civic Type-R in North America? maybe
Thread Starter
Registered!!
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
From: Patterson, New York, US
Rep Power: 0 
civic Type-R in North America? maybe
I was reading through the Nov 2002 issue of Motor trend and on pg 24 there is a little article that says
"Honda as quick as Acura ? Acura saysti doesn't need to up the horsepower on its RSX Type-S to make room for a hotter Honda Civic Si. The Si isn't a sales success in part because its 160-hp 2.0 i-VTEC falls short of thehorsepower put out by such competitors as the Ford SVT Focus and Volkswagon Golf GTI 1.8. Acura says it would be acceptable for Honda to sell a 200-hp Civic SiR even as its dealers sell the more expensive RSX Type-S with the same engine."
if this is true I am going to start saving now
"Honda as quick as Acura ? Acura saysti doesn't need to up the horsepower on its RSX Type-S to make room for a hotter Honda Civic Si. The Si isn't a sales success in part because its 160-hp 2.0 i-VTEC falls short of thehorsepower put out by such competitors as the Ford SVT Focus and Volkswagon Golf GTI 1.8. Acura says it would be acceptable for Honda to sell a 200-hp Civic SiR even as its dealers sell the more expensive RSX Type-S with the same engine."
if this is true I am going to start saving now
Registered!!
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,922
Likes: 0
From: Oakland, California, US
Rep Power: 0 Well, you've just figured out why it would be easier to bring the CTR here.
But if they do bring the CTR here, the Si will never exist again. People will want nothing more but the Type R unless the Si comes standard in their line of Civics. This is the only reason why I don't see the CTR will be here.
But if they do bring the CTR here, the Si will never exist again. People will want nothing more but the Type R unless the Si comes standard in their line of Civics. This is the only reason why I don't see the CTR will be here.
Registered!!
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,204
Likes: 0
From: Roseville, CA
Rep Power: 0 Here's what I think they may do: Bring the type-R hatch to the US, and make the Si available in coupe or sedan form. They're putting K-series engines in the sedans in asia[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/IMG]
Of course, my opinion doesn't mean shjt.[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-frown.gif[/IMG]
Of course, my opinion doesn't mean shjt.[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-frown.gif[/IMG]
Registered!!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
From: Newtown, Connecticut, US
Rep Power: 0 i dont get why "acura feels no need to up the horsepower" , is that a way for honda to make it sound like they are confident in this new si, or whats the deal, since when acura is speaking, its just honda people talking.
Registered!!
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,034
Likes: 0
From: Plano, Texas, US
Rep Power: 0 CTR is worthless the compressionis too high and you cannot get really good HP out a honda by going the NA route, you might as well get an Si with a Type R cam and lower compression pistons, and trubo it and save yourself a buttload of cash. I am now in the process of selling the LX Auto and going for the New Si, I love the hatch no matter what people say mini mini van and whatever, its totally pimped out, and has a lot of potential IMO. New engine internals(mmm titanium), 19" Racing Hart rims, TEIN coilover system, turbo hopefully pushing 1-1.5 BAR, tunable ECU, APEXi JGTC Spec Exhaust system, performance transmission components(including new clutch and flywheel), brake upgrade(4 pot), and of course a huge *** wing, and a huge vinyl sticker that says CIVIC SiR on it. Also some Sparco Torino racing buckets with harness. Denso performance radiator, GReddy or HKS Intercooler, upgraded fuels sytem with some ~700cc injectors, GReddy electronics for turbo. mmmm woudl be quite sweet, and ricey.
Registered!!
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,299
Likes: 0
From: San Diego, California, USA, Northern Hemisphere, Earth, Sol System, Spiral arm of the Milkey Way Galaxy
Rep Power: 0
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: WhiteRiceBoi
CTR is worthless the compressionis too high and you cannot get really good HP out a honda by going the NA route[hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: WhiteRiceBoi
CTR is worthless the compressionis too high and you cannot get really good HP out a honda by going the NA route[hr]
http://ghettoracer.com/~sgt/itr1.html
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 13,151
Likes: 3
From: Washington DC
Rep Power: 424 
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: rac53041
I don't think it will be a Type-R it may just be the Si with RSX-S motor and tranny[hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: rac53041
I don't think it will be a Type-R it may just be the Si with RSX-S motor and tranny[hr]
Registered!!
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,096
Likes: 0
From: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Rep Power: 0
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: SoNiCcIvIc
Well, you've just figured out why it would be easier to bring the CTR here.
But if they do bring the CTR here, the Si will never exist again. People will want nothing more but the Type R unless the Si comes standard in their line of Civics. This is the only reason why I don't see the CTR will be here.[hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: SoNiCcIvIc
Well, you've just figured out why it would be easier to bring the CTR here.
But if they do bring the CTR here, the Si will never exist again. People will want nothing more but the Type R unless the Si comes standard in their line of Civics. This is the only reason why I don't see the CTR will be here.[hr]
I don't think that's true.. Si will still exist. Cost, for example... not everyone can afford it. WRX has been highly anticipated, and now it's here. But I don't see you driving one, nor I. Can't afford it. I certainly will not pay extreme $$$ for a CTR, unless I land on some huge sums of money.
Same reason why I have an LX.. even though EX is out there, I'd rather save the money. Not everyone will go for the ultimate hot rodded version. No doubt, it will steal Si's spotlight, but that's okay. Acura still sold tons of GSR Integras when they introduced the ITR.
Registered!!
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,034
Likes: 0
From: Plano, Texas, US
Rep Power: 0 is that with pump fuel and without NOS? The abovementioned setup would run about 288 HP to the wheels, so I really dont see how it would as you so intelligently put it "eat my she1t alive"?
Registered!!
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,299
Likes: 0
From: San Diego, California, USA, Northern Hemisphere, Earth, Sol System, Spiral arm of the Milkey Way Galaxy
Rep Power: 0 yes kackass. didnt you look at the link i provided? apparently not... you also apparently dont know the meaning of "naturally aspirated".
Registered!!
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,034
Likes: 0
From: Plano, Texas, US
Rep Power: 0 you know u can kiss my a$$ for correcting me on nitrous people say Kleenex to describe facial tissues and Saran wrap to describe plastic wrap, and Coke to describe any sort of carbonated beverage, so I have the right to use NOS as a term for nitrous, and yes I do know what NA means but on the subject of NOS there is no forced induction of air into the engine, you are not blowing any more air into the engine therefore its really not FI so it can be considered NA.
Registered!!
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,299
Likes: 0
From: San Diego, California, USA, Northern Hemisphere, Earth, Sol System, Spiral arm of the Milkey Way Galaxy
Rep Power: 0 REALLLY?
A) "NOS" wasn’t a "street term" until The Fast & The Furious came out. What was the Ricer movie that started people on saying "Kleenex" or "Xerox" as general terms for those products? Oh yea, there isn’t any. Also try typing "Kleenex" or "Xerox" into MS word or what have you. It sure as hell recognizes those, but not "NOS". Why? Because the former 2 are in the dictionary.
B) You should write rules for the IHRA and IRDC. The driverd would love you, because they classify NATURALLY ASPIRATED and FI/N20 cars as SEPERATE CATAGORIES. As a matter of fact there was a case of a driver being disqualified for running in the NATURALLY ASPIRATED class with a hidden N20 system (had it IN his roll cage).
C) N20 has 3x the amount of 02 as regular air. Injecting it into an engine increases horse power by adding more air into the air/fuel mix... thus creating MORE POWER. And how does a turbo or super charger do that? By ADDING MORE AIR INTO THE EINGE TO MAKE MORE POWER. Difference? One is done mechanically the other chemically. Same reason for making more power, just a different method.
D) Sit your dumb ricer *** down.
A) "NOS" wasn’t a "street term" until The Fast & The Furious came out. What was the Ricer movie that started people on saying "Kleenex" or "Xerox" as general terms for those products? Oh yea, there isn’t any. Also try typing "Kleenex" or "Xerox" into MS word or what have you. It sure as hell recognizes those, but not "NOS". Why? Because the former 2 are in the dictionary.
B) You should write rules for the IHRA and IRDC. The driverd would love you, because they classify NATURALLY ASPIRATED and FI/N20 cars as SEPERATE CATAGORIES. As a matter of fact there was a case of a driver being disqualified for running in the NATURALLY ASPIRATED class with a hidden N20 system (had it IN his roll cage).
C) N20 has 3x the amount of 02 as regular air. Injecting it into an engine increases horse power by adding more air into the air/fuel mix... thus creating MORE POWER. And how does a turbo or super charger do that? By ADDING MORE AIR INTO THE EINGE TO MAKE MORE POWER. Difference? One is done mechanically the other chemically. Same reason for making more power, just a different method.
D) Sit your dumb ricer *** down.
Registered!!
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,299
Likes: 0
From: San Diego, California, USA, Northern Hemisphere, Earth, Sol System, Spiral arm of the Milkey Way Galaxy
Rep Power: 0 and COKE? if you ask for a coke in a restraunt with PEPSI, what do they tell you? "We dont have coke, just pepsi is that okay?"
go into a legitimate performance shop and say "i need NAWZ". they will most likely kick you in the nuts.
go into a legitimate performance shop and say "i need NAWZ". they will most likely kick you in the nuts.
Registered!!
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,034
Likes: 0
From: Plano, Texas, US
Rep Power: 0 A) "NOS" wasn't a "street term" until The Fast & The Furious came out. What was the Ricer movie that started people on saying "Kleenex" or "Xerox" as general terms for those products? Oh yea, there isn't any. Also try typing "Kleenex" or "Xerox" into MS word or what have you. It sure as hell recognizes those, but not "NOS". Why? Because the former 2 are in the dictionary.
Personally I used NOS to describe nitrous before that movie came out so it really doesnt matter, and yeah I'm sure media and movies perpetrated the "street use" naming products after their most famous manufacturer, such as Kleenex and Saran, Xerox...etc. Also as far as MS Word is concerned N2O is a relatively new term when compared to plastic wrap and facial tissues so I would just give Microsoft a few more years to catch up idiot.
B) You should write rules for the IHRA and IRDC. The driverd would love you, because they classify NATURALLY ASPIRATED and FI/N20 cars as SEPERATE CATAGORIES. As a matter of fact there was a case of a driver being disqualified for running in the NATURALLY ASPIRATED class with a hidden N20 system (had it IN his roll cage).
Yeah I should write the rules. I really don't see your point about IHRA classifications, as I'm sure they don;t have domain over what to classify NOS as to the rest of the world, just to their participants.
C) N20 has 3x the amount of 02 as regular air. Injecting it into an engine increases horse power by adding more air into the air/fuel mix... thus creating MORE POWER. And how does a turbo or super charger do that? By ADDING MORE AIR INTO THE EINGE TO MAKE MORE POWER. Difference? One is done mechanically the other chemically. Same reason for making more power, just a different method.
Air and O2 are two different things, and N2O FYI doesnt quite have 3x the O2 in it, it increases horsepower in the engine because it contains more oxygen in it not because its injecting more physical air per certain cubic inch. Oxygen is the necesary component for combustion as it fuels the explosions that take palce the more oxygen content the more fuel is added the bigger the explosion, so its not forcefully inducing Air, its inducing the same amount of air with N2O which happens to contain more oxygen. A Turbo/Supercharger physically inserts more air into the engine, hence the various PSI ratings. So we are not tlaking about forced induction of air when it comes to NOS, so IMO it can be classified as either one.
D) Sit your dumb ricer *** down.
I beg your pardon, but I am far from dumb and you think anything to make a car look nice is rice so your opinion doesn;t really count because you are so biased, so sit your dumb *** down. You jus tliek to argue and flame and you;re really not very good at it kid.
Personally I used NOS to describe nitrous before that movie came out so it really doesnt matter, and yeah I'm sure media and movies perpetrated the "street use" naming products after their most famous manufacturer, such as Kleenex and Saran, Xerox...etc. Also as far as MS Word is concerned N2O is a relatively new term when compared to plastic wrap and facial tissues so I would just give Microsoft a few more years to catch up idiot.
B) You should write rules for the IHRA and IRDC. The driverd would love you, because they classify NATURALLY ASPIRATED and FI/N20 cars as SEPERATE CATAGORIES. As a matter of fact there was a case of a driver being disqualified for running in the NATURALLY ASPIRATED class with a hidden N20 system (had it IN his roll cage).
Yeah I should write the rules. I really don't see your point about IHRA classifications, as I'm sure they don;t have domain over what to classify NOS as to the rest of the world, just to their participants.
C) N20 has 3x the amount of 02 as regular air. Injecting it into an engine increases horse power by adding more air into the air/fuel mix... thus creating MORE POWER. And how does a turbo or super charger do that? By ADDING MORE AIR INTO THE EINGE TO MAKE MORE POWER. Difference? One is done mechanically the other chemically. Same reason for making more power, just a different method.
Air and O2 are two different things, and N2O FYI doesnt quite have 3x the O2 in it, it increases horsepower in the engine because it contains more oxygen in it not because its injecting more physical air per certain cubic inch. Oxygen is the necesary component for combustion as it fuels the explosions that take palce the more oxygen content the more fuel is added the bigger the explosion, so its not forcefully inducing Air, its inducing the same amount of air with N2O which happens to contain more oxygen. A Turbo/Supercharger physically inserts more air into the engine, hence the various PSI ratings. So we are not tlaking about forced induction of air when it comes to NOS, so IMO it can be classified as either one.
D) Sit your dumb ricer *** down.
I beg your pardon, but I am far from dumb and you think anything to make a car look nice is rice so your opinion doesn;t really count because you are so biased, so sit your dumb *** down. You jus tliek to argue and flame and you;re really not very good at it kid.
Registered!!
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,034
Likes: 0
From: Plano, Texas, US
Rep Power: 0
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: JoeB16
and COKE? if you ask for a coke in a restraunt with PEPSI, what do they tell you? "We dont have coke, just pepsi is that okay?"
go into a legitimate performance shop and say "i need NAWZ". they will most likely kick you in the nuts.[hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: JoeB16
and COKE? if you ask for a coke in a restraunt with PEPSI, what do they tell you? "We dont have coke, just pepsi is that okay?"
go into a legitimate performance shop and say "i need NAWZ". they will most likely kick you in the nuts.[hr]
You are sooo stupid, you must've spent a good part of your youth riding the short bus to school. Registered!!
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,299
Likes: 0
From: San Diego, California, USA, Northern Hemisphere, Earth, Sol System, Spiral arm of the Milkey Way Galaxy
Rep Power: 0 Bhahaha, your stupidity... stupifies me.
[QUOTE]Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: WhiteRiceBoi
Personally I used NOS to describe nitrous before that movie came out so it really doesnt matter, and yeah I'm sure media and movies perpetrated the "street use" naming products after their most famous manufacturer, such as Kleenex and Saran, Xerox...etc. Also as far as MS Word is concerned N2O is a relatively new term when compared to plastic wrap and facial tissues so I would just give Microsoft a few more years to catch up idiot.
Then you sir, are a moron of the Nth degree. Apparently so much so that you actually JUMPED the ricer curve. Would you be just as proud to be the first to use LED washer nozles before they became "popular rice"? Probably. BTW nitrous oxide was being used in WORLD WAR 2 FIGHTER JETS. Id say its been around a BIT longer then Xerox [IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG]
Yeah I should write the rules. I really don't see your point about IHRA classifications, as I'm sure they don;t have domain over what to classify NOS as to the rest of the world, just to their participants.
Hmmm.. let me think here for a second... am I going to go allong with the classifications used by thousands of professional racers.. or how your dumb *** decided to interprit the meaning of "nayurally aspirated". Theres a hard one... hmmmmmmmmm....
Air and O2 are two different things, and N2O FYI doesnt quite have 3x the O2 in it, it increases horsepower in the engine because it contains more oxygen in it not because its injecting more physical air per certain cubic inch. Oxygen is the necesary component for combustion as it fuels the explosions that take palce the more oxygen content the more fuel is added the bigger the explosion, so its not forcefully inducing Air, its inducing the same amount of air with N2O which happens to contain more oxygen. A Turbo/Supercharger physically inserts more air into the engine, hence the various PSI ratings. So we are not tlaking about forced induction of air when it comes to NOS, so IMO it can be classified as either one.
You are right. Air and N20 are 2 different things. Only 1/3 of air contains 02, this is why you must force a MUCH greater ammount of air into an engine to produce the same power out put as a much smaller shot of N20. Why? Because, they BOTH REQUIRE MORE 02 AND FUEL TO MAKE MORE POWER. Not only that its using MECHANICAL MEANS to FORECFULLY INJECT N20 into said engine. It just does it at a much more efficent level. On that subject, whats the rest of "air" comprised of? Nitrogen? Sure. Methane? Sure. Pollutants? Sure. Is ANY of it used by the engine to make more power? No. Just like the nitrogen that they use to piggy back the volitile pure 02 isnt used by the engine to make more power. On top of that your arguement is circular and quite illogical. You contradict your self only to proclaim "its not "air" so nitrous oxide isnt the same as a turbo"... yet both use one and only one thing to add power. Oxygen.
BTW
"IMO it can be classified as either one"
thats it right there. IN YOUR OPINION. too bad its the opinion of a ricer who obviously doesnt know the first thinkg about the subject. I think you just shot your self down with that by it self. Plus the fact that its not a subject of debate. There are black and white clasifications to what is NA/ nitrous enhanced or FI. no "opinions" about it.
I beg your pardon, but I am far from dumb and you think anything to make a car look nice is rice so your opinion doesn;t really count because you are so biased, so sit your dumb *** down. You jus tliek to argue and flame and you;re really not very good at it kid.
actually, i just demolished your pathetic arguement. you might want to rethink that statement.
[QUOTE]Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: WhiteRiceBoi
Personally I used NOS to describe nitrous before that movie came out so it really doesnt matter, and yeah I'm sure media and movies perpetrated the "street use" naming products after their most famous manufacturer, such as Kleenex and Saran, Xerox...etc. Also as far as MS Word is concerned N2O is a relatively new term when compared to plastic wrap and facial tissues so I would just give Microsoft a few more years to catch up idiot.
Then you sir, are a moron of the Nth degree. Apparently so much so that you actually JUMPED the ricer curve. Would you be just as proud to be the first to use LED washer nozles before they became "popular rice"? Probably. BTW nitrous oxide was being used in WORLD WAR 2 FIGHTER JETS. Id say its been around a BIT longer then Xerox [IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG]
Yeah I should write the rules. I really don't see your point about IHRA classifications, as I'm sure they don;t have domain over what to classify NOS as to the rest of the world, just to their participants.
Hmmm.. let me think here for a second... am I going to go allong with the classifications used by thousands of professional racers.. or how your dumb *** decided to interprit the meaning of "nayurally aspirated". Theres a hard one... hmmmmmmmmm....
Air and O2 are two different things, and N2O FYI doesnt quite have 3x the O2 in it, it increases horsepower in the engine because it contains more oxygen in it not because its injecting more physical air per certain cubic inch. Oxygen is the necesary component for combustion as it fuels the explosions that take palce the more oxygen content the more fuel is added the bigger the explosion, so its not forcefully inducing Air, its inducing the same amount of air with N2O which happens to contain more oxygen. A Turbo/Supercharger physically inserts more air into the engine, hence the various PSI ratings. So we are not tlaking about forced induction of air when it comes to NOS, so IMO it can be classified as either one.
You are right. Air and N20 are 2 different things. Only 1/3 of air contains 02, this is why you must force a MUCH greater ammount of air into an engine to produce the same power out put as a much smaller shot of N20. Why? Because, they BOTH REQUIRE MORE 02 AND FUEL TO MAKE MORE POWER. Not only that its using MECHANICAL MEANS to FORECFULLY INJECT N20 into said engine. It just does it at a much more efficent level. On that subject, whats the rest of "air" comprised of? Nitrogen? Sure. Methane? Sure. Pollutants? Sure. Is ANY of it used by the engine to make more power? No. Just like the nitrogen that they use to piggy back the volitile pure 02 isnt used by the engine to make more power. On top of that your arguement is circular and quite illogical. You contradict your self only to proclaim "its not "air" so nitrous oxide isnt the same as a turbo"... yet both use one and only one thing to add power. Oxygen.
BTW
"IMO it can be classified as either one"
thats it right there. IN YOUR OPINION. too bad its the opinion of a ricer who obviously doesnt know the first thinkg about the subject. I think you just shot your self down with that by it self. Plus the fact that its not a subject of debate. There are black and white clasifications to what is NA/ nitrous enhanced or FI. no "opinions" about it.
I beg your pardon, but I am far from dumb and you think anything to make a car look nice is rice so your opinion doesn;t really count because you are so biased, so sit your dumb *** down. You jus tliek to argue and flame and you;re really not very good at it kid.
actually, i just demolished your pathetic arguement. you might want to rethink that statement.
Registered!!
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,034
Likes: 0
From: Plano, Texas, US
Rep Power: 0 OK Im gonna stop now because you are clearly an idiot, and you will use your stupid arguements that make no real sense for the topic at hand. You are not worth nay more time and energy than this last post. Arguing with Joe is like arguing with any retard he will just spew pointless rhetoric and always think he is right, you sir are not correct.
Arguing with Joe is like arguing with any retard he will just spew pointless rhetoric and always think he is right, you sir are not correct. Registered!!
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,299
Likes: 0
From: San Diego, California, USA, Northern Hemisphere, Earth, Sol System, Spiral arm of the Milkey Way Galaxy
Rep Power: 0 yes, run like a scared ricer with no more BS to pull out of your ***. hard to fight logic with stupidity isnt it?
Registered!!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
From: Newtown, Connecticut, US
Rep Power: 0 For the first time in a long time, im not thinking of JoeB16 simply as a pw, but as someone who makes sense!! this time, you provided all 100% accurate rebuttals to everything you said, then gave him the low blows, i commend you!
Registered!!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,636
Likes: 0
From: Central PA, Pennsylvania, US
Rep Power: 0 Don't expect a Civic Type R. An Si with a K20A2 maybe. But a real Civic Type R, has never been and most likely will never be.
As for the Si becoming a coupe/sedan, what a long shot. Only the US got the 99-00 as a coupe, after going back to a hatch I highly doubt they will switch to a coupe again.
Joe and WRB- settle it in a PM or keep it civil- or the thread will be locked.
As for the Si becoming a coupe/sedan, what a long shot. Only the US got the 99-00 as a coupe, after going back to a hatch I highly doubt they will switch to a coupe again.
Joe and WRB- settle it in a PM or keep it civil- or the thread will be locked.
Registered!!
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
From: Miami, Florida, US
Rep Power: 0 if Joe says it isnt coming than it isnt coming. He does more research than every one put together on this forum and he will know out of all of us. Plus it sounds kinda wack bringing the type-r's here, wtf about the si's u think Honda is gonna do all that bs for us American peeps...nawww think again...
Registered!!
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,299
Likes: 0
From: San Diego, California, USA, Northern Hemisphere, Earth, Sol System, Spiral arm of the Milkey Way Galaxy
Rep Power: 0 thin about this. acura already stated NO RSX-R for the USDM market. Only a suspension/body kit package. BFD. WHY THE HELL would they bring the civic R?
Thread
Thread Starter
Honda Civic Forum
Replies
Last Post
Touge
Canada East
0
Apr 26, 2015 11:58 PM
Touge
Ottawa
0
Apr 26, 2015 11:57 PM
