The largest Civic Type R club forum

[kingofdbrits]

Can't we have a new Prelude, packed with performance enhancing tech and that goes like sting, instead of a reheated hippy hybrid....thing.

No.

It's all because of the CO2 nonesense, all Euro manufacturers have to make cars with no more than 130g/km by 2012, which is exactly what the CZR produces.

You have to blame climate change.

[NHB_EP3_Chris]

It will be a very sad day indeed when the average man has to plug his vehicle into a wall in order to recharge rather than pump it up full of Shell's finest. The extent of man's influence on Climate change is something which will never be proven nor negated, and the EU government have simply capilatised on the theory as a means of creating huge amounts of additional revenue. This CR-Z (not unlike the new offerings from Renault) is no more than another by-product of an unjust money-making campaign piloted by our bewildered government of today. Cars like these are beyond me at this moment in time. They are marketed as being a benefit to our environment, yet they must produce around 50% more pollution to manufacture than a conventional car. We all know about the pollution implications that apply to the manufacture (and disposal) of modern battery cells, yet the car manufacturers and governments are still trying to claim that they will achieve the opposite. Not even mentioning the fact that over 90% of Europes mains electricity still comes from burning fossil fuels - Where exactly is the benefit to the environment?

They might as well concentrate on producing more efficient petrol/diesel engines for now. The Toyota Prius was deemed a waste of space soon after it's debut, and I can quite easily see the CR-Z to quickly follow suit. Yea sure it looks smart enough, but I can't see how it could compete with a similar sized hot-hatch with circa 150bhp in terms of performance - the additional weight of the motors will make the thing handle and perform like a barge. I'd sooner have a CR-Z which has just a 1.5ltr VTEC motor under the bonnet with less power than the petrol/lectric hybrid crap. Bring back the D15B please Honda!

[kingofdbrits]

It will be a very sad day indeed when the average man has to plug his vehicle into a wall in order to recharge rather than pump it up full of Shell's finest. The extent of man's influence on Climate change is something which will never be proven nor negated, and the EU government have simply capilatised on the theory as a means of creating huge amounts of additional revenue. This CR-Z (not unlike the new offerings from Renault) is no more than another by-product of an unjust money-making campaign piloted by our bewildered government of today. Cars like these are beyond me at this moment in time. They are marketed as being a benefit to our environment, yet they must produce around 50% more pollution to manufacture than a conventional car. We all know about the pollution implications that apply to the manufacture (and disposal) of modern battery cells, yet the car manufacturers and governments are still trying to claim that they will achieve the opposite. Not even mentioning the fact that over 90% of Europes mains electricity still comes from burning fossil fuels - Where exactly is the benefit to the environment?

They might as well concentrate on producing more efficient petrol/diesel engines for now. The Toyota Prius was deemed a waste of space soon after it's debut, and I can quite easily see the CR-Z to quickly follow suit. Yea sure it looks smart enough, but I can't see how it could compete with a similar sized hot-hatch with circa 150bhp in terms of performance - the additional weight of the motors will make the thing handle and perform like a barge. I'd sooner have a CR-Z which has just a 1.5ltr VTEC motor under the bonnet with less power than the petrol/lectric hybrid crap. Bring back the D15B please Honda!

Good post :thumbup:

What annoys me about these types of cars is that people only look at the CO2 emissions and believe that a lower one means it's better for the environment. Never mind the materials needed for the battery are mined in Canada, shipped to Japan then shipped to the UK.

[Ali]

Or the fact that low CO2 means an inefficiently burning engine which will be producing far more NOx, SOx and unburned hydrocarbons which are genuine pollutants.

[NHB_EP3_Chris]

It's just a complete load of BS in my opinion. Its always been the government's goal to tax the more wealthy people higher amounts than the less fortunate people, and as it stands they are using C02 outputs as thier gauge of this - there are just so many flaws in using these figures as a unit measure of car/engine size. I suppose the problem is that there are too many variables these days to determine the overall environmental effect each car has by looking at just one value.

If they were truely interested in the environment, you could suggest it would be more accurate to base taxation on the overall impact of each actual car based on individual readings taken from information on an MOT. For example, levels of Hydrocarbons, Carbon monoxide, C02 emmissions and soot deposits could be monitored to give a much more accurate indication on an engine's health, and more importantly, the threat it has to us and our atmosphere. What really irritates me is the fact that although diesels emit far lower levels of C02, they also produce far more toxic fumes than petrols - yet they still qualify for cheaper tax. Seems backwards if you ask me.

http://www.mflohc.mb.ca/fact_sheets_fol ... xhaust.pdf

The fact remains that Mr.Brown and his European cronies don't like us driving around in 15yr-old 3+Ltr saloons and SUVs. They want us to drive newer, smaller and ultimately slower yet more complex and potentially unreliable hybrids, while reserving the big Mercs and BMWs for those who say 'Tally ho' and 'Spiffing, my old chap' while wearing clothing made from tweed. It just begs a big question, which is what is going to happen to the taxation system when we all suddenly buy into these pieces of crap? They'll just jump on the next passing bandwagon and try and use that as a reason to charge everyone more money again.

[sjw]

Just don't forget that the two fastest FWD cars (by some distance) both have torsion beam rear suspension.

Yep that is very true, but they would likley be quicker with wishbones, but still blooming quick granted

They probably wouldn't, but they would likely ride better. The thing about those French hatches with torsion beam setups is that they are made by people with an awful lot of experience of making them work - achieving a good compromise of ride and handling. The move to more expensive IRS setups by Ford and VW was done for sound engineering reasons, and particularly in the case of the Focus was instrumental in making the car's ride and handling compromise a new benchmark for the class, moving Ford's offering in that segment from bottom of the class to top.

[Ali]

Not to mention that the compromise of ride vs handling becomes far more apparent the heavier the car is, if you use a torsion beam. No such issue with weight with a good wishbone or multilink system.

[EvoStu]

Not to mention that the compromise of ride vs handling becomes far more apparent the heavier the car is, if you use a torsion beam. No such issue with weight with a good wishbone or multilink system.

The new Megane weighs the best part of 1400Kg mate and still handles extremely well according to the reviews and rides pretty well also. You can make a torsion beam work perfectly with the right setup. It will will be used more and more in the future by car companies so we'd best get used to it.

[NHB_EP3_Chris]

^^ T'is true, but the likes of Renault have been doing it for much longer than most. It's going to take much longer for the likes of Honda to develop a system that works well and gives a good compromise between comfort and handling. From reading the critisism regarding the current FN2, Honda seem to have failed at achieving either. Whether this is simply a result of a lack of development into finding the optimum setup, or whether it is due to the actual design is the real arguement. The FN2s don't seem to do too bad in the BTCC series so I'm thinking there's definately room for great improvement over the std setup - but this isn't a very fair assessment as comfort is not of great concern to those guys.

[EvoStu]

^^ T'is true, but the likes of Renault have been doing it for much longer than most. It's going to take much longer for the likes of Honda to develop a system that works well and gives a good compromise between comfort and handling. From reading the critisism regarding the current FN2, Honda seem to have failed at achieving either. Whether this is simply a result of a lack of development into finding the optimum setup, or whether it is due to the actual design is the real arguement. The FN2s don't seem to do too bad in the BTCC series so I'm thinking there's definately room for great improvement over the std setup - but this isn't a very fair assessment as comfort is not of great concern to those guys.

I agree but then Honda have always seemingly had issues with suspension setups. The 2 EP3's I had were far more uncomfortable and crashier than my FN2 on bumpy roads. The torsion beam is an excuse by most people because as I've said before, I would hazard a guess that 90% of drivers wouldn't know the difference between a fully independent setup and a torsion beam.

[NHB_EP3_Chris]

Personally I preferred the older EK double-wishbone suspension setup as opposed to the mcpherson strut/trailing arm arrangement on the Ep3. You get much more feel through the wheel and more control on the limits of tyre grip in the older EK's. I felt Honda made a poor decision to transfer to mcpherson struts, but I'm led to believe this was more to do with the availablity of space in the engine bay.

I'll be the first to admit the EP3's suspension isn't the most forgiving, but the advantage is that it takes much less development to get good levels of grip from the double wishbone designs, and adjustability is much more straight forward. I wouldn't write the FN2 off as having poor handling, at the end of the day most drivers wouldn't even notice the difference. I do tend to reach the limits of grip in my EP3 quite regularly, especially on the slippery local B-roads. I've had an encounter with a red FN2 and he did seem to struggle with understeer coming off the roundabout at speed in the wet, although on the straight there was little between my 52 and his 08 plater if I'm honest. Having good tyres is more important than anything else on our roads IMO.

Admittedly I find some FN2's nicer than others though - They had a CW one at my local dealers with white wheels and I really did like it. Not sure if I could justfy all that cash on one just yet though, but still v.nice.

[Ali]

Not to mention that the compromise of ride vs handling becomes far more apparent the heavier the car is, if you use a torsion beam. No such issue with weight with a good wishbone or multilink system.

The new Megane weighs the best part of 1400Kg mate and still handles extremely well according to the reviews and rides pretty well also. You can make a torsion beam work perfectly with the right setup. It will will be used more and more in the future by car companies so we'd best get used to it.

dude, it's already been in widespread use for 30 years. At least Ford saw the light and you have to admit, even a boggo Focus handles very nicely indeed as a result. Renaultsport invest heavily in expensive damping to sort out the Megane and, to a lesser extent, the Clio. They wouldn't have to if they started wit ha decent set up in the first place. And boggo Meganes handle like someone trying to drive a turd across jelly.

[kingofdbrits]

It's going to take much longer for the likes of Honda to develop a system that works well and gives a good compromise between comfort and handling. From reading the critisism regarding the current FN2, Honda seem to have failed at achieving either.

Not quite, the CW only has an LSD above a standard FN2 yet it managed to cut a lap time by 3.2 seconds. It also made it faster than the Megane, Golf, Focus, Leon, Scirocco, 3MPS etc... round a lap Bedford, it was only the 300bhp hatch's and the R26.R that were quicker. So if any criticisms of the FN2 are to be made they should be directed at the lack of an LSD before the rear suspension.

Have a read of the full article, here's just an extract.

The Championship White costs an additional £1140 and, apart from the all-white colour scheme, the only real difference is the diff. It sounds like a lot of money for not a lot extra, but one corner of the West Circuit is all you need to be convinced it’s a bargain. The diff changes the feel and behaviour of the car so comprehensively you’d think there were other upgrades, but there aren’t – everything else is the same, even the tyres. Yet the White is more effective on the brakes, there are a whole load more messages coming from the nose, and it claws its way out of the turns with no fuss or frustrating wheelspin. When we strap the timing gear on, it knocks more than 3sec off the lap time set by the regular version – a staggering improvement that I wouldn’t have believed possible if I hadn’t done the driving myself. The game is upped on the road too. The CTR is all front end, but with the CW the rear can be brought into play and its reactions are sharper, allowing the driver to play with the interface between tyre and tarmac.

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/cargrou ... ype_r.html

[EvoStu]

Not to mention that the compromise of ride vs handling becomes far more apparent the heavier the car is, if you use a torsion beam. No such issue with weight with a good wishbone or multilink system.

The new Megane weighs the best part of 1400Kg mate and still handles extremely well according to the reviews and rides pretty well also. You can make a torsion beam work perfectly with the right setup. It will will be used more and more in the future by car companies so we'd best get used to it.

dude, it's already been in widespread use for 30 years. At least Ford saw the light and you have to admit, even a boggo Focus handles very nicely indeed as a result. Renaultsport invest heavily in expensive damping to sort out the Megane and, to a lesser extent, the Clio. They wouldn't have to if they started wit ha decent set up in the first place. And boggo Meganes handle like someone trying to drive a turd across jelly.

New Megane is actually better than you think mate. It rides infinitely better than its predecessor.
Plus you seem to forget that fully independent setups are expensive. This would push the base cost up for these manufacturers and would have to be passed onto the consumer. If you ever got a chance to drive the Mugen you wouldn't know it was a torsion beam such is the development they have done on it. What it goes to show is what can be achieved with this setup.

But as I say, more and more companies are switching to torsion beams so we best get used to it.

[sjw]

But as I say, more and more companies are switching to torsion beams so we best get used to it.

That surprises me - the move in recent years having been in the opposite direction - who is planning to change then?

[smartie]

I couldn't give a monkey's about the suspension, there are numerous other factors that have a higher priority in an R.

[EvoStu]

But as I say, more and more companies are switching to torsion beams so we best get used to it.

That surprises me - the move in recent years having been in the opposite direction - who is planning to change then?

Apparently, only Ford & VW are pushing ahead with alternatives at the moment due to the cost. Torsion beam is compromised but its by no means bad. There are some US cars using technology from the Ark.

[sjw]

Interesting - I can see why they would want to do so, particularly since much of the car buying market aren't very demanding on chassis dynamics, but I would have thought that turning the clock back would be difficult now that even things like the Kia C'eed are boasting a fully independent rear setup. It's not so much what the customers think, you can sell to most of them with styling, perceived build quality and fuel economy, it's getting it past the journalists without it getting a slagging.

[EvoStu]

Interesting - I can see why they would want to do so, particularly since much of the car buying market aren't very demanding on chassis dynamics, but I would have thought that turning the clock back would be difficult now that even things like the Kia C'eed are boasting a fully independent rear setup. It's not so much what the customers think, you can sell to most of them with styling, perceived build quality and fuel economy, it's getting it past the journalists without it getting a slagging.

The Kia C'eed is unfortunately pretty poorly setup. The Pro C'eed is better but all they've done is make it stiffer which is hardly dynamic. It does make sense that other manufacturers are following suit though due to shared platforms etc.

The thing is the journo's are a funny bunch you know. I was talking to Jamie Corstorphine at the launch of the FN2, it was actually funny to hear him dismiss the FN2 there and then before he'd driven it all due to the torsion beam.
When he was asked about these comments someone pointed out he Renault & Vauxhall were using it and he then said yes but this a Honda.

At the end of the day like I've said most folks don't know the difference and if people are happy with their purchases thats the main thing.

[Ali]

Stu, as far as I can remember, Honda is the only manufacturer that was so resolutely in favour of double wishbones all round and then threw out it's own sound engineering principles and put in the most basic, and cheapest, suspension set up since leaf springs and solid axles went out of fashion. Has any other manufacturer that currently uses torsion beams been using wishbones or multi link for a previous model? I certainly don't think so. The French have been using torsion beams for decades, as have Vauxhall since the original Astras. Honda, to my knowledge, are the only manufacturer to have actually regressed!