Why is the Type-R so slow?

iqbad

Senior Member
First Name
Eric
Joined
Aug 5, 2017
Threads
12
Messages
75
Reaction score
27
Location
Sweden
Vehicle(s)
Honda Civic Type R 2018, Audi TT-RS 2010 400hp, Audi A6 3.0 TFSI 400hp
Country flag
So I have read a lot of CTR reviews and many of the testers say that the car really accelerates hard once you get up to speed. The power to weight ratio is also quite good with about 4.4kg/hp. In general FWD cars accelerate better while up to speed compared to front-engine RWD cars because of lower transmission losses. Especially the 90-degree rear differentials have poor efficiency. But all the instrumented tests that I have seen just show poor acceleration figures. I am not talking about 0-100km/h now since all FWD cars will suck here. I am talking about 100-200km/h readings, something that is relevant for track driving.

In a recent test in the German Sport Auto magazine the CTR was tested against among others the BMW M2. The M2 has higher power (370hp) and slightly better power-to-weight ratio with 4.2kg/hp. The M2 blew the CTR away on Hockenheim, with a 1.59.8 laptime. The CTR pulled a 2.03.4 on the same track. The M2 was on pilot super sports and the CTR on the stock continentals. The interesting part comes when you analyze the speeds on different parts of the racetrack. The CTR has higher (and sometimes equal) curve speeds in all turns! This basically means, that everything that is lost to the M2 is because of acceleration! If the CTR had equal acceleration it would be quicker! I think this is very interesting data and that the CTR pulls higher G’s in the corners despite slightly worse tires (I consider the MPSS a bit better than the Continentals for dry track driving) is impressing!

So the CTR pulls a 100-200km/h acceleration in 14.8 seconds. The M2 makes the same in 11.5 seconds. OK, this is quite a large difference. Comparing also to other cars with almost the same power to weight ratio the CTR seems slow.

M3 E46 (4.5kg/hp) = 12.0sec
GTI CS S (4.4kg/hp) = 13.0sec
Leon Cupra 300 (4.7kg/hp) =11.8sec
Cayman S 987.2 (4.3kg/hp) = 12.5sec

Source: fastestlaps.com

In my opinion the CTR should pull better times 100-200, so what is the issue here?
  • Does the CTR struggle with heat-soake and cannot make 320hp for a full pull to 200?
  • Is the CwA higher than its competitors?
  • Is it the lack of double-clutch gearbox that kills the acceleration times?

What do you guys think?
Sponsored

 

CTR1633FK2

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Threads
3
Messages
606
Reaction score
424
Location
Netherlands
Vehicle(s)
Civic Type R Fk2 + Civic Type R Fk8
Country flag
It's the tire. I am already struggling with greasy tires after 1 or 2 laps. And sometimes people forget turning of VSA on the track. It makes a big difference when accelerating out of corners.
On a straight line it should be OK.
Aero drag( CW) is one of the best, if you consider it's top speed related to it's max power.
Ask SportAuto to do the same test with Mich Pilot SuperSports on the FK8 and with VSA off.

BTW, the FK2 that SportAuto tested had problems with heat and power (only 270 HP), so the Fk8 maybe has the same issue?
 
OP
OP
iqbad

iqbad

Senior Member
First Name
Eric
Joined
Aug 5, 2017
Threads
12
Messages
75
Reaction score
27
Location
Sweden
Vehicle(s)
Honda Civic Type R 2018, Audi TT-RS 2010 400hp, Audi A6 3.0 TFSI 400hp
Country flag
I just don't see that the tires are causing this. The type-r pulled the highest corner speeds meaning it has good traction. That it would spin both wheels going out from these corners doesn't make any sense.

The M2 had 234km/h after the long straight, the Type-r only 218! That is a huge difference.

The M2 was not on cup2's, and in my experience super sports would maybe only give you half a second over the continentals on a track like this.
 

CTR1633FK2

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Threads
3
Messages
606
Reaction score
424
Location
Netherlands
Vehicle(s)
Civic Type R Fk2 + Civic Type R Fk8
Country flag
In mid corner, the weight and the suspension (geometry) tuning comes into play. But I can feel the FK2 has problems with accelerating out of the corner. With stock tires. The tires are struggling and a FWD is not good in this. There is just too much stress on the front outer tire in a corner exit.
Actually sideways grip is good, traction during acceleration is not so good.
The top speed is also determined by the acceleration out of the corner not only CW and power. So, in this case it makes sense that the M2 has a higher speed in the straight. It has and 50 HP more and the rear tires are very wide most likely. What is the size of the rear tire of the M2?

I think you have to compare them yourself to know more. :)
 
Last edited:


OP
OP
iqbad

iqbad

Senior Member
First Name
Eric
Joined
Aug 5, 2017
Threads
12
Messages
75
Reaction score
27
Location
Sweden
Vehicle(s)
Honda Civic Type R 2018, Audi TT-RS 2010 400hp, Audi A6 3.0 TFSI 400hp
Country flag
Thanks for your replies! :)

I still think the fk8 underperforms in terms of acceleration. In the 100-200 times, no turning is involved and the times are quite poor. I personally believe it is the lack of dual-clutch gearbox and lower than expected average (between the gears) power output from the engine.

The M2 had 265 rear tires. In the previous test where a fk8 was tested against the M2, both using cup2's, the M2 was still significantly faster.

However, I do agree that I would very much like to see a 370hp version of the fk8 compared against an M2 to see how it performs!
 

gtman

Senior Member
First Name
Mitch
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Threads
328
Messages
16,659
Reaction score
24,350
Location
USA
Website
www.civicx.com
Vehicle(s)
2017 Cosmic Blue EX-L Sedan
Vehicle Showcase
2
I don't think most people would ever use the word slow to describe the Type R.
 

cal

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2017
Threads
0
Messages
13
Reaction score
5
Location
CA
Vehicle(s)
CTR soon...
Country flag
But how would the FK8 perform on the track with the same amount of power (370HP) and with the exact same tire as the M2. That would be a fair comparison, don't you think?
Well, the M2 is also over 400 lbs heavier than the Type R, so a 370HP Type R should theoretically be faster than an M2 on the straights. I think to reinforce the OP's point, an M235i with 322 hp and ~3550 lbs (stock form) is still faster than the Type R in a straightline (drag, rolling, and top end). The M235i has >400 lbs more than the Type R, but *only* 15-20 hp crank rated. Another comparison that is even more relevant would be a DSG Golf R, which accelerates nearly identical to the Type R (rolling, not drag where the GolfR is quicker). The GolfR is a couple hundred more lbs than the Type R, has AWD, yet has the same hp rating as the Type R. I would expect the Type R, which is FWD, couple hundred pounds lighter, and around the same rated HP, to be faster than the Golf R. However, it is not. (In this case, I would attribute to the GolfR's DSG to make up for its weight and AWD disadvantages.)

Type R vs Golf R:


The above video is an FK2, but an FK8 should be about the same straightline speed-wise:


Having said all that, the Type R is not all about straightline speed and that is why I'm buying one and not a Golf R (or even the M240i which after the TypeR ADM and M240i discounts, can be purchased for almost the same price, or for just a couple thousand more for the M240i).
 


shihabp79

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2017
Threads
8
Messages
885
Reaction score
486
Location
Dallas
Vehicle(s)
'17 Civic Type R #2740
Country flag
Honestly, who cares about bench racing. Is it fun on a track? Can you really push it and go fast if you're a competent driver? Does it make it easy to become a good driver? The answer to those questions is all yes. Stop comparing it to a BMW that's $20,000 more expensive than the CTR and with more tire to ground, to boot.
 

NoelPR

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Threads
5
Messages
593
Reaction score
543
Location
Florida
Vehicle(s)
21' Ridgeline RTL-E (Thanks to the CTR markups)
Country flag
You are forgetting two things. The way that BMW underrate (power) their cars is far more aggressive than Honda does on their new turbo-4s and the difference on gearing between both cars.

The TypeR isn't slow compared to its competitors.
Have you looked at their 100km to 200km numbers?
The problem is that people think that is a super car because has a TypeR badge on it.
 

typemismatch

Senior Member
First Name
Russell
Joined
Jun 15, 2017
Threads
8
Messages
974
Reaction score
945
Location
Fargo, ND
Vehicle(s)
A whole farm of Hondas
Country flag
Aero creates downforce, creates grip
Downforce slows the car down
Downforce and grip = faster corner speeds, slower straight line speeds

There it is.

CTR - $35k MSRP FWD hot hatch
M2 - $54k MSRP RWD sports car

CTR 2.0L single scroll turbo with DI, dual VTC and VTEC 306/295 bhp
M2 3.0L twin scroll turbo with DI, dual VANOS (VTC) 365/343 bhp

At every rpm the 3.0L of the M2 is moving 50% more CFM of air than the 2.0L, that's just physics. So at every RPM, it should make 50% more power, but it doesn't. By rights, the BMW should be in the 400-450 hp/tq range given the basic air flow difference.

The twin scroll turbo in the BMW should bring in power faster which is a factor in acceleration. So it appears that that is doing its job.

When a car accelerates, the weight shifts to the rear, lifting up on the nose, and the front wheels. By nature a FWD decreases traction on the drive wheels the harder it accelerates, while a RWD increases traction.

A FWD should loose an acceleration test to a RWD all other things being equal.

Every

Single

Time


If you also stick better tires on the RWD car, you're just rigging the game.

Regardless of all this, here are their times around the ring, as advertised by the manufacturers:
CTR - 7:43 <- from all of Honda's advertising and YouTube video
M2 - 7:58 https://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/m/m2.html <- from BMW's website

How is the CTR slower?

Oh, some magazine put some driver that can't drive it in the drivers seat and posted their times.

I could put my girlfriend in an M2, and post her times, then it would be slower.

If you start with the thesis that the CTR is slower, you can set out to prove it any number of ways
- Stock tires vs upgraded tires
- Average driver vs race driver
- Run the car hot
- Short shift or mis-shift
- Regular gas instead of premium (the ECU will pull power due to knock)

Come on man, think it through, just because a car can do a thing, doesn't mean everyone can do that thing with it.

Also, look for BMW advertising on their site, can't have an unbiased opinion if you're accepting money from the competition.

Wait a minute ... the magazine is called "German Auto Sport"?

I wonder why the CTR is slower

Lastly:

Stop bench racing and drive.
Sponsored

 
Last edited:


 


Top