Ford focus RS vs civic type R

[Losiracer2]

They're putting 20" tires on a Civic? 20 inches?! That would most likely be the worst riding, bumpiest civic ever. 245/30/20.....Thats way too low profile.

The Focus RS already has a pretty bad ride and its on 19s.

[deevergote]

Remember when 17" wheels on factory vehicles were considered large? And when anything rolling on 20s was basically guaranteed to be a show car on airride?

[verothacamaro]

Remember when 17" wheels on factory vehicles were considered large? And when anything rolling on 20s was basically guaranteed to be a show car on airride?

I was thinking about this the other day, but cars also had lower hood lines which didn't require such large wheels to increase their presence.

I will say that the Type-R is quite exciting, I'm still holding out for an RS, if only for the fact that this is the first RS on US shores.

I've owned an ST for 3 years now and it has been nothing but good to me. Great power, great handling, and decent build quality. Since the RS is made in Germany, I expect the quality will improve slightly.

If you can find one at MSRP, it should retain its value very well (at least in line with Subaru STI and Golf R).

The Type-R seems like a lunatic car. I'm certain that combined with brake biased torque vectoring and limited slip diff, this car will be bananas in the corners. Still though, I can't wait to get a ride in one!

[deevergote]

The Type R really does seem like the pinnacle of "in-house tuning". I'm sure someone will top it eventually, but it's a totally bonkers example of a showroom stock car. 300+ horsepower FWD cars are something people BUILD, not something they buy from the dealer! For that alone, I love it.

You're probably very right about the fender height. On an old car like a CB7, 16s look about as big as 18s do on modern cars. 17s or 18s on the CTR would probably look like Honda forgot to address the wheels. Though I'm sure the ride will suffer. My CTS-V's ride is harsh enough with 18s... i couldn't imagine 20s on a smaller car!

[AccordWarrior]

I don't know about that, the demographic for these kinds of tuner cars is mostly 20-somethings with no kids. I feel like if Subaru still made a coupe STI it would be at least as popular as the sedan.

You think? VW is dropping the two door Golf and Golf R. The big push in the STi / WRX crowd is for a hatch, rather than a coupe...at least the last time I was over there.

Sure, at 24 when I bought my STi, I'd have wanted the coupe, but as I got older, I realized a sedan makes more sense as a daily driver (the fact I bought a truck not withstanding) and a two door makes more sense as a toy.

My wife had a tC from when we first met until last year. If we went out with friends, either I took the STi or they drove. It did get old quick that she could never drive a group of people.

I mean, sure for the enthusiast crew, a coupe isn't a big deal, but bigger picture, they don't make a whole lot of sense as evidenced by how few 2-doors are even being made anymore.

[CyborgGT]

From what I've noticed in traffic, Golf GTIs/Rs are primarily driven by men in their 40s and 50s, and Evos/STis are almost exclusively driven by guys in their 20s. I think I saw an older man in an Evo 8 once. Which makes sense that VW's dropping the two-door; the Golf is a much more mature car compared to... well, big wang and box flares.

[h22sparkle]

This is crazy I wasn't too moved about the type r honestly for what it was worth. Don't get me wrong it's a nice car especially with a boosted earth dreams motor but the price compared to a used 8 or 9 Evo or the Ford focus st don't sleep on those and never been a fan of the golf r but I bet it can do some serious damage. Everyone's got their own way of handling things but the price. I rather go back to the older cars.

[Raf99]

300+ horsepower FWD cars are something people BUILD, not something they buy from the dealer! For that alone, I love it.
....

Ahh do we need to remind everyone of the Cobalt SS and others, which came with 200HP but a dealership factory tune which anyone can buy will take it close to 300HP. That's what still puzzles me about this civic. I expected it to be up around 350HP. If I bought one of these and got smoked by a old cobalt SS I'd be pretty pissed.

And ya... 245/30/........ is wayyyy tooo low profile. No-one in their right mind runs that on public roads.

[deevergote]

I was wondering if someone was going to mention the Cobalt or Neon upgrades!
I still feel that's "built", since the car is modified after arriving on the showroom floor. The ctr just comes that way (I wonder if we'll see a Mugen variant with your 350hp!)

Still, a 305hp Civic with a dialed-in chassis, suspension, and transmission is likely to stomp most enthusiast-modified econoboxes. At least I hope so! This is a Type R, after all. I hope this doesn't signify the decline of that hallowed designation. Much like Chevy's SS has become pathetically watered down over the years.

[deevergote]

As for the tire being too skinny, it has about 1/3" (8mm) less sidewall than a set of 205/40/17s, which are a fairly common size on CB7s (I ran that myself... I did manage to dent a rim while doing so, but it's a "normal" size.)

I would consider the 245/30/20 to be too skinny myself... but for many people, it's just fine. I just live around too many potholes, and I tend to hit them.

[Losiracer2]

As for the tire being too skinny, it has about 1/3" (8mm) less sidewall than a set of 205/40/17s, which are a fairly common size on CB7s (I ran that myself... I did manage to dent a rim while doing so, but it's a "normal" size.)

I would consider the 245/30/20 to be too skinny myself... but for many people, it's just fine. I just live around too many potholes, and I tend to hit them.

Hell, I had 245/35/20s on my Lexus LS400 and it actually rode decently. For the Civic to have tires almost the same diameter of my big LS400, shows you how much a compact car has grown in size from years past. The stock tire size was 225/60/16 so it had plenty of sidewall cushion, but I doubt even 17s will clear the big brakes they'll probably stuff under those 20s

[deevergote]

That is very true. I'm sure a 305hp performance car is going to have some hefty brakes! The tire width is also probably a bit of a concern. When you go that wide, too much sidewall can be pretty squirmy.

That being said, the Type R isn't going to be for everyone. It probably won't be a great car for anyone that expects it to be a sole daily driver, or for someone that just wants "the top of the line". If you want the best "Civic" you can get, get the Si. If you want a heavily factory-modified near-race version, get the Type R.

My CTS-V is a milder case of the same. Many people complain that the V is harsh, noisy, and brutish for a Cadillac. I know at least one person that bought one, didn't like it, and exchanged it for the top V6 model. He much preferred the non-V, because it fit his expectations of a Cadillac (while still having a fairly competent chassis and reasonably powerful engine.) I knew my car was going to basically be a factory hot rod, and I understood the compromises necessary (poor fuel economy, harsh ride, noisy exhaust, and a few expensive wear items...) It also wasn't my daily driver for a long time!

[hiptech]

I think the speculation long term for these cars is how long. How much longer before mainstream car makers continue to offer these? As deevergote points out fuel mileage is a big issue. So will high tech and tiny engines be enough or will some new technology eliminate large displacement internal combustion engines?

The rumour mill has been saying the current Accord V6 will probably disappear next year when the next gen debuts... who knows ��

[deevergote]

With Audi and BMW making such a big deal about their small turbo 4 cylinder engines, even in their larger offerings (5 Series and A6), I could definitely see the trend going that way. BMW and Audi are major trendsetters, and I've noticed that other brands tend to follow their lead. Emissions and fuel economy regulations are becoming stricter worldwide. Many countries penalize owners for engine displacement over a certain amount. The trend is definitely going that way.

The good thing is that we'll get LOTS of turbo engines to play with (and lots of used turbo parts to scavenge from junkyards in a decade, for those of us still into this stuff...)
The bad thing is that the monstrous V8s that Americans love so much will become a rarity.
Ford is already touting their Ecoboost V6. The Mustang has been transformed from a drag machine to a car with legitimate handling chops. I understand how eliminating the V8 from the lineup now would cause outrage... but I could foresee Ford replacing the top Mustang engine with a twin-turbo V6 in another generation. GM offers a twin-turbo V6 in the ATS-V, which is closely related to the Camaro. In another generation, the two cars could very well share that same powerplant. The ATS-V makes 420hp, so in another generation of ATS/Camaro, that could easily hit 450hp from the factory.


That being said, I do fear for the high-performance variants in general. Normal car performance is such that it's difficult to make a car that is forgiving enough on public roads, but extreme enough to satisfy enthusiasts. The very first Civic Type R, 20 years ago, made 182hp. That's a little more than half what the current Type R makes! As I have said before, 305hp in a FWD street car is pretty nuts... even as a modified tuner car, let alone something from the factory (with corporate liability to consider.) How much more can they push it?
The STi has basically exceeded Subaru's capabilities in the market, I feel. That's why it has stayed at roughly the same power output since its US release. In order to release a more powerful car, the company would have to start from the ground up... and they'd likely end up with something that would price itself right out of the market. At nearly $40,000 already, it's pretty much at its ceiling. The current STi is already immensely powerful and extremely capable. It can do things that 90% of STi owners will never do. Few STi owners will ever come close to exceeding the vehicle's capabilities. Yet in a market where you can spend less money on cars from other automakers with similar capabilities and more power, it's becoming irrelevant.
The Hellcat cars are a prime example of things going TOO far. NOBODY needs 707hp! People want it, sure. I want it. But who can use it? I can barely use the 400hp I have now.
Performance cars are quickly becoming so powerful, so capable, that they are almost reaching the realms of theoretical, hypothetical performance levels. Regular cars are practically where performance cars were a few years ago. The current turbo Civic makes nearly as much power as the original Civic Type R (granted, there's a weight difference of about 350lbs...) The current base model Civic is putting out what early Si models were doing (again, weight difference applies... but still...)

[Raf99]

i was going to mention the new turbo civic.

"A new 1.5-liter four-cylinder available in the pricier trims makes 174 horsepower at 6000 rpm. Fitted with a single-scroll turbo*charger pumping up to 16.5 psi of boost, its 162 pound-feet of torque makes it a small-displacement Honda engine with heretofore unheard of grunt from a stoplight. "
....
"Lesser Civics get a naturally aspirated 2.0-liter with only 158 horsepower, which still shames last year’s 143-hp 1.8-liter four. The 1.5-liter engine, the first turbo the Honda brand has offered here in a car, is good enough to speed the 2924-pound 2016 Civic from zero to 60 mph in 6.8 seconds, cutting two seconds off the old car’s run."

174HP but the same weight as a cb7, that's not bad. That's like putting a run-down H22 in our cars basically. Actually now I want to see a race between a 2015 turbo civic and a H22 CB7. I bet it would be close ....