Autospeed say Civic Type R is weak

[yfin]

Controversial? Check
An unfair blog? Check
Still worth a read? yep.

Everyone knows the engine lacks torque - but to say it is weak car is ridiculous. Not all that many years ago Australian V8s (early 90s) were running low 15s over the quarter too.

http://blog.autospeed.com/2007/09/24...-type-r-civic/

Preview....

[aaronng]

I'd take everything from Autospeed with a pinch of salt. Check out their Epica review, it was very biased: http://www.autospeed.com/cms/A_109042/article.html

Here are some quotes and my interpretations:
- Powered in the tested model by a Porsche-designed 2.5 litre straight six cylinder engine, the $27,990 car uses the almost unique configuration of placing the engine transversely across the nose, something that with six cylinder engines normally requires a V design.
Porsche doesn't use straight sixes, so why did they design one? Could have been a design that they didn't want to/couldn't use and so sold it off for cheap.

-Not overly endowed with power – there’s 115kW available at 5800 rpm – and with low-down torque that is clearly not in the league of the local sixes, the 1500kg Epica still manages to acquit itself quite well in the normal cut-and-thrust of urban traffic. In this it’s helped by the complete lack of (dry road) wheelspin and the well-matched auto transmission torque converter.
It is underpowered for the weight but its pace is suitable for urban traffic jams. Oh, and it has low torque for a six cylidner engine.

-Away from idle, the straight six is silky smooth (at idle there’s a slight lumpiness) and noticeably ‘comes on cam’ (or is it the switching of the variable length intake manifold?) at around 3500-4000 rpm. Because of its relatively small size, hard acceleration requires lots of revs and the engine then becomes clearly audible. There’s also a slight jerk when getting back on the throttle, something particularly noticeable with the cruise control engaged.
The idle is poor for an inline-6 that is meant to be the ideally balanced configuration. It is flat below 3500rpm (which is bad for a 6-cylinder). It needs a lot of throttle and revs to move like a small capacity engine and it is noisy as well. The electronic throttle is jerky.

-But for our money the biggest driveline deficiency is not the engine but the 5-speed auto trans. No easy-to-use manual shift mode is provided – a pity, when at times the power and torque characteristics of the engine would lend themselves well to manual control.
The engine is underpowered that it needs a tiptronic to stay in lower gears.

-The ride is excellent, feeling ‘large car’ and being upset only by continuous short-spaced bumps on country roads – there, the ride can become a little jiggly. In other conditions, including dirt roads, the suspension feels long-travel and well-damped.
The car handles like a boat and is rough on country roads. The car has good suspension for going rallying.

-The Epica is a full-size family car, capable of swallowing four adults.
The Epica is meant to a big car but is too tight in the rear for 3 adults.

-Rear space looks at first a bit tight for leg-room but that’s primarily because the rear seat tracks extend back a long way – position them so that front occupants are still comfortable and the back seat has sufficient leg-room for normal sized adults.
The rear has van-type seats that can move back because of poor legroom when you move the front seats back.

-A large, flat-lidded compartment is provided in the middle of the dashboard – presumably, an LCD display is placed there in other models.
Aussies get jipped. We lose out on a feature that the Koreans get in their Daewoo.

[VT3C]

man the Epica is sooooo bad !! when they started the advertising campaign I was worried it'd effect EURO sales but we had Honda Australia Comparison training the other day and we got to drive the Epica.. man it's cheap but u get what u pay for.. a V6 ? wow the Euro is only a 4cyl.. but the Epica is ~105KW and 2L.. Euro 140Kw and 2.4L.. but that's just the epica's motor.. but sorry that's of topic

the only way to see what the FN2 is like is to take one for a drive.. forget reading these kind of articles - make up your own mind.

[matt]

An unfair blog? Check

agreed

With a 2 litre naturally aspirated engine that revs to 8000 rpm and develops 148kW, it might look the goods on paper - but the reality is very different.

To go further, I think the idea that small, naturally aspirated engines can compete with turbo cars is the stuff of fairytales.

this section here pretty much finished the article for me, i know most reviewers base their articles on the specsa of the cars (im in the AV industry so i see this far too often). but since when was there somethign wrong with being different. sure the honda isnt going to be the fastest but it will deliver the most unique driving experience from the rest of the turbo mob.
and IMO theres somethign to be said for that.

[fasthonda]

.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ........................................
the only way to see what the FN2 is like is to take one for a drive.. forget reading these kind of articles - make up your own mind.

Exactly,that's what I did twice!and I bought the car(delivery in a couple of weeks).Test driving dispelled a number of "bad" review opinions by so called experts-like this backyard mechanic in Autospeed.His writing style reminds of what a hoon driver would write.
I wonder why he chose the Madza Mps 3 probably to make the CTR look as "bad" as possible-the Madza is a very good car but even their NA 2.3 ltr has only 10 NM more than the CTR's 2.0 litre.

[T-onedc2]

......Madza is a very good car but even their NA 2.3 ltr has only 10 NM more than the CTR's 2.0 litre.

and over 30 less kw than CTR, it's laughable

[DreadAngel]

You just need to read the article to know that he doesn't "get" NA power. He doesn't even compare it to a NA car with bigger displacement which he claims to offset the lack of torque but instead goes straight to a FI car ie Mazda 3 MPS lol.

With a 2 litre naturally aspirated engine that revs to 8000 rpm and develops 148kW, it might look the goods on paper - but the reality is very different.

That quote there tells you what to expect from the engine, its not going to have a mountain of torque, smooth behaviour low down then fun time up high. I don't need to be a "Motor Journalist" to know that a 2L NA won't have that much torque down low compared to a 2L Turbo let alone a 2.3L Turbo.

This guy needs a headcheck...

In these torque-less, high-revving naturally aspirated engines, you put your foot down and in relative terms, nothing happens. Revs wind up and up, and as they do, the acceleration finally starts to build. In turbo cars – like the Focus XR5 and the Mazda 3 MPS – you tromp it at anything over 2000 rpm and the cars immediately go hard. And then continue to go hard right ’til the redline.

But if you accelerate from (say) 1500 rpm, the response will initially be leisurely followed by a sudden increase in acceleration as the car comes up on boost.

The torque curve of a naturally aspirated engine is flatter: that is, there isn’t the rush of torque when a turbo comes on boost. Fans of small naturally aspirated engines will say that the flat torque curve allows better throttle control. That a certain movement of the throttle will give the same increase in torque at the wheels, irrespective of whether the revs are at 2000 or 4000 rpm. That when you’re cornering on slippery surfaces, feeding-in power and feeling the front-end just starting to walk, the last thing you want is a sudden rush of power.

See, he even KNOWS that its not going to compare torque wise to the Turbo cars yet he complains? Stupid imho. Type-R was never the straight line machine the other hot hatches can claim to be. When has Type-R EVER been about straight line? Its modest at best with straight line. Its more about the experience and feel of the car rather than outright stonk that I could get out of a Z06 C6.

And if you don’t believe me, take a look at this dyno graph (click on it to enlarge). It shows the power and torque outputs of the Type R Civic, as recorded on ChipTorque’s chassis dyno. Peak output of the Type R is a creditable 121kW at the wheels – and look at how flat that torque curve is! But hold on, what are the blue lines? They’re the outputs for a standard Mazda 3 MPS - that’s the one with the 2.3 litre, direct injected, turbo and intercooled engine.

What a genius! A car that has more displacement and is force induced will normally have a better torque curve and power curve than a car that is smaller in displacement and naturally aspirated. *claps hand for the idiot*

They should employ me, at least I know what the hell I'm driving instead of sitting in the driver seat and figure out... OH SHITZ!!! This Type-R isn't force induced and hey, IT DON'T BEHAVE LIKE A FORCE INDUCED CAR *claps like a seal*

[T-onedc2]

^^^hahaha I second that!!!^^^

[DreadAngel]

Julian Edgar, 44, has been writing about car modification and automotive technology for 17 years. He has owned cars with two, three, four, five, six and eight cylinders; single turbo, twin turbo, supercharged, diesel and hybrid electric drivelines. He lists his automotive interests as turbocharging, aerodynamics, suspension design and human powered vehicles.

Line, hook and sinker...

[6ary]

The reviewer is probably too used to driving his holden and ford V8s

[DreadAngel]

Nah, Honda Australia's Press Release and Marketing got him so good, made him believe that the Type-R beats the competitors senseless with its crazy power and awesome torque delivery. Come on man, who the heck takes advertisements as hardcore facts? So stupid...

If we all take press releases and marketing ads as facts, we'll all be so damn disappointed with our cars. At best we're all cynical of advertisements, they give you beautiful facts without telling you the rest. Its up to your judgement then, this guy for all his claims of knowledge and expertise failed to look pass the marketing exercise and got sucked in, left his commonsense at the door.

[T-onedc2]

yeah according to the tv ad the Falcon XR8 handles like it's on rails and beats the Z06 C5R Race car & 350Z!