Fair points except for the four pot one; yep, some of the older stuff was great but the Honda engines, while technically impressive, have sod all torque and don't even sound great.
I do quite like the Boxers but I struggle with any others. They suit light cars like Caterhams and Elises but not a lot else. Our fast revving, almost lag free 3.0 six certainly makes the right noises and pulls hard; not what I'd call dull.

I will still buy outright unless the new low emissions stuff finally makes business sense. It might happen one day...

 

There is something else to consider with the outright purchase, certainly in my case i tended to feel very precious about the car, worried about the first scratch, dent, wheel scuff etc. It was on my mind that a large chunk of my own money was sitting in that car.

This is less of an issue with PCP and almost no issue with a lease so long as normal wear and tear is not exceeded.

This means IMHO you can enjoy the car more from day one.

 

Looking after my car is a large part of the enjoyment for me; detailing it, keeping it looking good; I love it and renting wouldn't give that sense of satisfaction.

I might be a bit odd...

It's nice having a bit of a beater now though; no wincing every time a van/lorry comes too fast through a narrow gap.

At least if you damage your own car, you can sort it when you can rather than panicking about over draconian lease/PCP contracts.

 

Fair point, I'm more into driving them than cleaning them.

 

Mine's done 13700 miles in a year including across Europe to Germany - it gets driven plenty.

 

Ahh that old honda Vtec's have sod all torque argument. You've never owned one, have you Matt?

I came from a Impreza Turbo 2000 to an Intergra Type R, and not once did I find it lacking in torque. In fact, if you look at the figures you'll find that the Vtec torque figures are on a par or actually better than other N/A engnes of similar capacity. The S2000 had a higher torque figure than the new 2.0L Subaru BRZ has, for example (over 10lbs/ft more).

Yes, that torque was produced at significantly higher RPM, but then the Hondas have significantly lower gearing to compensate. And as anyone with a bit of understanding about gearing will understand, the torque at wheels (the important bit) will be higher for a given engine torque with lower gearing than it will be with higher gearing.

Yes those Vtec engines did their best work north of 6,000 rpm, but they still pulled well from much lower down (and much better than armchair commentators give them credit for). Of course forced induction or large capacity will produce more torque and at lower RPM.

To simply look at he raw numbers on paper is to be completely missing the reality of the point. A ferrari 355 of the same year produced 375hp and 268 lbs ft from a 3.5l V8. Thats pretty much the same ratio and numbers per CC as the 1.8 Vtec in my old DC2. I don't think anyone would criticise the Ferrari for having poor torque compared to its headline power figure.

We'll agree to disagree on the sound. Quite how you can say a vtec honda on its way to 9,000 rpm doesn't sound great is, however, a bit of a mystery.

 

When you turbo a VTEC engine they can make phenomenal power at modest boost

 

Yes I have owned one; drove it 8000km around New Zealand.
I've also driven several others; unless you rag them, not a lot happens.
Yes they are loud at 9000rpm but it's not a great sound.

They are definitely interesting engines but the best Honda engine has six cylinders and lives in an NSX.

 

Gotta agree with Mattee (did I just say that) on the VTEC's. Drove an FN2 CTR for 3yrs (lease actually so it got ragged). Did nothing til about 5400 rpm, then sounded like it did a lot but actually didn't.

Was a luke warm hatch at best and that was driving on my own. Add a passenger and / or luggage and it struggles to match you average Golf TDI.

They do sound good on VTEC though. A lot of passengers commented on the sound. Not up there with a boxer, V8 or the 5 pot in my RS but certainly not a bad sound.

Devildog - not sure why you are comparing to other N/A cars - the point is most don't have decent torque unless big capacity. 142lb ft lb compared to 325 in the RS which manages to put it through the front wheels a lot better than the Type R.

 

I must admit, I struggled to get my head around a PCP deal on the A45. It ultimately came down to how much money I was going to lose, with no equity at the end of the deal. It wasn't the case of could I afford it, it was purely down to the fact of renting an A45 (OTR at £43k) over 3yrs would have set me back just under £28k. Perhaps I'm just a tight git.

The deal I ended up with was the best for me, if you can justify blowing £37k on a hatch that is.

Second hand, 4 month old car with 2.5k on the clock, with a new price tag of over £44k. Up for £37k (so it's took the first big hit), on a 40% down and the rest of 0% APR. Car cost aside, it means I don't pay any finance charges and don't tie £37k of my own cash up right now and at least have equity in the car at the end of the agreement. On the PCP deal you were talking around £6k in interest charges alone!!

I'm glad I didn't pull the trigger on the new car on the run up to xmas..... and I was close believe me. Even MB have January sales.

It's still a shedload of money, but personally I'm more happy with buying, rather than renting on this occasion.

Horses for courses and all that.

 

Excellent, I'm sure she'll enjoy it! I waited justed under four months from the date of order to collection.

 

They are the optional 19" Pretoria wheels, i believe a few other markets such as Germany, Poland, USA etc. get to spec the 19" Cadiz wheels

 

Love VTEC engines myself. Guess they are a bit marmite though with plenty of very knowledgeable petrolheads that never really took to them.

Be interested to see how the new CTR fairs given it's turbocharged origins.

I think Honda really need to deliver something exciting because the recent attempts have been very tame compared to the raw type-r's of old.

I mean the CRZ was a total let down, they scrapped the S2000 and NSX and gave us a CTR that was slower than the outgoing model and ditched their best looking coupe (integra DC5) in favour of a crap looking hatchback.

 

S2000's so called lack of torque never bothered me. I'd just drop 1,2 or 3 gears, which was a joy in itself.

Also, piped through a titanium single exit millionDb exhaust that 4-pot sounded pretty fruity.

I've never understood why people pan entire engine or drivetrain configurations. They all have there place and sometimes we crave one over the other depending on mood or circumstances. Given this weather, I'd love to have AWD again and, on the basis I've been living with a gutsy diesel for the last two years, I crave something that revs. I was in a Z06 last week at full chat in 4th through 5th so I have a hardon for displacement right now

 

It's only me that pans them really although some agree.
Are we not allowed an opinion any more?

 

If you want to experience a lack of torque then try an RX8.

Having said that a 9.5k redline, slick six speed box ( even better with a short shifter) and sublime handling meant it was one of the most fun cars I have ever driven. Although 15mpg wasn't so enjoyable,

Torque is for diesels, petrol engines are for horse power.

 

The best engines seem to have a roughly matching bhp and torque (in lbs-ft) amount.
If bhp is way higher, it needs thrashing too much, if torque is much higher it's a diesel.

 

Sounds right, my 330 is 221/231 and while not fast by today's standards, it's a great drive.

 

Just parked behind one these cars in underground carpark Morrisons,

They're not quite pretty / exciting to look at , are they!

It was a dullish bronze/green as far as i could tell



Golf 'r' 5 door

 

5 door should be left for saloons and big 4x4's, looks wrong on a hatchback

 

As much as I don't get involved in these threads very often, it seems to me matt like everyone is having an opinion yourrself included.

But no ones opinion is right unless it matches your opinion imo.

 

Which one did you own Matt?

 

2.0 Accord; I can't remember the year (it was in 1999/2000) but it went quite well and was all singing, all dancing spec.

We did all of NZ, sold back to the same dealer and lost a mere £120. Splendid.

 

Simon,

Comparing to other N/A cars because Vtecs are N/A.

The point was made that Vtecs hondas are gutless. My argument was that no, they're not. They are comparable to other N/A engines of similar capacity, but produce significantly more power at the top end.

 

That'll be a 2.2 Matt. Red lined at 7,500 rpm, compared to 8,800 of the Integra or 9,000 of the S2000.

Its also probably 200+kg heavier than the Integra at the time.

Perhaps not the best example of the type R breed of that time upon which experience to make sweeping comments about them all?

 

Jesus you do go on.
I also thoroughly tested a CTR expecting to buy one. I didn't.
And an older Civic VTI.
And a drive in an ATR.

I haven't owned a newer one because I've never wanted one. The Accord was to get us around NZ; which it did well. But even that needed revving.

They DO need thrashing. They are hard work. I don't desire one.

 

When I first got my S2000 a close friend had a Saxo VTS. Subscribing to the hype, we believed they would have similar performance out of VTEC so we floored them both in 4th at 30mph. The S2000 walked off with ease and by the time I hit VTEC-YO the Saxo was bus lengths back. It performs like any other 2.0l off-cam and like a 3.0 or 2.0T* on-cam; simple as that.

*not the current crop of 2.0T's which produce like 400bhp for fun! The 2.0T's of the early naughties (i.e. MY00 Impreza, etc).

 

^^^ this.




I go on ??

I call bullsh1t Matt.

I call that for the most part you're an armchair expert. Lets be honest, its not as if you don't quote Evo magazine or top gear lap times at least once a day.

Go on, enlighten us. Just what haven't you, your mate(s) or your family either owned or driven "extensively"

 

Please let me know exactly which bit you call BS.

I have driven MANY cars in my life; we owned a Honda in NZ, etc.

It's your own problem if you're sad enough to not believe me. I haven't read Evo for a year. You have the issue not me.

 

A 230ish bhp S2000 was quicker than a 120bhp Saxo? Now there's a surprise...