[chetanhanda]

Originally Posted by 1100D

Please read the above post very carefully. You would know where I am coming from.

Essentially to take away any misconceptions that its only a Honda Civic Type R thats delivering on these counts. Turbocharged, supercharged, AWD immaterial. If they are not doing it, thats their prerogative. Moreover it has always been that, Honda wanted to show that they have a minimalist approach with high efficiency but beyond a certain limit it doesn't work.

Now comparing a Type R or even an Si or even SiR with a WRX, or Evo seems very crappy at this end too. But I have seen some Ricer Boys and Tuners bragging on their H badges and thats even how these cars are marketed. Logically comparing these cars, in my REAL opinion is just baseless. But I still did it for keeping a record to show at a later stage when such comparisons WILL be brought. I know the discussions usually get there.

Now this thread makes no mistake about saying that Honda wants to introduce a Civic Type R in diesel.

The real history about Type R and the advent of the VTEC was to give essentially race prepped engines some on-traffic driveability. Which always meant real world driving was essentially compromised at all times, thats where the turbo-charged pack comes in providing almost everything. So I am not saying that the Type R is bad in itself, its just that the concept does not work very good in real world driving.

I asked for a list of cars which are equally performing with same specs, if u bring in turbo charged intercooled 4 wheel drive rally monsters or turbocharged street cars then its not a fair comparision.
The low end torque is by design of the engine and real nature of the engine is seen after vtec with the more aggressive cam profile.

Since u are aware that vtec is a feature used for giving the honda enigne's a decent dual nature i.e driveability and some top end power ..I have nothing more to argue, we are on the same page

[chetanhanda]

Originally Posted by iraghava

I guess for some reason Honda does not believe in turbocharging their road engines to extract maximum performance. They believe in high-revving NA engines (ala BMW's M divison) to achieve their power objectives of course at the cost of low-end torque. But with their range of Type-R engines (barring the S2000's unit of course) they've shown that even with manic redlines & good top-end performance, their engines can still have good enough low-end so that they don't become cumbersome or frustating to drive in heavy traffic conditions.

Plus, apart from the Legend & CR-V they also do not seem to be keen on AWD. I guess the basic difference lies in the approach wherein Honda does not want to be associated with Rallying and wants to be associated more with Racing where NA engines are the norm rather than the blown mills of WRC and AWD/4WD is not used.

A lightweight, FWD car with a high-revving, NA, small-capacity engine and a good handling balance seems to be Honda's high-performance aka Type-R mantra.

exactly

Originally Posted by hellspawn

well they cant be compared for the simple reason as the basic fundamentals of the civic and evo/sti are completely different.while one is fwd,the others are awd.the civics are naturally aspirated while the others are turbocharged.the type-r's are all about overall balance(engine/chassis/suspension),fwd's dont get better than the type-r's.
and the power output of the civic and the evos are different.compare the evo/sti to a nsx type-r...then you are talking..

NA and turbo ..totally diff

[1100D]

Originally Posted by chetanhanda

I asked for a list of cars which are equally performing with same specs, if u bring in turbo charged intercooled 4 wheel drive rally monsters or turbocharged street cars then its not a fair comparision.
The low end torque is by design of the engine and real nature of the engine is seen after vtec with the more aggressive cam profile.

Since u are aware that vtec is a feature used for giving the honda enigne's a decent dual nature i.e driveability and some top end power ..I have nothing more to argue, we are on the same page

Yes, right my point is questioning the logic of having this specs in the first place.

There was one magazine which actually put the Swift thru the paces with the Civic Type R. Why? Similar concepts. NA with Variable Valve Timing.

I have not got the opportunity to drive the recent Civic Type R, but had the good fortune of driving the old one in UK and as much as I loved revving in every gear, taking it to our drive location (which was an abandoned track sort of) was a pain in a sense that, it was never in the right rpm under normal cruising conditions to make a move over others in traffic. But nothing an enthusiastic driver cannot get rid off. But then, the "overtakee" hear the engine note and say, "oh yeah he is taking me on second gear"!!
The whole point is lost.
"I want to beat him with a Toothbroosh and at the same time not appear to be working hard for it". This is exactly where a Type R "diesel" comes in.

[hellspawn]

on the contrary its the evos and the stis which are more difficult to drive inn real world situations due to massive turbo lag.the type r's were conceived to be realy good track cars where people can improve their driving skills rather than have snazzy electronics to dish them out of trouble(like in evos and sti's).the racing pedigree in type r comes from the fact that you have to have the basics of driving right(like a race driver) to make progress with the type r.in the case of civic type r,its fwd so in corners you have to be careful to not load the tires too much and dont brake/accelerate while turning or u get understeer the case of sti/evo,the electronics,ayc etc take care of everything andall you have to do is pile on the throttle.

P.S:i think we have deviated from the topic of a diesel type-r.

[1100D]

Originally Posted by hellspawn

P.S:i think we have deviated from the topic of a diesel type-r.

No No we are actually debating on a need for a diesel Type R. Discussing the petrol one's shortcomings.

[chetanhanda]

Originally Posted by 1100D

Yes, right my point is questioning the logic of having this specs in the first place.

There was one magazine which actually put the Swift thru the paces with the Civic Type R. Why? Similar concepts. NA with Variable Valve Timing.

mags even race evo vs lambo's, type R vs vipers..

Originally Posted by 1100D

I have not got the opportunity to drive the recent Civic Type R, but had the good fortune of driving the old one in UK and as much as I loved revving in every gear, taking it to our drive location (which was an abandoned track sort of) was a pain in a sense that, it was never in the right rpm under normal cruising conditions to make a move over others in traffic. But nothing an enthusiastic driver cannot get rid off. But then, the "overtakee" hear the engine note and say, "oh yeah he is taking me on second gear"!!

haha ..I can understand dude.. but u need to be damn aggressive with these honda's ,need to give them stick

Originally Posted by 1100D

The whole point is lost.
"I want to beat him with a Toothbroosh and at the same time not appear to be working hard for it". This is exactly where a Type R "diesel" comes in.

.. cant deny these things are damn freakin noisy ... the toothbrush point is a good example, I tried out a JDM Integra type r, all the USDM si from 96 onwards,USDM 2006 honda s2000, yes they sound as if they are in 2nd. I have a d16 coupe for daily use and its pretty noisy when u get it to 7000 rpm but thats just how their engine is designed.. to have dual nature. Combine this with a FF exhaust and u have a loud toothebrush.

But its a matter of personal choice.. I like high revving engines some guys dont.. lets see what this diesel type R turns out to be.

[v1p3r]

Originally Posted by iraghava

Plus, apart from the Legend & CR-V they also do not seem to be keen on AWD.

A small correction here. Most, if not all the Civic generations sold in the 90s had an AWD option nestled somewhere in the line-up.

Originally Posted by hellspawn

...have snazzy electronics to dish them out of trouble(like in evos and sti's)....
... the case of sti/evo,the electronics,ayc etc take care of everything andall you have to do is pile on the throttle.

I was just wondering, have you ever driven one of these F4s, maybe on track, or to its limits?

[iraghava]

Originally Posted by v1p3r

A small correction here. Most, if not all the Civic generations sold in the 90s had an AWD option nestled somewhere in the line-up.

Mostly for the American markets I suppose?

[androdev]

does honda design and manufacture its own diesel engines? or is it going to license it from Bosch as suggested by the pics in the link below:

Honda Accord diesel - TDIClub Forums

so there wont be any vtec like differentiator?

[hellspawn]

Originally Posted by v1p3r

I was just wondering, have you ever driven one of these F4s, maybe on track, or to its limits?

No i havent and i know for sure that it doesn't dilute my opinion in any way.if you would care to research you would know what i'm talking about.
cheers.

[v1p3r]

Trust me, they're not that simple.