fir3vip3r
Member
Registered: 14th Jun 06
Location: Stevenage, Hertfordshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by VXR
quote:
Originally posted by fir3vip3r
why the fuck have you mentioned a red top engine in this thread.
thread title: astra coupe turbo or civic type r and your going on about the torque from a 10+ year old engine.
i see.
Hmm why talk about a NA 2.0 16v from vauxhall, on a vauxhall site, when talking about NA 2.0 16v engines (as in a civic type r).
I wonder?????? Read the post dopey.
Door, that way, please leave with the D hat on 
because the redtop is only ever so slightly older.
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Corsa_Sport21
Just for the record my mate has a DC2.As much as he loves it,he wishes he had went for a mk4 Gsi.
Says the Honda is good for what it is,but it uses far too much fuel if you want to go anywhere quick(and its not all that quick compared to a Redtop btw)and even when he isnt using Tec,he reckons it still sooks the fuel.Says he will deffo be going for a Mk4 Gsi next.
But then a turbo car will drink juice as soon as it comes on boost, about 2000-2500rpm. Change lower than that, and you may as well have a derv.
1st-2nd-3rd gear, its hard to get above 20mpg in the astra, any turbo car will have similar issue.
BUT
A slight dab on the throttle and you go go go, so on the road, the turbos better (actually, on the road, TDi's are the best imo).
But for belting it down a back road, or track day, type R.
Turbo will be quicker on the road though, as you've got instant power, not waiting another 3000-5000rpm for the engine to let rip.
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by fir3vip3r
because the redtop is only ever so slightly older.
And?????????? Whats your point.
Its still an NA 2.0 16v. With far less technology, and far less torque.
People are whinging about no torque. These people have no idea what they are on about as it has less torque than the redtop (but being on a vauxhall site, no-one could flame the good ol redtop engine could they).
Its a belter of an engine.
And if you REALLY want to get anal, i'll compare the Ecotec engine, of same age as the Honda lump, in which case the stats are even worse, and the vauxhall engine looks 10x as bad, so actually vauxhall have gone backwards, and im using the OLDER but BETTER engine as a comparison.
Door, leave now.
[Edited on 19-01-2009 by VXR]
|
Ojc
Member
Registered: 14th Nov 00
Location: Reading: Drives : Clio 197
User status: Offline
|
Leave it and 6th at 70mph and watch the CTR disapear, especially up hills.
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
But then if you do that your a gimp who again has no idea how to use the engine.
Its not a turbo
Its not a derv
its a HIGH revving NA engine.
Put an F1 car in 7th, at 60mph, and see how well it pulls up the revs??????
No, you wouldn't, you'd knock it down 2-3 gears, revs rise into power band, THEN you go...
Likewise with CTR, you don't leave it in 6th, you stick it in 3rd, let it rev, and go from there... Then where will it be? Stuck right up your arse thats where....
Hence why Akeemkings 300+bhp LET TURBO corsa could not escape his friends mildy tuned NA Civic at top speeds, and acceleration.
|
Corsa_Sport21
Member
Registered: 13th Apr 08
Location: Leven, Fife. Drives : 205 GTi
User status: Offline
|
We both done the same trip,me in an XE corsa and him in his teg,both going hard at it.Compared fuel consumtion after it and he had used double what i had used.Although on the twisties he was quicker.
Even with a mk4 u dont have to use all the revs so really,fuel consumption could be better.Hanging on to the revs all the way,the fuel is going to be pumping thro,using the turbo will mean he can change up a good bit earlier and still have pulled quite a bit compared to what you would have to do to pull in Vtec.
|
Adam_B
Member
Registered: 13th Dec 00
Location: Lancashire
User status: Offline
|
After doing a bit of googling the CTR has 145 ft lbs of torque. I dont know if this is 100% correct but im thinking its not too far off give or take a few ft lbs. Again, correct me if im wrong but doesnt the red top in standard trim make around about 140-150 ft lbs of torque? Ive got a RR print out somewhere from my corsa that had exhaust and air filter and a set of vernier pullys on the standard cams, it made 152ft lbs of torque. Someone tell me im wrong but thats not really any difference, its certainly not 'far less torque.'
[Edited on 19-01-2009 by Adam_B]
|
Corsa_Sport21
Member
Registered: 13th Apr 08
Location: Leven, Fife. Drives : 205 GTi
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by VXR
But then if you do that your a gimp who again has no idea how to use the engine.
Its not a turbo
Its not a derv
its a HIGH revving NA engine.
Put an F1 car in 7th, at 60mph, and see how well it pulls up the revs??????
No, you wouldn't, you'd knock it down 2-3 gears, revs rise into power band, THEN you go...
Likewise with CTR, you don't leave it in 6th, you stick it in 3rd, let it rev, and go from there... Then where will it be? Stuck right up your arse thats where....
Hence why Akeemkings 300+bhp LET TURBO corsa could not escape his friends mildy tuned NA Civic at top speeds, and acceleration.
Another friend of mine has a stripped out Nova that used to be a track car,nothing more than a cage and 2 seats in it and a standard XE.From the off it wiped the floor with a dyno proven 230bhp CTR a good few times.The CTR owner was a tad pissed off so suggested they take it to the dual carriageway.The XE was off and a good but in front till 135+,then the CTR and its 6th gear started to reel him in.Not enough for a clean pass and certainly not enough to pull away as quick as hed liked.
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Adam_B
After doing a bit of googling the CTR has 145 ft lbs of torque. I dont know if this is 100% correct but im thinking its not too far off give or take a few ft lbs. Again, correct me if im wrong but doesnt the red top in standard trim make around about 140-150 ft lbs of torque? Ive got a RR print out somewhere from my corsa that had exhaust and air filter and a set of vernier pullys on the standard cams, it made 152ft lbs of torque. Someone tell me im wrong but thats not really any difference, its certainly not 'far less torque.'
[Edited on 19-01-2009 by Adam_B]
145lb ft on C20XE, 147lb ft on 20XE
So same torque figures on CTR and Redtop lump. So anytime anyone says about them having no torque, i'll quote this
So same torque, yet about 50bhp more top end.
2 sets of cams
Fannytastic engine IMO.
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Corsa_Sport21
Another friend of mine has a stripped out Nova that used to be a track car,nothing more than a cage and 2 seats in it and a standard XE.From the off it wiped the floor with a dyno proven 230bhp CTR a good few times.The CTR owner was a tad pissed off so suggested they take it to the dual carriageway.The XE was off and a good but in front till 135+,then the CTR and its 6th gear started to reel him in.Not enough for a clean pass and certainly not enough to pull away as quick as hed liked.
Errrrrrrr peak bhp......
You've answered your own comment there?
Now tell me weight of said stripped Nova for acceleration?
A car weighing 800kg is bound to out accelerate a car weighing 1.2+ tonnes.......
Who's seen Akeemkings vids, any nooby lot?
Also seen CTR's doing same times as stripped out Novas/Corsas, but with full interiors.
For my next trick, i'll compare a stripped out 400bhp Nova Vs a Ferrari....
Nova out accelerates it, but Ferrari has top end... Does this mean the Novas the better car???
[Edited on 19-01-2009 by VXR]
|
Adam_B
Member
Registered: 13th Dec 00
Location: Lancashire
User status: Offline
|
you were saying the red top had far less torque than the CTR though
My issue is you have to rev the bollocks off it get to the torque, you just cant enjoy a quiet b road making decent pace without driving it flat out. Peak torque at 4000rpm FTW in the real world.
|
flybikeslee
Member
Registered: 2nd Jan 07
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by VXR
quote:
Originally posted by fir3vip3r
because the redtop is only ever so slightly older.
And?????????? Whats your point.
Its still an NA 2.0 16v. With far less technology, and far less torque.
People are whinging about no torque. These people have no idea what they are on about as it has less torque than the redtop (but being on a vauxhall site, no-one could flame the good ol redtop engine could they).
Its a belter of an engine.
And if you REALLY want to get anal, i'll compare the Ecotec engine, of same age as the Honda lump, in which case the stats are even worse, and the vauxhall engine looks 10x as bad, so actually vauxhall have gone backwards, and im using the OLDER but BETTER engine as a comparison.
Door, leave now.
[Edited on 19-01-2009 by VXR]
no, compare the older integra to it, age means nothing as theres not much technology behind the vtec engines, even less with the xe. 2.0 16v with figures quoted, less cc but the teg has 140lbs and 188bhp (we're talking uk spec and not the slighlty more powerful jdm) iirc.
|
Corsa_Sport21
Member
Registered: 13th Apr 08
Location: Leven, Fife. Drives : 205 GTi
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Adam_B
you were saying the red top had far less torque than the CTR though
My issue is you have to rev the bollocks off it get to the torque, you just cant enjoy a quiet b road making decent pace without driving it flat out. Peak torque at 4000rpm FTW in the real world.
Perfect example.
The key to having a quick engine is having near enough the same figures for bhp and torque.The redtop is within 5 of this,the typeR is roughly 50 in difference.
|
Corsa_Sport21
Member
Registered: 13th Apr 08
Location: Leven, Fife. Drives : 205 GTi
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by flybikeslee
quote:
Originally posted by VXR
quote:
Originally posted by fir3vip3r
because the redtop is only ever so slightly older.
And?????????? Whats your point.
Its still an NA 2.0 16v. With far less technology, and far less torque.
People are whinging about no torque. These people have no idea what they are on about as it has less torque than the redtop (but being on a vauxhall site, no-one could flame the good ol redtop engine could they).
Its a belter of an engine.
And if you REALLY want to get anal, i'll compare the Ecotec engine, of same age as the Honda lump, in which case the stats are even worse, and the vauxhall engine looks 10x as bad, so actually vauxhall have gone backwards, and im using the OLDER but BETTER engine as a comparison.
Door, leave now.
[Edited on 19-01-2009 by VXR]
no, compare the older integra to it, age means nothing as theres not much technology behind the vtec engines, even less with the xe. 2.0 16v with figures quoted, less cc but the teg has 140lbs and 188bhp (we're talking uk spec and not the slighlty more powerful jdm) iirc.
IIRC the teg engine has 130odd lb/ft and 187bhp.The JDM version has a few more bhp but that certainly aint noticeable on the road,only on a dyno.
|
flybikeslee
Member
Registered: 2nd Jan 07
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
oh yeah we're only talking a little bit more bhp wise which is why i quoted the lower of the two
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Adam_B
you were saying the red top had far less torque than the CTR though
My issue is you have to rev the bollocks off it get to the torque, you just cant enjoy a quiet b road making decent pace without driving it flat out. Peak torque at 4000rpm FTW in the real world.
Powned I thought the CTR had 160lb ft, but obviously im wrong with that.
Thing is, if you dont like revving an engine, and you buy a CTR, then you haven't got much intelligence.
You want instant torque, then you need a derv (but i did say all this already  )
NO 2.0 NA 4 pot has loads of torque. Its 2 litres, a bottle of milk. Put a turbocharger on it and of course its going to have much more. But then also, I did say the Tubby will be better for road use already as well
IIRC, its the 1.8 VVTI Toyota unit that has 180bhp and 130lb ft.
|
gavin18787
Premium Member
Registered: 22nd Feb 05
Location: Basildon, Essex
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Adam_B
quote:
Originally posted by gavin18787
quote:
Originally posted by Daniel_Corsa
quote:
Originally posted by Adam_B
Astra. Just because i hate having to rag the bollocks off a car to get it to go anywhere.
You dont unless you want to "go for it" has the usual average 2.0 NA engine power without (about 150bhp iirc) the other cam.
BHP means nothing. The one i drove i felt like it was either normal driving or full on 110% Attack mode, there was no middle ground for spirited fun driving.
True figures mean nothing really but I still feel that the civic has more low down go then my old corsa gsi did. All depends what you are used too. You had a vx220 and have accsess to a 350z so to you it probably would feel gutless
Main thing is you have to give them time. At first I wasnt overly in love with it now I have had it a while I really like it. I now know how to use the gears and keep it on the boil to get the best out of it.
My friend wanted a play the other day in his LCR both at 60 and went for it with nothing in it. I just knew that if I put it in 3rd at this speed I would be straight in the right rpm to be making the power.
But if you dont like this driving style you wont like it. Buy a derv or turbo car insted.
Cars are all personal preference 
I have a feeling the CTR is on its way to or has already achived its 106 gti status on here
Drives supercharged Tec with torque  
|
flybikeslee
Member
Registered: 2nd Jan 07
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
no the 106 would kill it 
|
Nic Barnes
Member
Registered: 5th Apr 04
Location: nowhere near ginger people
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by VXR
And not one unit in standard trim has ever failed.
Something Honda are quite proud of, and rightly so.
thats not technically true however. they have never been able to point the blame for engine failure at the vtec set up. the engines do however fail.
vtec and never failing is a total internet made up thing. i go into honda all the time. quite a few engines being replaced, engines in bits etc from modern cars. id not say theyre unreliable though. theyre a great engine.
just hyped up far too much on the net.
id still far rather have a ctr than an astra gsi if i just wanted it as the way it came std though. theyre awesome cars, tarnished by the chav reputation and ego's of their owners. still. cracking cars and very tuneable engines.
supercharged one from a town down the road has 470bhp odd. ive never heard a car like it. absolutely amazing car.
|
mk4_astra
Member
Registered: 15th Oct 03
Location: aylesbury,bucks
User status: Offline
|
i cant understand why people stil say these cars have no torque when they have the same as most other 2.0 n/a engines a friend of mine had a 172 cup and drove a ctr, he said both had around the same amount of low down grunt yet you never hear people slating the 172/182 for having no torque blah blah..
also i trained with someone down the gym who owned a ctr, impeza(sti i think) e46 m3 and now has a golf mk5 gti and he rates the ctr VERY highly saying it was the perfect hot hatch and the power being up top of the rev range on the great engine and gearbox combo made it a real hoot to drive on the boil. i also remember he raced clio197s and had a sponsership going on so its not just an average jo voicing his opinion.
back on topic pick the astra coupe turbo if was want something to cruise around in which is good at being a lazy drive and has nearly instant power thanks to the turbo, they are also nice looking and comfy( my friends 1.8 coupe always got comments on how nice it looked etc) but dont expend a fun and involving drive, speak to fad and jambo they had the mk4 astra gsi.
pick the ctr if you want a fast and great handling hatch thats pratical and reliable and if your not bothered that you wont be the only person in your area with one, but they are popular for a reason.
this might help you make your mind up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeHY69gweKU
|
Corsa_Sport21
Member
Registered: 13th Apr 08
Location: Leven, Fife. Drives : 205 GTi
User status: Offline
|
I think the "no torque" comment about the CTR is aimed at the fact they have no low down torque.
|
andy1868
Member
Registered: 22nd Jun 06
Location: Burscough, Lancashire
User status: Offline
|
if we're getting pissy about it, the K20 in the JDM EP3/DC5 produces 152lbs/ft
but enough about this torque business and back to the matter at hand what kind of car do you want mate?
[Edited on 19-01-2009 by andy1868]
|
Adam_B
Member
Registered: 13th Dec 00
Location: Lancashire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by gavin18787
All depends what you are used too. You had a vx220 and have accsess to a 350z so to you it probably would feel gutless
erm, this was ages ago. Id just got out of my XE Corsa Know what you mean though
|
MoesTavern
Member
Registered: 19th Jul 07
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ojc
Leave it and 6th at 70mph and watch the CTR disapear, especially up hills.
Well obviously, as you'd be driving in completely the wrong way for the Civic.
|
big eck
Member
Registered: 20th Apr 03
Location: Tullibody. Drives - Audi B8 S4 & Fiesta Zetec-S
User status: Offline
|
Just for comparison here are the differences between the C20XE that was in my old corsa and the K20 thats in the wifes CTR
I know about dyno lottery and all that so this is just a rough look lol
XE Corsa
Mods - 4-2-1 manifold straight through exhaust (no cat) only 1 rear silencer and an Induction Kit, Ecotec pipe (supposidly makes more torque than the power cap)
Civic Type R
Mods - Mongoose Cat back and thats it lol
|
