$40k stock Acura Integra Type R

[aw6141]

heh I met Dave-ROR at a local autox and asked him about his ITR, he noted to me the stiffness in the rear was noticeable over his GSR and did experience the subframe tearing on his GSR yikes...

He did sell his ITR over a year ago, but still has the GSR, I think he had some issues with the brz tranny and is looking to get rid of it.

 

[Sonnytron]

heh I met Dave-ROR at a local autox and asked him about his ITR, he noted to me the stiffness in the rear was noticeable over his GSR and did experience the subframe tearing on his GSR yikes...

He did sell his ITR over a year ago, but still has the GSR, I think he had some issues with the brz tranny and is looking to get rid of it.

He's definitely not the typical owner. It takes a lot of harsh driving to break away welds and seals on the GSR subframe but the ITR has a reinforced frame.

Almost any car will have issues with the transmission, the way he drives (from what I've heard).

 

[AnchorsAweigh]

I'm going to be in the minority here, but to put that in perspective, $40k is brand new Golf R money. Way too expensive unless you want it for sentimental value (and this is coming from someone who used to own a DC2 GS-R). Or buy an FR-S and get the same package with RWD.

No one is buying this Type R to drive it, you do know that right?

It'll sit in someones garage somewhere while it slowly appreciates until it ends up at another auction in another two decades.

 

[zrickety]

Yeah, it's a shame. I would rack up serious miles in it.

 

[SwiftGTI]

You've never owned a Type R and if you ever did, you wouldn't dare compare a GSR to it. It's not just a trim upgrade. The Integra Type R was built from the ground up completely differently than the GSR. The FT86 is a modern day, RWD GSR. It's a far cry from a modern day ITR. There is no modern day ITR and if there were, it would have summer tires stock and not get beat to the quarter mile by a Toyota Camry.

You do realize that in the exact post you quoted, the guy who's actually owned/tracked them wrote:

The two are EXTREMELY similar though (ITR is much more raw and usable (space) while the BRZ is much more modern and civilized with far superior steering feel.

:laugh:

Like it or not, the BRZ/FR-S is the modern day ITR. Both are sub-2800 lbs., ~200 hp cars with LSDs. The ITR is a bit lighter. The FR-S/BRZ more powerful and adds RWD. Both are incredible at the track and run similar times stock v. stock on similar tires. That's already been shown.

No one is buying this Type R to drive it, you do know that right?

It'll sit in someones garage somewhere while it slowly appreciates until it ends up at another auction in another two decades.

Yeah that's my point. If you're buying it because you're a collector or have a hard-on for Hondas and it's worth $40k to you, that's one thing. But if you're looking for the modern equivalent, save your money and buy an FR-S/BRZ for $20k less.

 

[D Griff]

This thread makes my high school Honda boner of 10+ years ago rise again.

 

[D Griff]

ITR > FURBURZS.

And I like the FURBURZS and am a RWD guy.

 

[SwiftGTI]

ITR > FURBURZS.

And I like the FURBURZS and am a RWD guy.

For me, adding RWD to the formula is the difference. Everyone's going to have their preference though. Personally I'm not a fan of power understeer.

 

[DerSock]

Like it or not, the BRZ/FR-S is the modern day ITR. Both are sub-2800 lbs., ~200 hp cars with LSDs. The ITR is a bit lighter. The FR-S/BRZ more powerful and adds RWD. Both are incredible at the track and run similar times stock v. stock on similar tires. That's already been shown.

Idk why you keep saying the brz/frs is the modern ITR... its really not. Because they both have LSD's and similar lap times? The SI has a lot more in common with the ITR than your frs.

 

[SwiftGTI]

Idk why you keep saying the brz/frs is the modern ITR... its really not. Because they both have LSD's and similar lap times? The SI has a lot more in common with the ITR than your frs.

Size, weight, driving feel, driving position, acceleration, power delivery, chassis balance, lap times. Probably the biggest difference is the ITR has all of its sound deadening stripped out, but the two cars were designed for similar purposes. The ITR was actually one of the cars Toyota/Subaru bench-marked when they were developing the FR-S/BRZ (the other being the 987 Cayman).

Not sure why you think the current SI is a better comparison. Have you driven one versus an old school DC2? Seating position is much higher, the car is heavier, steering is lighter, it feels more refined/isolated, there's lots of chassis roll, it's understeer prone, sloppier turn-in, torquier engine. Very different cars. There's a reason why people think Honda lost its way, especially those who remember what it was like to drive the older Hondas (EK, EM, DC2 chassis etc).

 

[DerSock]

Not sure why you think the current SI is a better comparison.

Its simple, the SI has a very similar engine and is FWD. Probably the most important things to consider in this comparison.

Edit: the frs is the "modern day" Toyota GT86, as Im sure you are aware if its namesake.

 

[SwiftGTI]

Its simple, the SI has a very similar engine and is FWD. Probably the most important things to consider in this comparison.

Edit: the frs is the "modern day" Toyota 86, as Im sure you are aware if its namesake.

I can tell you right now, the K24 engine in the SI feels nothing like the b18c1 (or b18c5) from the Integras. The K24 produces a ton more low-end torque and the VTEC changeover is nowhere near as noticeable.

The current Civic SI chassis also feels very different from the old DC2 chassis.

It's just a bad comparison other than both cars being FWD.

 

[DerSock]

I can tell you right now, the K24 engine in the SI feels nothing like the b18c1 (or b18c5) from the Integras. The K24 produces a ton more low-end torque and the VTEC changeover is nowhere near as noticeable.

The current Civic SI chassis also feels very different from the old DC2 chassis.

It's just a bad comparison other than both cars being FWD.

K20 would be a better comparison, not K24. Do you have something to prove to everyone on this thread? You bought a frs and you need to let the world know how amazing it is? You're really just spitting out arbitrary facts to bolster your ridiculous opinion. Not my fault you keep pushing the term "modern day equivalent." Yerr rong budday.

 

[SwiftGTI]

K20 would be a better comparison, not K24. Do you have something to prove to everyone on this thread? You bought a frs and you need to let the world know how amazing it is? You're really just spitting out arbitrary facts to bolster your ridiculous opinion. Not my fault you keep pushing the term "modern day equivalent." Yerr rong budday.

I actually don't have anything to prove. Facts are facts, they speak for themselves. I've also owned Integras, RSX's, and other cars so I'm aware from experience how they compare to the FR-S.

This all started because I said the FR-S is the modern-day RWD ITR. People seemed to take issue with that, so I explained from facts and personal experience why this was the case.

So far, the only thing I've gotten from this thread was reading the experience of the one guy who owned and tracked both the ITR and BRZ, and basically all he said was they were extremely similar.

The two are EXTREMELY similar though (ITR is much more raw and usable (space) while the BRZ is much more modern and civilized with far superior steering feel.

I think people's hate for the FR-S/BRZ clouds objectivity about the platform.

 

[DerSock]

I actually don't have anything to prove. Facts are facts, they speak for themselves. I've also owned Integras, RSX's, and other cars so I'm aware from experience how they compare to the FR-S.

I think people's hate for the FR-S/BRZ clouds objectivity about the platform.

I certainly dont hate the frs/brz, but youre comparing apples to... vaginas.