cup vs type r

[miketheman2k]

I am from Far East. Civic Type R is designed for track usage basically. Same as Integra Type R (even better), it is probalby the best NA FF car in the world. But I don't think they import the Integra Type R to UK since 98, right?

But still, I love my Clio.

You obviously get a different CTR over there, because the one they sell here isn't a track car by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[_Tom]

They do get a different car over there. They get LSD's ect

 

[Lagerlout]

Aye, the JDM CTr is a different beast - slip diff, 220 bhp, recaros...

 

[miketheman2k]

Do they remove the sponge from the steering rack?

 

[Chris n nic]

do you mean the driver? (only kidding!)

Chris

 

[Chris n nic]

I had a go with my m8s ages ago (me and passenger, him on his own) and mine was defo quicker below 100mph and I got to 143 indicated and he wasn`t catching me (although his speedo must have been way out as he mentioned he`d never done 150+ b4 lol)

Chris

 

[Phill1978]

Type R - 197bhp - 1200kg - 6.4seconds
172 - 172bhp - 1035kg - 7.0seconds
182 Trophy - 182bhp - 1090kg - 6.9seconds


They're the official figures... the clio has the better power to weight ratio, but with the Civic's i-Vtech 2-litre, it's probably gonna win 1st gear.

As for other stuff... *shrug* ... load up gran turismo 4 and have a bash!



-Akira

ive guessed by reading your posts and your username your a big jap fan and not just cars you own a clio until you can afford the jap car you want.

A CTR weighs 1204kg 0-60 in 6.8 (REV.2 = 6.6)
A Clio 172MKII weighs 1110kg 0-60 7.1
A Clio 182 weighs 1090kg 0-60 in 6.9
A Clio 182 cup weighs 1075kg 0-60 in 6.7
A Clio 172 Cup weighs 1020kg ( +8kg unsprung advantage) 0-60 in 6.5

however, 182cup tested by autocar (without lighter recaros even) did 6.3 !
and considering power to weight a 172cup will also do a simular 0-60 with a few cheap mods brings most these cars down to low sixes and mid 16`s to 100 with some midly modded cups doing 1/4 miles in 14`s

i would have to say, if you take a 182 there equal in pace upto 130 without a great noticble difference, breaking and cornering are more important seen as there so equal, however i wouldnt think a CTR could keep pace with a modded 182cup/172cup due to thier light weight and relativley small bhp gains count for more

 

[JBarber]

Evo report the following independently tested 0-60 times (in "The Knowledge" section):

TypeR @ 6.8 sec
182 @ 6.6 sec
172 Cup @ 6.5 sec
172 @ 7.1 sec

Worth considering that
i) no two "identical" cars (same make) perform exactly the same
ii) human factor - variation in performance on tests
iii) 0.2 sec is very fast. Try starting and stopping an electronic stop watch, 0.2 sec is about as fast as you can do it (give or take)

For completeness, the 0-100 times

TypeR @ 16.9s
182 @ 17.5 sec
172 Cup @ 17.7 sec
172 @ 18.9 sec

 

[matty w]

If most of you lot would show your face at the dragstrip you would find out whats the quickest - dont talk about manufacturers figures - get off your ass and race one for real

i couldnt agree more j3ned i'm sick of hearing these figures just go and find out for yourself if your that bothered instead of using other peoples findings

 

[SOHROB]

chill out,its a car forum.People like to talk about cars !!!!

 

[matty w]

chill out,its a car forum.People like to talk about cars !!!!

i am chilled its just the same thread over & over

 

[Ant1]

Both great cars imao. But is has been talked about over and over and over again for the last few years.................................. Both cars are very similar, each to there own

 

[jonnyqango]

ive got a 172 and ive beat type r in it

 

[lee_cup]

i say it depends on athe driver, my mate has a type r and i beat him coz he is a crap driver and wont take it past 3k rpms (what a waste)
But personally i think they are pretty much even.
But i would prefer my 172cup anyday

 

[Mondial172]

Wondered how long before meggerman got the stats out. Do we have ourselves another Michy? ;-)


Of course its down to driver! My best mate is an outstanding driver! He's got a Caterham 7 but his daily runaround is a 1.6 Astra and I have trouble keeping up with him in that in my Cup. lol!

 

[Ali]

Great vid! The video car is fantasic, great lines...

 

[goodhand]

I drive a 172 and my dad has a Civic Type R. Having driven both I'd say that my Clio is probably better around country lanes as it's far more 'chuckable'.

The straight line debate is a little more complicated. I guess it all comes down to how you are prepared to drive your car. If you are willing to side step the clutch at, say, 3500-4000rpm, from a standing start, the Civic would just pip the Clio. Pulling away like this in a CTR would cause the second cam profile to kick in pretty much straight away (around 5500rpm) and then you've another 2700rpm to go before the limiter kicks in. Whereas the Clio is a lot more limited. Although, a less ferocious get away would see the Clio make initial ground gainst the Civic as it seems to have more power lower down the rev range.

At the end of the day though, they both cover ground at a similar rate but I find the Clio far more entertaining!

 

[Vtec Abuser]

The chase car is a Civic VTI from what I believe... Does well though... Wish I could say the same about the CTR's lines...LOL

 

[Martin]

type R is faster overall lets face it....172 cups or even a RS-1 might give it a run for it's money but all the other Mk2 clios are steaming turds in a straight line . IMHO

 

[TheJesus]

PMSL @ Martin!

TBH I have never seen a 172 Vs CTR on the road, but have had a do with both, but that's not really a fair test as I'm not standard. Anyway, it's the ITR you have to watch out for, much quicker than the Civic varient, dont care what anyone says, I have been up against ITR and CTR and there's a big difference lol.

 

[Munson]

...all the other Mk2 clios are steaming turds in a straight line . IMHO

LMFAO

 

[Vtec Abuser]

PMSL @ Martin!

TBH I have never seen a 172 Vs CTR on the road, but have had a do with both, but that's not really a fair test as I'm not standard. Anyway, it's the ITR you have to watch out for, much quicker than the Civic varient, dont care what anyone says, I have been up against ITR and CTR and there's a big difference lol.

And out survey says...... augghh augghh...
ITR (DC2) is slightly slower than a EP3 CTR. My house mate has one and before I got rid of my CTR, it was identical to it from 0-150. But it has full Spoon N1 exhaust, de-cat pipe and ITG Maxogen CAI. Standard it was slower..
DC5 is about the same to 110 as a CTR and is slightly quicker after from what I believe...

 

[philis]

Heeeheee ....

Wanna know whats faster??

http://media.putfile.com/Renault-Clio-Sport-vs-Honda-Civic

:race:

Ph1 172's are bestist

 

[Phill1978]

0-100`s you quoted are wrong BTW. ive done a proven 17.5 to 100 in a stock MKII 172 and so my 90kilo lighter + 8kg unsprung extra with turinis will be 17 flat if not the same as a ctr (prolly faster hehe)

also my bro had sailed past a CTR in his skoda Diesel also with 185hp ( 320lbft snigger) and i have stayed behind at an easy 125 without wantin to pass but knowing iam no slower.

knowone knocks the CTR but man come on how many are there kicking about with the worst possible drivers old women in them they have lost that street cred / kudos they had for a year!! there civics remember TopGear ? all grannies buy them or chavs. there sooo dull but perfectly durable and efficient

sigh thats exaclty what cliosporters hate about cars

 

[stu8v]

I drive a 172 and my dad has a Civic Type R. Having driven both I'd say that my Clio is probably better around country lanes as it's far more 'chuckable'.

The straight line debate is a little more complicated. I guess it all comes down to how you are prepared to drive your car. If you are willing to side step the clutch at, say, 3500-4000rpm, from a standing start, the Civic would just pip the Clio. Pulling away like this in a CTR would cause the second cam profile to kick in pretty much straight away (around 5500rpm) and then you've another 2700rpm to go before the limiter kicks in. Whereas the Clio is a lot more limited. Although, a less ferocious get away would see the Clio make initial ground gainst the Civic as it seems to have more power lower down the rev range.

At the end of the day though, they both cover ground at a similar rate but I find the Clio far more entertaining!

The Clio does well because it has fewer gearchanges for a start.

 

[JBarber]

0-100`s you quoted are wrong BTW. ..

They're from independent tests in Evo magazine. Maybe not the same as yours, but not wrong.

 

[Guy]

on a trackday a lad in a type r with, im guessing, at least an exhaust and induction kit (cos it sounded like a motorbike) told my mate he couldnt keep up with me on the straights in my standard 182.

but then again he did have an extra 9 stone or so from a girlfriend in the pass seat.

i'd say the type r would be quicker higher up, say 100+

 

[Dave H]

Just a few figures l found to spice up the debate...

Clio 172Cup (dirty,minus 1 tin of tyre foam) 12.67 seconds to the top of the hill
CTR (driver knackered,ashtray full) 12.69 seconds
Clio 172 (two birds in the back) 13.05 seconds
MK3 XR3i (big shop in the boot,RS alloys fitted) 13.34 seconds
Skyline GTR (engine removed but due in next week) 1100,5464,55 seconds

 

[Steve2004]

Skyline GTR (engine removed but due in next week) 1100,5464,55 seconds

Rapid!!!!

 

[Brazo]

Deja vu anyone?

 

[MATT BLACK]

yawn

 

[Vtec Abuser]

0-100`s you quoted are wrong BTW. ive done a proven 17.5 to 100 in a stock MKII 172 and so my 90kilo lighter + 8kg unsprung extra with turinis will be 17 flat if not the same as a ctr (prolly faster hehe)

also my bro had sailed past a CTR in his skoda Diesel also with 185hp ( 320lbft snigger) and i have stayed behind at an easy 125 without wantin to pass but knowing iam no slower.

knowone knocks the CTR but man come on how many are there kicking about with the worst possible drivers old women in them they have lost that street cred / kudos they had for a year!! there civics remember TopGear ? all grannies buy them or chavs. there sooo dull but perfectly durable and efficient

sigh thats exaclty what cliosporters hate about cars

LMFAO....
Skoda diesel sailing past... don't make me f***ing laugh... They are nippy, or even maybe 172 pace... But sailing past a CTR... Must you talk such shite man..???
What was the proven timing equipment used on your 0-100 test? A grotty casio calculator watch...
If it's done on a 1/4 mile strip then fair enough... ie my CTR was 14.5 @ 97mph, roughly working out to be 0-100 in just over 15 secs... STANDARD!!!

 

[lucky]

CTR's are the best thing since sliced 'bread'

 

[Fred@BTM]

Heeeheee ....

Wanna know whats faster??

http://media.putfile.com/Renault-Clio-Sport-vs-Honda-Civic

:race:

nuff said

 

[tameracingdriver]

LMFAO....
Skoda diesel sailing past... don't make me f***ing laugh... They are nippy, or even maybe 172 pace... But sailing past a CTR... Must you talk such sh*te man..???
What was the proven timing equipment used on your 0-100 test? A grotty casio calculator watch...
If it's done on a 1/4 mile strip then fair enough... ie my CTR was 14.5 @ 97mph, roughly working out to be 0-100 in just over 15 secs... STANDARD!!!

I guess it'll be a remapped Fabia vRS, and I wouldnt underestimate them. I used to have one, as standard, no they arent as quick, but remapped and they'll give most things a run for their money.

One thing they wont do however, is handle as well as the Clio.

They are nice cars though, I still miss mine sometimes.

 

[dk]

ive guessed by reading your posts and your username your a big jap fan and not just cars you own a clio until you can afford the jap car you want.

A CTR weighs 1204kg 0-60 in 6.8 (REV.2 = 6.6)
A Clio 172MKII weighs 1110kg 0-60 7.1
A Clio 182 weighs 1090kg 0-60 in 6.9
A Clio 182 cup weighs 1075kg 0-60 in 6.7
A Clio 172 Cup weighs 1020kg ( +8kg unsprung advantage) 0-60 in 6.5

however, 182cup tested by autocar (without lighter recaros even) did 6.3 !
and considering power to weight a 172cup will also do a simular 0-60 with a few cheap mods brings most these cars down to low sixes and mid 16`s to 100 with some midly modded cups doing 1/4 miles in 14`s

i would have to say, if you take a 182 there equal in pace upto 130 without a great noticble difference, breaking and cornering are more important seen as there so equal, however i wouldnt think a CTR could keep pace with a modded 182cup/172cup due to thier light weight and relativley small bhp gains count for more

actually it was a 182 full fat with cup options i think.

 

[Vtec Abuser]

I guess it'll be a remapped Fabia vRS, and I wouldnt underestimate them. I used to have one, as standard, no they arent as quick, but remapped and they'll give most things a run for their money.

One thing they wont do however, is handle as well as the Clio.

They are nice cars though, I still miss mine sometimes.

Yeah a re-mapped Furby is quite quick, low 16's , high 15's 1/4's. But sailing past a CTR is never going to happen. May keep within a few car lengths to about 90, but that's about it. They weigh over 1300kgs and have a power/weight of less than 100 bhp/ton as standard for god sake..

 

[Gilbert_Ratchet]

I think I can comment on this seeing as I recently swapped my Cup for a type r. I've "compared" a type r from the lights and destroyed it in the cup (next set of lights shrugged my shoulders and the fello shrugged his back) In hindsight I think he changed gear at 6k avoiding the v-tec zone. Me cup had 60,000 on it and pulled hard from low down more so than the type r. Its That the delivery is different. I loved my cup and covered all those miles with a smile on my face. But the type r is a better car in terms of you don't feel like you are going to break something when you give it welly. I think the cup handles better specially on a track like that one in the film there but the trade off is the comedy lift off oversteer you get in the type r. That with the 8.5K rev limit and six gears makes for a versatile vehicle. getting shut of the cup was quite a major wrench and I reckon its quicker overall with the right driver,but I feel more confident (ABS) in the type r,and V-TEC rules kids!

 

[tameracingdriver]

Yeah a re-mapped Furby is quite quick, low 16's , high 15's 1/4's. But sailing past a CTR is never going to happen. May keep within a few car lengths to about 90, but that's about it. They weigh over 1300kgs and have a power/weight of less than 100 bhp/ton as standard for god sake..

Oh yeah, I know it definitely wouldnt sail past... just that they arent particularly slow, but I'd be surprised if it could overtake a CTR at all, unless it was very heavily modded. Maybe if the Fabia driver caught the CTR driver in the wrong gear, but thats it.

Certainly they *feel* quick, but are not that quick in reality - the 182 is loads quicker than a standard one, and probably is no slower than a remapped one. Also, when remapped, they can suffer heatsoak without an FMIC.

They are like chalk and cheese though, and the Fabia, although described as a "hot hatch" is really just a small, comfortable cruiser.

I will say one thing in its defence though - its much faster than the power to weight ratio would suggest - a std one will give a Saxo VTS a run for its money.

 

[mand182]

It all comes down to driver ability. We have a 182 and a CTR. Would have to say that the CTR feels the quickest in most situations, just feels like it wants to go faster all the time.
Heard people saying how the CTR isn't good on a track hasn't driven one on a track. Yeah the steering is a bit light but its easy to control and well balanced, but the difference is nothing in the real world.
But spend a few hundred extra £ and the CTR is very tunable we have run 14.45 1/4 mile with ours.