R would suit my needs beside the CRV. Perhaps you are not a performance enthusiast and that's ok. My first Honda was an Elite 50. It had no horse power, great fuel economy, and it was a lot of fun as a kid but I grew from there.
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
