Why is the Type-R so slow?

[typemismatch]

Actually with stability off the rear end likes to slide on this car. Not hard to get it to slide at all, and it’s very compliant.

Agreed, I've noticed that on cloverleaf on ramps. I have a lot of fun letting the ass just hang out at the limit when I get a clear on ramp.

Smiles for days

Sponsored

 

[CWCTR2018]

Must have missed it as it was not posted on Top Gear website's power lap board.
However, everyone has their own opinion and I would go for a European car for performance and handling any day. I would go with an e46 M3 and save thousands over the price of a CTR. With that cash I can buy a winter beater and a few trips to iconic tracks like Spa, Nurburgring, Silverstone and Laguna Seca.

Maintenance is not as bad as everyone claims on German cars, the CTR will also end up being expensive long term as it has many bespoke parts

a m3 costs 55k
a type r costs 34k

good luck taking your car to the bmw dealer after the 3rd year of ownership,

 

[iqbad]

a m3 costs 55k
a type r costs 34k

I think you missed the word “E46” which means the m3 is between 2001-2006. Great car by the way, I had one for three years and did over 1000laps on different tracks.

Has anyone made an gps logs of 100-200km/h with a stage 1 tuned fk8 yet? What are the results?

 

[CWCTR2018]

I think you missed the word “E46” which means the m3 is between 2001-2006. Great car by the way, I had one for three years and did over 1000laps on different tracks.

Has anyone made an gps logs of 100-200km/h with a stage 1 tuned fk8 yet? What are the results?

good luck finding a good condition m3 E46 . I heard it is a nightmare to fix a fuel injector since you have to program them

 

[23Red]

Maintenance is not as bad as everyone claims on German cars, the CTR will also end up being expensive long term as it has many bespoke parts

And an M3 doesn't

I love when people resort to speculation to try to make a point.

 

[toddrhodes]

I cross-shopped E46s and Z4Ms, basically looking at examples available and pricing, prior to settling on the CTR. In fact it was those cars that drove me to the CTR. Unless you're coming with CTR ADM money, you're not getting either car in a decent configuration with reasonable miles and condition. And though the value is sky high today, eventually it'll settle back down to earth because the market around those cars is very emotional right now. "The last of their kind" and stuff. And at the end of the day, you pay at or nearly new CTR money for 10+ year-old German sports cars. Have fun.

 

[Muggsy]

I owned an E46 M3. Great car but owning a BMW out of warranty is like playing Russian roulette. Also, the odds of finding a used M3 that is 10+ years old and hasn't been abused are exceedingly slim. Speaking from personal experience here, my first M3 was an E36 that I bought used when it was only two years old. Checked out cosmetically and mechanically but turns out the first owner drove the hell out of it, and I ended up with a leaky head gasket and all sorts of expenses. At that point it was cheaper to buy a new one, so I got the E46, but that was 15 years ago. A new M3 is twice the price of a new CTR, and the CTR is just as much fun.

And as for bespoke parts, when I had a significant accident in my E36, it was in the shop for 5 weeks because they had to order all the parts from Germany. Having owned two prior Hondas and two BMWs, when it comes to cost of ownership post-warranty, there is NO comparison.

 

[e85sbm]

Instead of using the common and well known M3, I should have stated that a Lotus Elise would be a good option. It does have a Toyota engine in it and Toyota's are stupid cheap for maintenance. I could have also pushed for a Cayman or Boxster as a comparison.

Making a price argument is also not the point of this conversation. The initial inquiry was regarding what 300hp car would be faster around the track than the CTR. That is a pretty general question, plus there would be differences in performance for one track over another. Again....the initial question was vague, therefore we are discussing generalities and not fact.

So if everyone wants to continue this conversation, then there should be a few givens:

1. what track are we using for comparison
2. what age of vehicle
3. what price range
4. what is the layout of the vehicle drivetrain (FF, MR, FR)
5. anything I missed??

 

[rnh204]

Here's food for thought since people are comparing to an E46 M3. I tracked a friends M3 around Watkins Glen for 2 days. Best lap time was 2:12.xx on a 85 degree day, his car has full aero (splitter and big ass wing), suspension, gutted interior, and SMG. In my CTR, mostly stock turned a 2:14.2, definitely could have gotten down to a 2:13 had the weather stayed cooler and drier longer.

Tires were relatively the same, NT01 vs. RE71. In terms of driving dynamics, the M3 is the more exhilarating car, NA vs Turbo motor. But times were relatively the same.

 

[iqbad]

Lifting this thread again, has anyone made any gps-logs of 100-200km/h with stock or tuned fk8s that you can share?

 

[Pittwm]

I bought the CTR and the M2 was also my choice... Both are amazing doing their own thing but you just can't comparing the two cars saying the CTR should be on the same level as the M2, it is not (as much as I love my CTR).

 

[Florence_NC]

can someone tell me how tall are the gears on the CTR? The big complaint with the regular mt civic is the short gearing. 2400 rpm at 60 mph. So if you're going 60 in your CTR, what rpm's are you at?

EDIT: I originally responded to this from memory, but after thinking about, I realized what I said was wrong. So here is an updated response:


Response to an old question here, just found this thread.

The CTR at 60mph is at 2400RPM in 6th. At 75 it is a tick under 3000RPM. It seems to be geared for maximum top speed in top gear. Since this is specialty transmission, there is no reason to have the exact same gearing as the regular Civic other than by coincidence.

I am sure if it had some taller gearing the highway MPG would be a good bit better than it is. There is a pretty significant difference in mileage between cruising at 68mph and 78mph. I can get 35-36mpg if I stay between 65-70, but it drops off 3-4mpg if I get up into the 75-80 range. Keep it under 3k and it is really good on fuel. Cross that threshold and starts to drop quickly. It certainly has enough torque in the cruise range to handle taller gearing. Give it 10% more overdrive and I bet a featherfoot could get 40mpg out of it.

 

[Florence_NC]

Lifting this thread again, has anyone made any gps-logs of 100-200km/h with stock or tuned fk8s that you can share?

What GPS device is recommended for this?

 

[iqbad]

What GPS device is recommended for this?

You need something with a high refresh rate, typically 5-10hz. Normal smartphones normally only sample with 1hz which is not quick enough to get a good reading. Stand alone xgps 10hz receiver + smart phone could work. Racelogic vbox is another common device.

 

[Godofelru]

A reasonable 60' for a FWD car is in the 1.8 region, which is .4-.6 seconds faster, making the CTR a mid 12 second car, if it was set up to launch better. Fast 60's for a FWD are in the 1.5-1.6 range.

I know your post is old, but when you say 1.8s 60' is reasonable you're referring to a car on full racing slicks yes?

Just wanted to make sure it was clear. You definitely won't see sub 2.0 on street tires, unless the car is set up specifically for drag and on REALLY aggressive street tires.

My old 2007 turbo spec v, 330whp/300wtq on 245mm dunlop sport maxx rt's (summer street tire) had traction in 1st gear with minimal to no issue. The car had a chromoly steel rear mount which aided traction by a staggering margin. This car went 13.1 @ 108mph w/ 2.0 60'.

The type R stock tires are not drag tires by any standard. They are awful for straight acceleration. You need something with a little more sidewall and a stiffer rear mount.

Sponsored