M3 laughs at type r

Sorry to bring this thread up, but my Evo2 suprised me last night.

A grey '05 reg Civic type R past me on the ring road near me. As I thought mine wasn't quite feeling as it did before I filled with Optimax, I thought the Civic would be a good "reference" for performance. I would say the Civic was lighter than the M3, and generally Civic's make slightly more than the factory figures too. Also I considered the aerodynamics of the Evo2 to be a disadvantage to the Civic too.

I am pleased to say the Evo2 passed with flying colours.  But in all respect to the Civic, it was pretty evenly matched to my Evo2 at lower speeds.

Thats all I have to say

I know of plenty S2000 cars that have had engine failures. Not sure if in or out of warranty though. Two have blown up big time on a certain track in Wales although that is track use but a failure is still a failure.

The S2000 is the only usable Honda I would want.

Edited by Darren M

This thread was interesting until I read this :) That is a lot of cars to be wiping from the track :). 

so what is the hp/l on a ep3? since numerous 100 hp/l figures have been floating around, 100hp/l is really not hard to beat. It is done all the time in fact. a proper S14 can make a streetable 125 hp/l in normally aspirated form,  FWIW.  but they are not simple cam swaps, but rather built from the ground up.

John

 

ZM Coupe wrote: Lads my bro' has a Type R EP3, we regularly go to the ring' where he wipes almost evrything bar the odd GT3 driven by a local, tricky car on the limit i.e 142mph through the compression.... Take a drive in a Type R, anyone who says they dont like it is just being a biased ******. Dave, ZM Coupe

Lads my bro' has a Type R EP3, we regularly go to the ring' where he wipes almost evrything bar the odd GT3 driven by a local, tricky car on the limit i.e 142mph through the compression.... Take a drive in a Type R, anyone who says they dont like it is just being a biased ******.

Dave, ZM Coupe

They should wang 2 of those together and dump the result in a new nsx with a big turbocharger on it. Should be good for 500hp.

It's not white. It's unmarked, and black.

They use it to bait the racers.... and then hope they can catch them!

I think the Accord engine has more torque for some reason. Hang on, doesn't the Accord use the civic's engine? 2.2? I didn't think they used that motor over here! (Maybe I'm just being forgetful)

I think some of the Accura (RSX?) R type models got a 2.2.

The rozzers use one in Coventry!

I'm sure it's one of only around 3 I've even seen (including working for Honda). Even with tinted glass, you know who is sat inside it! Dirty tricksters!

Well said Phil.

I work with a guy who is into Alfas and his opinion is so biased that he can't even admit that any car company, except Ferrari, makes better cars. He genuinely thinks that his 145 is better than a 911. He also makes constant digs about BMW drivers, ford owners, drivers of fast jap cars etc etc

I can't stand this 'let's laugh at owners of other makes because our cars are better' attitude that you get amongst some enthusiasts. Live and let live I say.

Italian M3 wrote: Phil-C wrote: When I was misguidedly thinking about selling my car [:Big Smile:] the cars I had on the list as possible replacements were (and still are should I ever sell) 964 C2, S2000 and NSX, the only negative about the NSX is it's very aggresively toe'd rear wheels which even with normal driving required new tyres every 5K miles. Very interesting!! Are you talking Toe or Camber? I find it hard to belive Honda would have sold a car that based its perfomance handleing on the fact you had to buy new tyres every 5K miles! Is this maybe something like bushes going, similar to our cars. I hope it is not true or can be easily rectified. Quite upset now!

I read it on a PH forum, just had a quick look and all I can find is 'Camber/castor settings...' but it can be reset to a less aggressive setting which apparently gets you a lot more mileage from them.
Only bad point from what I can see is red,red,red,red...

On another note, I have no idea why people knock Hondas, their engineering is fantastic. Incredible reliability from fantastic revvy engines. Look at the recalls on BMW engines with high outputs per litre (excluding S14) and as for no torque below quite high revs? E30 M3 anyone?

If you're going to start slating the drivers, just because most BMW owners on this board are pretty sensible about car appearance and general attitude it doesn't mean that they're not out there being total tools in BMW's with huge systems quibbling about bhp.

This is the sort of rubbish you read on American boards, V8s R bet-R thn Ryc-rrs.

Sorry, rant (almost) over but there are not that many other companies making something as extreme and lightweight as the Integra Type-R for the road without going to Porsche or Ferrari with their RS's and Stradales.

I thought that people on here were car enthusiasts not badge wearers.

Rant (definately) over.

Phil-C wrote: When I was misguidedly thinking about selling my car [:Big Smile:] the cars I had on the list as possible replacements were (and still are should I ever sell) 964 C2, S2000 and NSX, the only negative about the NSX is it's very aggresively toe'd rear wheels which even with normal driving required new tyres every 5K miles.

Very interesting!! Are you talking Toe or Camber? I find it hard to belive
Honda would have sold a car that based its perfomance handleing on the
fact you had to buy new tyres every 5K miles!
Is this maybe something like bushes going, similar to our cars.

I hope it is not true or can be easily rectified. Quite upset now!