2006+ Honda Civic Forum banner

1 - 20 of 84 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
119 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've just had a play with an evo 8 and I wasn't impressed at all. I was short shifting below about 60 mph and it wasn't pulling away above 60. Ive always thought evos were considerably faster than a type-R but obviously not.
I know there is a lower powered 260bhp evo but that is still 60 more than a R.
Has anyone else been able to compare their Rs to an evo?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
472 Posts
Test drove an Evo X but decided to keep my R as the Evo just has no fun factor.
Had a race against my mates mk1 focus rs as we, I thought he would smoke me but I had to short shift as I was faster than him
 

·
Living the dream!
Joined
·
8,539 Posts
To be fair I was looking at MK4 golf spec the other day for a friend and a golf VR6 2.8 (201BHP @ 600rpm) engine only has the power of an EP3 (both made around the same time) yet the EP3 is around 40% smaller engine size and lighter with the same power. What shocked me more was a Golf R32 with a 3.2 237BHP engine is only 6.6 seconds 0-60MPH which again is what an EP3 can do with a 60% smaller engine, what I realised when comparing cars as standard the CTR is a lot quicker in comparison to a lot bigger engined cars than you realise and even a MK5 Golf R32 with 247BHP is only 6.5 seconds 0-60MPH or 6.2 seconds with a dsg gearbox.

This is interesting for comparing stock oem times http://www.fastestlaps.com/cars/honda_civic_type-r_fn2.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
905 Posts
Power to weight, I'm convinced if a type r with 200bhp vs 250bhp there will be nothing in it if there Type r is over 200kg lighter.

Big power cars like evo's are useless on public roads, most the power ain't usable unless you break the law
 

·
Living the dream!
Joined
·
8,539 Posts
The other point to make is a Golf GTI with its turbo will feel quicker as you dont need to rev it to get the power but when all these types of car a driven in anger (so you are using the correct gears and revs to get maximum performance) the CTR is very very quick and a lot quicker than people credit it for with it only have 198BHP.

I dare say there are not many standard production cars on the road under 2.0l with NO TURBO that are as quick, if any but the Clio cup does spring to mind.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
577 Posts
Evo X is way to heavy. Every 100kg is considered as 25hp-30hp need to cover the difference so now you can calculate if Evo i over 200kg heavier. My friend with FN2 = 235hp is getting away with Subaru Impreza STI = 305hp easily.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,286 Posts
The other point to make is a Golf GTI with its turbo will feel quicker as you dont need to rev it to get the power but when all these types of car a driven in anger (so you are using the correct gears and revs to get maximum performance) the CTR is very very quick and a lot quicker than people credit it for with it only have 198BHP.

I dare say there are not many standard production cars on the road under 2.0l with NO TURBO that are as quick, if any but the Clio cup does spring to mind.
^This 100% (198bhp is an urban legend tho never seen a good FN2 make less than 208bhp stock on the rollers) still don't get why Honda didn't credit the car with 208-10bhp in the motoring press:(
 

·
Go Hard or Go Home!
Joined
·
2,063 Posts
^This 100% (198bhp is an urban legend tho never seen a good FN2 make less than 208bhp stock on the rollers) still don't get why Honda didn't credit the car with 208-10bhp in the motoring press:(
Coz if they advertised it as having say 208bhp and someone dyno'd one and it made 201 it'd be classed as false advertising and they'd probably get bummed. 200 would probably be the minimum but covered their arses by saying 198. No one's going to complain about having more power than they should ;)

A lightly modified fn2 will be quicker than a lot more cars than you'd think, heavily modify it and only the big horse power cars will out perform you. Driver dependant obviously :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,286 Posts
Coz if they advertised it as having say 208bhp and someone dyno'd one and it made 201 it'd be classed as false advertising and they'd probably get bummed. 200 would probably be the minimum but covered their arses by saying 198. No one's going to complain about having more power than they should ;)

A lightly modified fn2 will be quicker than a lot more cars than you'd think, heavily modify it and only the big horse power cars will out perform you. Driver dependant obviously :)
Yeah see what your saying but loads of cars don't make the advertised power. Take the FRS none of them were making the book 300+bhp didn't hurt fords sales none. Even with the revised software updates 300bhp seemed a little bit of bs on fords part.

Not to mention almost every dyno on the planet would give different power results. If Honda had just said 210bhp at least the piss taking Clarkson would have been unable to do the "just one" bit in the review TG did:(

I've seen (on here I think) an FN2 made 215bhp so it's safe to assume 210bhp could have been the advertised power (dyno dependant) I think there is more to it. Maybe insurance?
 

·
Go Hard or Go Home!
Joined
·
2,063 Posts
Possibly yeah, honda must have done it for a good reason :)
 

·
Aye Aye....
Joined
·
7,098 Posts
Honda, I believe, decided to say that engine power was the same as the EP3 because then there would be less focus on the engine and they could get away with making the CO2 road tax band it's in (if you look you'll see it's right up at the max for its band IIRC)...no-one would buy a car with the CTR's peformance and pay 4-500 quid a year to tax it!

I concur with whats been said above, it's all about power to weight and how the car distributes that power and forces it onto the Tarmac, the CTR does well in these areas hence why it can compete with bigger power cars, need to remember the K20 was designed in the 90's it's concept is around 20 years old yet it's still regarded as one of the best NA engines on the planet and even plunked into a heavier modern car (FN2) it still manages to outperform and entertain, the only issue with the FN2 on public roads if your having a wee blast is the midrange, the exhaust manifold/cat/exhaust are poorly designed for making gains and in effect choke the car in midrange, I found with the stock car that sometimes I would give up before the CTR had really got going because the other car would have gotten away already, but as Tim says modify it a bit, get that midrange sorted and few things will beat it ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
After a few months with my fn2 cw type r it is has the same performance as my previous ep3 type r.has alot better handling imo but in a straight line the ep3 struggled to keep up with a white edition astra vxr never mind a evo
 

·
Living the dream!
Joined
·
8,539 Posts
After a few months with my fn2 cw type r it is has the same performance as my previous ep3 type r.has alot better handling imo but in a straight line the ep3 struggled to keep up with a white edition astra vxr never mind a evo

FN2 146 bhp/tonne, Astra VXR 170 bhp/tonne so to be fair if you keep up with this in a straight line I would be shocked, then add to the fact most of these are chipped and when chipped they are one of the quickest affordable cars on the road in a straight line.

Shame its a Vauxhall with poor reliability and a chassis to match because with better engineering this could have been a classic hot hatch and if I remember right the man with pubes for hair described the handling as like a shopping trolley :worms:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I've just had a play with an evo 8 and I wasn't impressed at all. I was short shifting below about 60 mph and it wasn't pulling away above 60. Ive always thought evos were considerably faster than a type-R but obviously not.
I know there is a lower powered 260bhp evo but that is still 60 more than a R.
Has anyone else been able to compare their Rs to an evo?
Yep i'm lucky enough to own a Type R GT and a Evo 9 and i'm sorry but the Type R wouldn't have a chance, with a supercharger perhaps :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
472 Posts

·
Aye Aye....
Joined
·
7,098 Posts
FN2 146 bhp/tonne, Astra VXR 170 bhp/tonne so to be fair if you keep up with this in a straight line I would be shocked, then add to the fact most of these are chipped and when chipped they are one of the quickest affordable cars on the road in a straight line.

Shame its a Vauxhall with poor reliability and a chassis to match because with better engineering this could have been a classic hot hatch and if I remember right the man with pubes for hair described the handling as like a shopping trolley :worms:

Hot hatches - Top Gear - BBC - YouTube

You can't really compare modded cars tho, VXR against a stock FN2 would win in a straight line but you can't comment on modified cars as then where do you stop? For example, due to weight reduction and power output my car sits at IIRC around 208bhp per tonne, so I'd whip a VXR and can easily keep with a focus RS, but then if they are modified then....you see what I mean?

Got the footwell lights fitted btw! Lol :cool:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,301 Posts
If your Mild tuned type R can keep up with an Evo or a 300bhp scoob,
This can happen when as mentioned the Evo or scoob is broke, they owners cant drive or the petrol light was on and they didnt drop out of 5th gear.

They say if you have the standard Evo 260 and it dosent make 280 when its run in your unlucky.

I had a 360 (ish) bhp Evo 6, it would pass (most) type r that fast it would spin them around then when you came to corners the Evo really showed its colours.



My Type R passes the new focus RS but there isn't that much in it, dont kid yourselfs that a mild tuned R will keep with one in a straight line
 
1 - 20 of 84 Posts
Top