27th Apr 2007, 03:06

Has anyone got the new 2007 Type R? If so whats it like??

I Getting the new Type R in January 2008. Cannot wait!!

19th Jul 2007, 10:08

The new Civic Type R saloon is more powerful, and is faster than the dc5 Integra. It has 240bhp and can be imported. I've seen a few on the Auto Trader.

The Type RR is also available in japan with 260bhp, but only if they made the british version with 260bhp... I think a lot of Honda fans are disappointed, because the new Type R UK spec is exactly the same as the old one performance wise.

1st Aug 2007, 08:38


I recently traded my civic type r in for a new skoda fabia VRS. The fabia VRS has "FAR" superior acceleration through the gears, I found it to be quite a bit quicker from 20mph to about 95mph, then and only then will the civic type r edge ahead. The handling was sharper in the type r though.

Fabia VRS has MUCH better in gear performance and far better fuel economy.


2nd Aug 2007, 11:03

Sarah, you had a very duff Type R. Probably a 1.6 non v-tec with Type R bodykit, because the Type R isn't just slightly faster, it's in a completely different league.

31st Oct 2007, 21:02

Sorry for re-opening the subject, but someone mentioned buying cars after reading reviews on this website.

First of all you don't know whose qualified and who isn't.

2nd, never ever buy a car because someone else likes it, you buy a car that YOU like.. or am I wrong people?

16th Nov 2007, 04:04

Autocar timed the vRS to 60 in 7.1 seconds, and it will match an Elise 111R in the 20-40 increment, and beat a BMW 330i from 50-70.

Peak power and torque are delivered right where most people tend to drive most of the time (2000-4000 RPM) meaning it feels quick even when you're just tootling around A to B.

And all this is before you get it chipped!

One of the absolute best things about driving a vRS is that so many idiots underestimate it, and therefore hand you the opportunity to humiliate them in such a way that you just can't refuse.

Of course it's not a fast car in the greater scheme of things, but when you come up against a typical hot hatch in any situation other than a drag race, you have very little to worry about.

Oh I should add, for an additional investment of about 1500 quid, mine makes the same power as a Civic Type-R, almost 200 lb/ft MORE torque, and has done 60,000 miles without a single fault.

And 55 mpg running to work and back! :-)

Still, slag off all you like. It perpetuates the myth, and ensures a ready supply of people to make look daft on the road. If word got about, driving it would be nowhere near as much fun.

17th Nov 2007, 11:03

"Autocar timed the vRS to 60 in 7.1 seconds, and it will match an Elise 111R in the 20-40 increment, and beat a BMW 330i from 50-70."

First of all that 0-60 run was done on a non wind assisted run, so that's misleading and inaccurate. That beating a 330 from 50-70 what you haven't told everyone is that is only in 4th or 5th gear so again misleading, in 3rd gear it would leave the Skoda for dead.

It doesn't matter what you think or believe that Type R does 0-60 in 6.4, it isn't ugly like the Skoda, and it's got the respect of 95% of road users, something a Skoda will never have; along with Rover they are the most uncool cars ever.

18th Nov 2007, 14:47

Ugliness is in the eye of the beholder. The Type R is more like a breadvan with windows than the wheeled equivalent of Angelina Jolie, if we're being honest.

I think you'll find that I acknowledged the Type-R was still the quicker car. And in any case, neither are as quick as the Honda sitting in my garage - a 2006 FireBlade. That's what you call performance.

Hence, my other acknowledgement that the vRS is not quick in the greater scheme of things.

19th Nov 2007, 06:55

'First of all that 0-60 run was done on a none wind assisted run so that's misleading and inaccurate.'

'None wind assisted run'...think about it. The wind wasn't helping it that means.

19th Nov 2007, 14:10

I really wish this debate would end. The Type R is pointless, you only ever get any fun or speed out of it if you drive it like a lunatic, it is flat as a pancake up to 6000rpm, it feels like it can barely haul itself along under that RPM, it has no torque out of corners hence a well driven diesel will easily keep up with or pull ahead of it.

I'm not a spotty teeny, I had one of the first Type R's in the worst colour I later found out (black...peeling paint etc) it was awful, you can wax lyrical about the mechanical loveliness and F1 technology all day long, but in the real world it does not work. I sold mine after 6 months, and something like a Focus ST is massively faster, and far superior in every department, drive them back to back, there's no debate those are the facts.

19th Nov 2007, 16:25

Well if you lived in the United States you would see the pain we have with our cars. Our Focus is a piece of crap and our little Delta platformed cars are rental cars. Honda Civics, 3's, Corollas, and Jetta's rule our streets.

19th Nov 2007, 18:43

14;10 What? You just said a Ford engine is superior to a Honda engine. NO. Sorry, but that's a lot far fetched. Guess what? You're allowed to run the Honda at 4-6000 rpms, and it won't blow up like the Focus will.

I know a kid that had the Honda you're describing, and he drove it so brutally that he ruined three transmissions. I mean, he drove it every day like he was TRYING his best to destroy it. The engine never gave up.

His mother owns a Focus and the transmission went out on her while she was running errands and driving like you would expect someone's mother to drive; very easily. Had she driven it like he drives his Honda, the Focus wouldn't have made it through one single week.

21st Nov 2007, 16:10

He's talking about the Focus ST, which you can't buy in the US.

225 bhp 2.5 litre five cylinder turbocharged Volvo engine making more torque at idle than the Honda makes with its neck wrung. 236 lb/ft @ 1600 RPM against the Honda's limp wristed 142 lb/ft @ 6500 RPM. And it's torque that moves the car at the end of the day. Fuel economy stinks, but hey you can't have it all.

Beats the Honda on any headline figure and wipes the floor with it on the in gear increments. Can produce 300 bhp and 300lb/ft without breaking a sweat.

British traffic cops regularly see 200,000+ miles from these engines. They are completely bulletproof.

23rd Nov 2007, 14:27

The comment above I think sums it up pretty well for me.

There is a lot of satisfaction to be gained from keeping a VTEC Honda singing across a good bit of road. In fact, one of the best drives of my entire life was in an old 1991 CRX VTEC along the A272 in Hampshire at 2AM. I was buzzing for hours afterwards.

Where they frustrate me though is in daily driving. They just don't feel quick unless you're thraping them. Fantastic when you're "on one", but irritating going to work and back.

I guess it depends what you want a car to do. Incidentally I drove a new CTR last week and thought it was dreadful. Feels underpowered and my God, the understeer is appalling! The original reviewer did the right thing going for the 06 model in my opinion.