182 v civic type-r

[DNP182]

There may have been a similar thread to this before...can't find it though. Was wondering which is quicker...the 182 or type-r. I have a feeling that there is probably is not much between them​

 

[Nez]

Type-R is defo quicker! But if your a good driver you'll beet him to 45-50mph, but as soon as you hit 3rd he'll be gone!

 

[DNP182]

i know that there wasn't much difference when tested on top gear and 5th gear...and that was round a track. thought that maybe on the road that both would be very similar in performance.

 

[Phill1978]

OMG not again !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Phill1978]

There may have been a similar thread to this before...can't find it though.​

FPMSL ^^ ahaha. a ctr isnt faster depending on what aspect of driving your talking about. 182 is better round corners. 182 is exaclty same speed to 120`ish a ctr has about 6mph better topspeed (who needs that though ?) youl have more fun in a clio and save your self 5-6k on price and still get 35+ mpg and have cruise, climate, xenons etc.. all as standard​

 

[rory182]

lol must search harder

 

[Toypop]

There absolutely is no difference worth talking about....and god has it been talked about.

Go out, drive a proper fast car, then drive a CTR and 182 you will agree that they are both sh*t end of story!

 

[tomehb]

this post comes up all the time i beat a ctr to *00 before! but then i did not want to go much faster cause i aitn stupid

 

[Phill1978]

There absolutely is no difference worth talking about....and god has it been talked about.

Go out, drive a proper fast car, then drive a CTR and 182 you will agree that they are both sh*t end of story!

i wouldnt say that. a lotus elise with 115bhp is much, much slower than my MKII172 or MKII172cup once travelling over 60 etc.. but i bet its way more fun and the cornering make for great cross country progress.

having said that, going out in RS-Tuning 270bhp megane was an eye opener for accelaration, the kind that mkaes your stomach sink like on a roller coaster (well we did go down hill also lol)

at the end of the day, the CTR is a nice engine and gearbox. the RSclio is a nice chassis and value only get a CTR if you simply MUST have what every other person drives

 

[DNP182]

thanks for the opinions...am only new to cliosport.net. a friend bought a typr-r only last week and was doing a bit of bragging and boasting...wasn't 100% if i would end up eating humble pie!!!

 

[Toypop]

i wouldnt say that. a lotus elise with 115bhp is much, much slower than my MKII172 or MKII172cup once travelling over 60 etc.. but i bet its way more fun and the cornering make for great cross country progress.

having said that, going out in RS-Tuning 270bhp megane was an eye opener for accelaration, the kind that mkaes your stomach sink like on a roller coaster (well we did go down hill also lol)

at the end of the day, the CTR is a nice engine and gearbox. the RSclio is a nice chassis and value

Yeah sorry what I mean't is that people talk about this non-stop and its all a load of boll*cks. On the 5th Gear test it was 0.2 of a second difference around an entire lap so what fricking difference is there going to be on a short strip of dual carriageway! NONE!

I have raced a CTR against my 182 and raced my 182 against a CTR.

Coming off a roundabout the 182 is about one coat of paint ahead to 60 and the CTR is one coat of paint ahead to 100. Now if you drive a car that is 20 or 30 lengths ahead of both of them come 100 you realise how stupid all these threads and arguments are!

 

[Ross M]

where that video gone of the 172 vrs the type r ?

that shows it .... very well.

 

[Phill1978]

toypop thats true but why would we bother racing comparing a ctr or 182 to a enzo ? we do all this stuff because we can realistically compare and contrast on everyday roads between everyday cars, im assuming the majority of people who own a performance clio dont have bags of wonga either or they would own a performance Evo or Bmw etc..

btw a 182 is deffo the same a 172ffMKII may be a tiny bit slower of course. and i have passed a ctr in my cup (no back seats + hillpower) there is 15hp extra but less torque in a CTR but there is more torque and 110kg less weight ( a very heavy 16st person) in a 182. logic dictates that until peak power is essencial i.e 120`is where wind resistance becomes very high and power is really needed that a Ctr will actually be slower hence evening out to be exaclity the same speed by 130`ish.

my cup for example is over 200kg`s two huge 16st guys weight diffo so you can see why i can pass a ctr if only slowly

 

[dc03ley 182]

rite 2 of my mate have ctrs n i have a 182. and both of them have said they mite sell there cars n buy a 182 as mine pulls from them till about 130... i am alot quicker than both of them... every time i have raced a ctr i have always beaten them.

a 182 is defo quicker than a ctr

 

[Phill1978]

^^ my cup and my bro`s 185bhp Diesel VRS fabia also had a run (at the same time lol) against a CTR caining it with a zorst on (sounded like a m.bike ) we both passed it.

 

[Toypop]

If you pass a CTR or get passed by a CTR its all down to the driver or because one of you has a full tank of gas and 4 passengers.

A 182 absolutely does not have the performance to drive past a CTR if both drivers are on the ball.

 

[tameracingdriver]

Whatever the case, I find it hard to believe some people really believe either could possibly be "a lot quicker" than the other.

There is a tiny difference.

Personally I'd say a CTR would probably edge, but we are talking about a seriously insignificant difference, not even one car length up to the ton IMO.

But theres so many variables - driver... and type of fuel used - for example I've heard that CTR's can run well even on 95 RON fuel whereas the Clio only makes it 180 bhp on 98 RON.

 

[TheCake]

I've owned a 172 Cup, driven a 182 at length AND now own a CTR. There is f**k all in it. All are roughtly 200bhp and have roughly the same weight.

Stop going over this pathetic arguement and trying to say oooh the Clio is quicker round corners, the Civic is quicker on the straights. Its all f**king b****cks.

The cars are identical. Whats different is the drivers.

 

[Ross M]

The cars are identical. Whats different is the drivers.

bang on ! IMO

 

[Mike_SE]

you couldnt find anything?! and you used the search engine?!

 

[portland]

OK, to save searching again, it goes like this: The 182 is better through the bends, especially cup/Trophy (quite a bit better here). Honda will take it on the straight at higher speeds.

In contrast, 182 is a lot cheaper, but Honda will depreciate and rattle less.

Deciding factor is: Honda looks like a bread van, especially in white, and if you're tall (with the seat set back) the gear lever is a little awkward.

 

[Toypop]

The depreciation thing is also a load of b*llocks too. Again there is nothing in it.

The figures people quote are based on list price.

What you need to look at is the value after 3 years compared to what people paid for the car. If you go on a full fat 182 costing £12500 compared to a CTR at 15500 to 17000 (trying to spec it up to 182 spec) you find that they lose the same amount.

Don't believe all this talk about sky high residuals on the CTR. The CTR forums are full of people struggling to sell their cars and they are asking for far less than the bullsh*t figures some reckon they are worth.

 

[Nez]

Type-R is defo quicker! But if your a good driver you'll beat him to 45-50mph, but as soon as you hit 3rd he'll be gone!

I stand corrected! LOL

But I did get pissed on by a CTR, only me and 1\8 of a tank in the car.

Only had the car 2 weeks so must need more practice. Must try harder next time..

 

[Mike_SE]

ive had a 172 cup and now have a ctr. i wont bother putting my opinion on, because ppl will argue etc etc. both are good cars for performance and fun, and people generally buy what they prefer!

 

[Ross M]

ive 'had' both too. my opinion is the clio is better. impo though.

 

[Mike_SE]

thats whats important at the end of the day, after all

 

[Stevie]

I've never lost to a ctr infact always edged it. I reckon 182s are that tad faster which is noticeable. All this talk about "oh past 120mph or 100mph the ctr will leave a 182" is total f**king b****cks.

Try learning how to drive some of you.

 

[Ad]

The depreciation thing is also a load of b*llocks too. Again there is nothing in it.

The figures people quote are based on list price.

What you need to look at is the value after 3 years compared to what people paid for the car. If you go on a full fat 182 costing £12500 compared to a CTR at 15500 to 17000 (trying to spec it up to 182 spec) you find that they lose the same amount.

Don't believe all this talk about sky high residuals on the CTR. The CTR forums are full of people struggling to sell their cars and they are asking for far less than the bullsh*t figures some reckon they are worth.

sold three days on autotrader. Book price for sale. 3yrs retentenion of 62% on original puchase cost.

Pissed on your bonfire!!!

Theres nowt in a CTR and a 182. A CTR will always cost you more, because they have a better name. more people know what a CTR is than a clio 172/182. CTR does have a better rep for build, and the size and driving position is much better. Steering is worse, but the back end grip is significantly better. If i was offered a straight choice of same aged/spec cars, would a CTR, but fact is that they cost a couple of k more.

BTW for those who dont know, ive had both a 172/182 and a CTR.

 

[Ad]

OK, to save searching again, it goes like this: The 182 is better through the bends, especially cup/Trophy (quite a bit better here). Honda will take it on the straight at higher speeds.

In contrast, 182 is a lot cheaper, but Honda will depreciate and rattle less.

Deciding factor is: Honda looks like a bread van, especially in white, and if you're tall (with the seat set back) the gear lever is a little awkward.

white are JDM (Japenese spec ones) and these are 212bhp models with some other uprated bits.

Gear lever takes some adjusting to... but one thing I forgot to say on the other post it is the gearbox is amazing, simply put, one of the bets boxes i have ever driven.

The CTR takes a different mentality to drive, and going straight from 182 to a CTR for a short test drive, 99% of people will prefer their clio. Ben_p had mine for a couple of days and didnt really like it at first, but by the end was loving it and didnt want to get back in his clio.

 

[Rich-D]

I've owned both, the Civic is quicker, but not by a lot...

 

[182 sport]

I've owned both, the Civic is quicker, but not by a lot...

^^^
I agree.

 

[JonnyCTR]

rite 2 of my mate have ctrs n i have a 182. and both of them have said they mite sell there cars n buy a 182 as mine pulls from them till about 130... i am alot quicker than both of them... every time i have raced a ctr i have always beaten them.

a 182 is defo quicker than a ctr

Must you balk so much tollocks!!!!
Get your mates back to driving school!!!
Had both CTR and now have Trophy.. CTR is quicker... End of..!!!

 

[Mr Melon]

Pointless argument... both cars are evenly matched and have their good and bad points, i dont think any one is going to find the answer on a internet forum as to which car is faster.

 

[Mike_SE]

its pointless anyway. when people start talking about "never losing to a CTR" and how people should "learn to drive" you know the thread has gone down the swanny!

 

[sh33n]

My Cup feels a lot faster than a CTR, but it's the same in real terms of speed etc.

 

[Tyson-182]

Oh dear not again....

It comes down to the driver because both cars are identical in performance terms. End of.

Tyson.

 

[Ad]

I've owned a 172 Cup, driven a 182 at length AND now own a CTR. There is f**k all in it. All are roughtly 200bhp and have roughly the same weight.

Stop going over this pathetic arguement and trying to say oooh the Clio is quicker round corners, the Civic is quicker on the straights. Its all f**king b****cks.

The cars are identical. Whats different is the drivers.

Agree with darthcake.... another owner of both the 172/182 and the CTR.

We had a meet with the CTRs on sundays and lets say the CTR boys where a little shocked at the clio's ability.

The meggy was at the front in a league of its own.

 

[Clang]

F*CK ME!!! I post a thread with a little story about an encounter (not a race) with a fcuking Aston Martin FFS and get slammed by half the people that replied, saying that the thread was 'pointless'!!!

This forum might as well be called 'Same Sh!t Different Day Sport' it continues like this.

182 vs CTR... Jesus f***ing Christ!!!! Hasn't anyone got anything new to say!!! AAAAAAAGGGGHHHHH !!! (head explodes.....)

Welcome to the forum, by the way.

 

[Ali]

There's only so fast you can go round a corner. When you hit the golden 150+Bhp your not going to pull away through the "So called twisties" Or massively in a straight line.

Normal Cliosport shite.

 

[seb]

'ctr' search, took 30 seconds to find these.

i really have nothing to say about this thread...

but welcome!