1993 Acura Integra GS-R from North America - Comments

It's too bad a video is required to prove something that's so readily obvious. Why would Honda build a newer, Type R Integra that's slower than an older GSR? As for magazine articles, which say this is so? And when did Honda themselves suggest this?

Look it up on Wikipedia, do research.

The 1993 GS-R did 0-60 in 6.4 seconds, it weighed less, imagine the 1997 Type R engine and gearing ratio in a 1993 GSR; nice, it was a better car! It did same 0-60 times with less horsepower, 160 versus 195.

Now you're going to tell me the Acura RSX Type S is better than them all right? You see a trend don't you! As Honda progresses in its model lines, it gets worse and worse, now go buy a Honda S2000CR, for 41000 dollars! And while you're at it, pick me up a 4 door Honda Civic MUGEN for 32000. For these kind of prices, I would go for a brand new Evo 10. Admit it, Honda has lost its way, don't you love the new NSX? Wait... they discontinued that. And they're fixing to discontinue the S2000, nice. Let's all go buy a Honda Civic Si and listen to the blackeyepeas.

Word up, the gs-R from 1993 is sick, it's a poor man's Type R. Actually the 1997 Type R is a little faster, screw the later models with AC and stereos, I'm a purist I guess, but any how the 1997 Type R does 0-60 in 6.1 seconds with 195bhp out of its 1.8 liter. The 1993 gs-R did 0-60 in 6.6 with 160 bhp out of its 1.7 liter. And no it's not found in other countries. It's not a SIR, due to its rarity its that much more desirable. it's a American Japanese car, you can't even find them in Japan!!! It's a reallllyyy cool ride, but I'd still pick the 1997-98 Integra type R, I've seen those run pretty quick, and they're rare themselves. If I had any money (WHICH I DON'T --- POOR ASIAN BOY) I'd just buy them both.

As far as magazine articles, I'd look in Car and Driver archives, really all of them got something. Motor Trend had a video on the web somewhere. But I get what the previous guy was saying, the newer state side stuff sucks. And the Type R from 1997 was around in the 2700 range, the 1993 gs-r weighed less and had AC. Do research though before crying, I swear it's true.

To those who ask questions and act arrogant, you need to provide facts to back up your claims. However I don't think a sir is a 1993 gsr, different engine.

Lastly, I agree a Type R Integra is way too hyped up and are sold at unreasonable prices. I bought a 2001 S2000 for 9500 cash. Its 2.0 makes 240bhp. Clearly a better use of an engine. It revs close to 9000 rpm. Once again better, and it's RWD, clearly better. Now we look at a 2002 NSX... do you get my point?

Maybe you don't. Let's say two people are given 18000 bucks and you go ahead and buy a 2001 Type R for 18000 dollars. Some smart guy buys a 1993 gs-r, which is way better than any later DC gsr, which 0-60 is 7.2, while the 1993 gsr was 6.6, and pay 3800 cash for the 1993. The smart guy uses the rest the cash for turbo setup and suspension upgrades. Just the fact the 1993 gsr is cheaper and more lightweight makes it a better car overall.

If I had the luxury of buying a car for a label like Type R, I'd get a NSX instead, which makes the Type R look foolish, in fact any S2000 make the ITR look silly.

In summary, the 93 gsr was the smart rich man's Type R, and it even weighs less than the 1999-00 Civic Si, and while a 1991 Civic Si weighed less, it didn't make the power the DA gsr did...

Finally, the best FWD car of all time would be any EG CIVIC TYPE R. The Japanese must think us silly, they always clowned the DC integra for being a heavy sedan. Once again, do research and provide ACCURATE links if you disagree, but you'll find I'm right. They considered the two door dc Integra to be a family sedan.