Think Honda has Lost its Way?

bravenrace wrote:

Knurled wrote:

bravenrace wrote: Maybe they are finding their way back. http://www.smautocar.com/video-the-new-honda-civic-type-r-is-faster-than-the-nissan-gt-r-and-gallardo-lp-560-4/

All I saw is that Honda is putting a turbo engine in their Civic as a last-ditch attempt at relevance. Why would I want a Civic when I could get a Focus ST, which is an altogether nicer car inside, outside, and in the driver's seat? Also: Kudos to Ford for making that sentence able to be said with a straight face. Seriously. Also for making a car *more badass than the ST* available here soon.

That "more badass ST" was 45 seconds slower around the Nurburgring than Honda's "last ditch attempt" Civic R's 7:50.

The new RS, to which he was referring, hasn't had a Ring lap time posted yet.

Has anyone considered that with the glut of cheap and fast grocery-getters and performance cars on the market it might be the Car Enthusiast that has lost the way rather than the car companies?

Seriously, with the quality and performance of the average vehicle being what it is in today's market, its like being at Hugh Hefner's parties in the 70's and debating the ambulant scenery.

Flight Service wrote:

bravenrace wrote:

Knurled wrote:

bravenrace wrote: Maybe they are finding their way back. http://www.smautocar.com/video-the-new-honda-civic-type-r-is-faster-than-the-nissan-gt-r-and-gallardo-lp-560-4/

All I saw is that Honda is putting a turbo engine in their Civic as a last-ditch attempt at relevance. Why would I want a Civic when I could get a Focus ST, which is an altogether nicer car inside, outside, and in the driver's seat? Also: Kudos to Ford for making that sentence able to be said with a straight face. Seriously. Also for making a car *more badass than the ST* available here soon.

That "more badass ST" was 45 seconds slower around the Nurburgring than Honda's "last ditch attempt" Civic R's 7:50.

The new RS, to which he was referring, hasn't had a Ring lap time posted yet.

Uh, what? He said Focus ST. Silly me, I took that as he was talking about the Focus ST.

NOHOME wrote: Has anyone considered that with the glut of cheap and fast grocery-getters and performance cars on the market it might be the Car Enthusiast that has lost the way rather than the car companies? Seriously, with the quality and performance of the average vehicle being what it is in today's market, its like being at Hugh Hefner's parties in the 70's and debating the ambulant scenery.

Good point. Sometimes I think some people here are incapable of saying anything positive. I have two of the cars that most of these people would say are a high mark for honda, but memories are deceiving. I love these cars, but they are in no way comparable to what is being produced now. What kind of 'ring lap do you all think an '88 CRX-si would do?

James May said: What is the Nürburgring? It's an old race track, the longest in the world, and it's open to anyone. It's pleasantly informal for something German and even rather scenic in places. driving around the 'Ring for a laugh – and I have done this a few times – is harmless, unless you collide with the Armco, the trees, that big fence or any of the other obstacles that prompted motorsport's governing bodies to declare it unfit for Formula one racing. What the Nürburgring isn't, in my view, is an arena of serious scientific enquiry. The 'Ring, like the blower on WO's 4.5-liter Bentley, corrupts performance when it's used by car makers to develop new models. Testing prototype cars on a circuit is nothing new, obviously: it's probably been going on since someone drove a horseless carriage onto a disused donkey derby track. But the 'Ring, through being communal and open to all, encourages a pointless scrabble for comparative lap times that isn't helping you or me. I may be alone in this, but I reckon that a lot of performance cars I drive lack proper feel. I blame the Nürburgring. Being able to claim that your daily driver holds a production car lap record somewhere in Germany is a good boast down the pub for the feeble minded, and the map of the place that Aston Martin embroidered on the center console of the N400 might make its owners feel superior, but it's all nonsense. In what way is the Nürburgring like the roads we drive on? There is nothing coming the other way, no pedestrians, no traffic lights, no tractors coming out of fields driven by cider-addled bucolics, no average-speed cameras; nothing, in fact, that makes real driving a sort of feel-as-you-go activity. In the real world, I reckon handling is more important than grip; in fact I would go so far as to say that cars with genuinely pleasing and intuitive feel are generally a bit short on absolute roadholding – the original Mini, the MX-5, the Perodua Kelisa (no, honest) and even my Panda. These cars, through the offices of that occult and incompletely understood thing we call the man/machine interface, send us messages about what the wheels are doing and what we should do about it. But when it comes to putting in a good time on a track, grip is paramount. It's why racing teams expend so much effort on producing downforce. The faster you can go through a bend, the sooner you will arrive back at the beginning. I'm simplifying things greatly here – obviously brakes are important, because if you can brake later you can go faster for longer, and power is useful because you can reach a higher speed sooner. But Colin Chapman was spot on when he observed that races are always won in the corners. So I would contend that cars with a good 'Ring pedigree are generally, and not unlike your correspondent, over-tired. Fat tires kill steering feel, for a start. They also generate bogus inputs through the phenomenon of 'tramlining', and because fat tires need to be low in profile to stop them deforming, the ride goes to the dogs. The ride then loses a fortune at the dogs because the suspension is set up to withstand cornering forces that can't be achieved on the B1108. None of this bothers your Ringmaster. He can attack corners with impunity, for the reasons outlined above, and because he's already been round a million times he knows exactly what to expect. Speaking personally, however, I tend to drive all over the place, and not just round and round the same road. I never know what's coming next. I reckon that driving quickly on a road you've never even seen before demands more input than driving around a track that's locked in your brain like the knowledge of how to tie a shoelace. Your understanding will only extend as far as you can see, which means you will have to go slower for most of the time and exploit opportunities for hanging your arse out over the ragged edge only when they present themselves unequivocally. Of what use, here, is a car that will go round that bend four times faster than you can? It will feel clinical and dull at your speed, and will probably punish you the rest of the time with a rotten ride and contrary steering feel. This is the problem with road cars developed on a track and on the 'Ring in particular. Their prowess can be expressed as a single figure. Because the Nürburgring is a very long circuit, a tiny improvement in outright cornering speed will yield a bigger difference, in terms of tenths of a second saved, than it would on a big roundabout. Therefore it encourages compromise in the areas that actually make a car pleasant to drive. That N400 is the best V8 Aston around the 'Ring, but the standard car is much more enjoyable on the road. Building a car that yields a winning lap time around the track gives you a car that is brilliant at that but nothing else. It comes with an impressive certificate but no real talent. In reality, performance is a sensation, not an absolute. It's about feedback, understanding, and the pact you establish with the controls and the car's limitations. Consider, um, Chopin. It won't automatically sound better on the concert Bechstein than it will on the beat-up and beer-sodden Joanna in the corner of the pub. What matters is that the person playing it feels the music.

Knurled wrote:

bravenrace wrote: Maybe they are finding their way back. http://www.smautocar.com/video-the-new-honda-civic-type-r-is-faster-than-the-nissan-gt-r-and-gallardo-lp-560-4/

All I saw is that Honda is putting a turbo engine in their Civic as a last-ditch attempt at relevance.

In this age of "smart" cars and Priuses, one could argue that a turbo engine in a Civic would be the very antithesis of "relevant". I echo the sentiment posted herein that perhaps it is the enthusiast that has lost his way. Auto manufacturers will build what sells.

In reply to oldeskewltoy:

Yeah, captain slow is the authority on the track. That's why virtually every manufacturer tests there.

In reply to bravenrace:

Yes, and that is why they cock it up.

If honda brings this to the US and makes the S1000 and brings that here as well i'll have faith in them. Until things like that happens it's still Japan's malaise era.

I think I am going to need a rather large barrel of popcorn for the "What tires did they use" portion.

bravenrace wrote:

Flight Service wrote:

bravenrace wrote:

Knurled wrote:

bravenrace wrote: Maybe they are finding their way back. http://www.smautocar.com/video-the-new-honda-civic-type-r-is-faster-than-the-nissan-gt-r-and-gallardo-lp-560-4/

All I saw is that Honda is putting a turbo engine in their Civic as a last-ditch attempt at relevance. Why would I want a Civic when I could get a Focus ST, which is an altogether nicer car inside, outside, and in the driver's seat? Also: Kudos to Ford for making that sentence able to be said with a straight face. Seriously. Also for making a car *more badass THAN the ST* available here soon.

That "more badass ST" was 45 seconds slower around the Nurburgring than Honda's "last ditch attempt" Civic R's 7:50.

The new RS, to which he was referring, hasn't had a Ring lap time posted yet.

Uh, what? He said Focus ST. Silly me, I took that as he was talking about the Focus ST.

no biggie

NOHOME wrote: Has anyone considered that with the glut of cheap and fast grocery-getters and performance cars on the market it might be the Car Enthusiast that has lost the way rather than the car companies? Seriously, with the quality and performance of the average vehicle being what it is in today's market, its like being at Hugh Hefner's parties in the 70's and debating the ambulant scenery.

I wouldn't go that far, but there are some great performance car bargains out there.

bravenrace wrote: In reply to oldeskewltoy: Yeah, captain slow is the authority on the track. That's why virtually every manufacturer tests there.

I'm pretty sure he is more of an "authority" then you are.......

and as far as every manufacturer testing there... there is no claim on intelligence in the automotive field..... never was

"testing" @ the "Ring" is all ego and means absolutely nothing

In reply to oldeskewltoy:

Um, when did I claim to be an authority?

bravenrace wrote: That "more badass ST" was 45 seconds slower around the Nurburgring than Honda's "last ditch attempt" Civic R's 7:50.

In reply to Tactical Penguin:

I don't know you, so I can't say for sure, but I have a feeling that no, you couldn't.

bravenrace wrote:

Flight Service wrote:

bravenrace wrote:

Knurled wrote:

bravenrace wrote: Maybe they are finding their way back. http://www.smautocar.com/video-the-new-honda-civic-type-r-is-faster-than-the-nissan-gt-r-and-gallardo-lp-560-4/

All I saw is that Honda is putting a turbo engine in their Civic as a last-ditch attempt at relevance. Why would I want a Civic when I could get a Focus ST, which is an altogether nicer car inside, outside, and in the driver's seat? Also: Kudos to Ford for making that sentence able to be said with a straight face. Seriously. Also for making a car *more badass than the ST* available here soon.

That "more badass ST" was 45 seconds slower around the Nurburgring than Honda's "last ditch attempt" Civic R's 7:50.

The new RS, to which he was referring, hasn't had a Ring lap time posted yet.

Uh, what? He said Focus ST. Silly me, I took that as he was talking about the Focus ST.

No, he said that the ST isn't the top of the range, there's a more badass Focus going to be available soon.

bravenrace wrote: In reply to Tactical Penguin: I don't know you, so I can't say for sure, but I have a feeling that no, you couldn't.

You lack imagination AND a sense of humor.

In reply to Knurled:

"Why would I want a Civic when I could get a Focus ST, which is an altogether nicer car inside, outside, and in the driver's seat?"

So what does that mean? Are you saying that it means you were comparing the Civic to the RS? Then why did you say ST? Please tell me how that works? You compared the ST to the Civic, then added that the RS is on the way. I was comparing the ST to the Civic R. If the RS is more badass, then the ST is badass, right? So my mistake, and all of this debate is because I used the word "more" incorrectly? That doesn't change the fact that the Civic blows away the ST on the 'ring, along with all other front wheel drive cars and many rear and AWD cars. They deserve credit for that, not criticism. And unless you've seen, sat in, and driven a Civic R, you have no way of knowing which is the altogether nicer car. However, one thing is pretty much a given, and that is that the Civic will be more reliable and have a higher resale value than the Focus.

In reply to Tactical Penguin:

I wasn't doubting the van...

In reply to Tactical Penguin:

LOL

Sick thread bro.

I don't care what any of you say that car is badass.

For a moment I thought this was going to be a discussion of the HR-V, which the claim roots from a EF Civic/CRX SI....