| 
		
		
	 
	
	
		
			
	
	
		
		
			
				
				
				
					fn2R 0-100km/h 6.7s
				
					
						
							click watch in high quality
 watch the video and speedo
  
 for those who still doubt to what honda claimed to be 6.6s
 
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8H5I5...eature=related
 
 launch at 1km/h at video time 0:07/ 0:25
 
 reach at 99km/h then 103 km/h at video time 0:13/ 0:25
 
 104 km/h at video time 0:14/0:25
 
 
 
   
				
				
				
					
						Last edited by bodaas; 20-09-2008 at 10:03 PM.
					
					
				 FN2 - FD2 - EGH2B(SOON)
 
	
	
		
		
			
				
				
						
						
				
					
						
							sorry mate - i still doubt it and i watched the video   
 People who have taken these to the strip - what have they achieved? Honda claims 14.8. That would be a more respectable test.
 
	
	
		
		
			
				
				
						
						
				
					
						
							no way the FN2R does it in 6.6  my euro does it in a bit under 8 seconds n theres no way the FN2R felt more than 1 second faster to 100.  I reckon its more like 7.0-7.5 seconds to 100
						 
	
	
		
		
			
				
				
						
						
				
					
						
							I can't read the damn numbers in that fuzzy vid.
						 
				
                                       
                                 
				
		        		--------------------------------------Stocky CL9 - 1:17.2
 
	
	
		
		
			
				
				
						
						
				
					
						
							
	You can't compare the Euro the the FN2R. The FN2R is lighter, has shorter ratios and could even have a lighter flywheel.
		
			
			
				
					  Originally Posted by damienm   no way the FN2R does it in 6.6  my euro does it in a bit under 8 seconds n theres no way the FN2R felt more than 1 second faster to 100.  I reckon its more like 7.0-7.5 seconds to 100 
				
                                       
                                 
				
		        		--------------------------------------Stocky CL9 - 1:17.2
 
	
	
		
		
			
				
				
						
						
				
					
						
							
	did you click high quality video?
		
			
			
				
					  Originally Posted by aaronng   I can't read the damn numbers in that fuzzy vid. 
 you cant see the number, if you watch normal quality,
 
 just look at the video time between 0:07 to 0:13 to 0:14, or use pause
 and check the speedo, the video dont tell lies
 
 i m bit sceptical too
 but there are more article was saying that they had tested and prove it
 
 so its up to the driver
 
				
				
				
					
						Last edited by bodaas; 21-09-2008 at 07:32 AM.
					
					
				 FN2 - FD2 - EGH2B(SOON)
 
	
	
		
		
			
				
				
						
						
				
					
						
							hmm .. but then again its all depend on so many factors to reach its 6.6 sec claim.. such as uphill or downhill road, road conditions, weather temperatures, number of passanger on the car, tyre conditions, driver ability .. bla bla etc etc
 honestly.. sometime i feel my car is fast at a time and launch unexpectedly quick especially in cold weather and night but then again sometime is a bit sluggish during a hot summer day ..hell its almost the same as my previous ride which is a wrx ( sometime is violently quick sometime so sluggish) o well ..
 
	
	
		
		
			
				
				
						
						
				
					
						
							
	Found it, thanks. The high quality thing appears only after the whole video is loaded on my retarded browser. It looks like 0:07 to 0:14. And even with that, the speedo could still be under reading and is also refreshed very slowly. I'd believe 7.0 to 7.x 0-100km/h time. If it was a 0-60mph time, then yes, it could be high 6.x.
		
			
			
				
					  Originally Posted by bodaas   did you click high quality video?
 you cant see the number, if you watch normal quality,
 
 just look at the video time between 0:07 to 0:13 to 0:14, or use pause
 and check the speedo, the video dont tell lies
 
 i m bit sceptical too
 but there are more article was saying that they had tested and prove it
 
 so its up to the driver
 
				
                                       
                                 
				
		        		--------------------------------------Stocky CL9 - 1:17.2
 
	
	
		
		
			
				
				
						
						
				
					
						
							
	ive had the chance to drive the FN2R as my mate owns one and we often swap our cars so im familiar with how they both feel and just watching the speedo climb to 100, the FN2R doesnt feel significantly faster than the euro.
		
			
			
				
					  Originally Posted by aaronng   You can't compare the Euro the the FN2R. The FN2R is lighter, has shorter ratios and could even have a lighter flywheel. 
	
	
		
		
			
				
				
						
						
				
					
						
							
	Use a stopwatch next time. It is difficult to compare using feel when one car has a responsive needle speedometer and the other has a laggy digital speedo.
		
			
			
				
					  Originally Posted by damienm   ive had the chance to drive the FN2R as my mate owns one and we often swap our cars so im familiar with how they both feel and just watching the speedo climb to 100, the FN2R doesnt feel significantly faster than the euro. 
				
                                       
                                 
				
		        		--------------------------------------Stocky CL9 - 1:17.2
 
	
	
		
		
			
				
				
						
						
				
					
						
							
	haha yeh ive timed it but i just didnt want to give the impression that i was street racing. The FN2R shouldnt be considered a type R its just too heavy for a Type R it made a consistant 7- 7.5  0-100. Ive run the euro against the type r n the euro was only left behind by half a car length. I know that its also the driver but yeh theres no way its 6.6 seconds for the civic
		
			
			
				
					  Originally Posted by aaronng   Use a stopwatch next time. It is difficult to compare using feel when one car has a responsive needle speedometer and the other has a laggy digital speedo. 
	
	
		
		
			
				
				
						
						
							
						
				
					
						
							i just check this one out, very interesting article
 type R vs clio sport
 
 http://www.teamhondaturkey.com/forum...t-t8704.0.html
 
 honda claimed 6.6, they got 6.76s and 0-400 14.94
 
 renault claimed clio to be 6.9, they got 7.41 and 0-400 15.28
 
 not bad for heavy type r, weight reduction would get even better
 
 there are some more about type R vs other, i just forgot the link, they got the same  result just close to 6.7 6.8 6.9, well yeah, round up to 7 s ,
 what honda claimed is right, i guess, it depends on the driver
 
 
	
	
 
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			
				 Posting Permissions
				
	
		You may not post new threadsYou may not post repliesYou may not post attachmentsYou may not edit your posts  Forum Rules | 
Bookmarks