Honda Is Going Rally Racing, Unveiling the New Civic Type R HRC Rally XP This Weekend

[-]

Frlataway@reddit

An AWD Civic Type R would be very welcome. I think they've nearly maximized the FWD performance with this gen and any further refinements are going to have vastly diminished returns compared to AWD. Plus, Acura has a good AWD system they may be able to use.

[-]

Aero06@reddit

AWD would be a good way to differentiate the Integra Type-S, they could keep the Type-R lighter and cheaper, and add more performance appeal to the pricier Acura.

[-]

Seeker80@reddit

It's a no-brainer, really. The Type-S could've had the RDX engine output & SH-AWD. Think of it being like a 'budget Golf R,' or a way to handily see off the GTI. Then the Type-R could get the CTR engine to go along with that awd.

[-]

Ran4@reddit

But the Golf R is cheaper than the type R…

[-]

Seeker80@reddit

My proposed Integra Type-S would be the one positioned as the 'budget Golf R.' The proposed Integra Type-R would be on a relatively even footing with the Golf R. The fwd Civic Type-R isn't in this fight, at least not for my scheme.

[-]

T-Baaller@reddit

The Type-S could've had the RDX engine output & SH-AWD.

Would that stuff fit? Seems like Honda prioritized rear seat room with the civic so even though I assume AWD crossovers exist on the platform, I am unsure there's room under the passenger space without some more significant modification.

[-]

mbn8807@reddit

Awd integra type s would be dope. Having an RDX type r with a sportier suspension would sell well. Honda needs to make their cars more fun again.

[-]

Frlataway@reddit

Ya know I thought that as soon as I posted. Would shell out for an AWD Type-S for sure. Lots of snow and country roads where I'm at, so every bit helps.

[-]

willpc14@reddit

I don't think I'd trade my GRC for an AWD Type-S simply because I don't think it makes financial sense, but there's a good chance I would have stretched for an AWD Type-S over the GRC when buying new.

[-]

m3t1t1@reddit

I believe they did this with the accord and tlx. Both 2.0t. Acura had the optional AWD. But the Acura was slower than the accord due to the extra weight. They would need to make the Type S significantly faster to account for the weight. Can't have the Acura cost more and slower than the Honda.

[-]

Spyzilla@reddit

An AWD Integra would be incredible

[-]

ZaheerAlGhul@reddit

That's what is should of been. It would at least justify the 10k difference between the two

[-]

Id-Build-That@reddit

Why would adding AWD make it better?

[-]

Uni_tasker@reddit

Better traction on loose surfaces.

[-]

SecretPantyWorshiper@reddit

I wouldn't be so sure with that FWD really isnt that bad for rally

[-]

Id-Build-That@reddit

And yet Honda is taking the FWD Type R rally racing.

[-]

Seeker80@reddit

This isn't a big deal. There are rallying events held at different levels of competition, with fwd, rwd and awd. The top levels feature awd, however.

[-]

Windows-XP-Home-NEW@reddit

TRACTION! Cars tilt rearward during hard launches, taking weight offf the front wheels, which is not ideal when your car is driven by exclusively the front wheels.

[-]

Id-Build-That@reddit

But when you weigh all the “cons” associated with adding AWD, does it really make it “better”?

[-]

Windows-XP-Home-NEW@reddit

Other than extra weight and tire wear there are literally no cons, only pros, so yes, it’s absolutely worth it, and makes every car but a drift car better.

[-]

-insignificant-@reddit

For rally racing? Yes.

[-]

Seeker80@reddit

Like others have mentioned, the traction is much improved. Most performance-oriented awd setups will focus almost exclusively on putting down the power at corner exit. That's the most important part of the turn, so it makes sense. That was the big draw of using it in rallying originally. Honda's SH-AWD is one of the rare types that can help with actually turning the car before you get to the corner exit.

[-]

Frlataway@reddit

Better traction and the ability to put down more power without torque steer. Asking only the front wheels to grip, steer and put down power is a lot. It can be mitigated to some extent but like I mentioned earlier, it's diminishing returns on money invested compared to changing the drivetrain.

[-]

roman_maverik@reddit

Performance gains come from weight savings, which is why the CTR is like 3100 pounds (which is already kind of pushing it).

An AWD CTR would probably weigh 3300 pounds, which would make it no different than all the other 300-+ hp cars that also weigh over 3300 pounds.

There’s a reason why the CTR punches above its weight; it’s mostly weight

[-]

SecretPantyWorshiper@reddit

Yeah people really underestimate how important keeping the weight low is.

[-]

killshelter@reddit

Or they should just do what Chevy did with the corvette after maxing out front engine capability.

Mid engine civic time.

/s

[-]

V8-Turbo-Hybrid@reddit

That's what beefy S660 should be.

[-]

stoned-autistic-dude@reddit

A CTR with SH-AWD would be insane. Even a traditional gearbox with an NSX-type AWD system would be crazy. Imagine the possibilities, like actual torque vectoring without relying on the brakes.

[-]

s4ltydog@reddit

So wait…. TIL that a Civic Type R only has about 35 more HP than a current model WRX and DOESNT have AWD. Forgive me, I’m not a Honda guy, but what exactly makes this a $60k car? I can gain that additional HP with an Intake and a Tune on my 22 WRX and still be at 1/3 the cost of the $68k Type R my local Honda dealer is selling.

[-]

roastpuff@reddit

The handling/chassis/suspension. It's not about straight line speed it's about the cornering...

[-]

s4ltydog@reddit

Yeah….. and the WRX isn’t about straight line speed either so your argument doesn’t really make sense.

[-]

roastpuff@reddit

Your argument is that you can spend X to make the WRX have more horsepower. That's straight line speed stuff. The WRX stock is a floppy noodle on track compared to a Corolla GR, Golf R or Civic Type R.

Others have also tried to explain to you, but I don't think you're willing to understand.

[-]

zerosystem03@reddit

Not to mention look at how a wrx tS is priced against a type R. No power adders, just suspension and brakes. "Bargain buy" goes out the window

[-]

2Drogdar2Furious@reddit

MSRP on a type R is SUPPOSED to be about $48k (if memory serves). And a Type R is about 10 seconds faster around the Nurburgring than a big standard WRX.

Couple that with Hondas reliability and it actually stands heads and shoulders over the Subaru IMO.

An AWD factory Type R could potentially dominate.

[-]

T-Baaller@reddit

Couple that with Hondas reliability

Worse than Subaru for quite a while now.

EJ motors were infamous but that's long ago, the current WRX's FA24 turbo is stout.

Meanwhile Honda's been slipping by Consumer Reports rankings, they're lucky to get in the top 3 where Subaru, Toyota, Lexus, and even Mazda (before the CX90/70) have been hanging out for the last decade or so.

[-]

handymanshandle@reddit

Do these Type Rs have issues besides cooling on track? I'm rather curious because I'm primarily most knowledgeable about the issues the Elantra N has (no surprise, I own one) but I haven't heard much in the way of the Type R (or the WRX, for the record) in reliability.

[-]

willpc14@reddit

Mark of Savagegeese boiled the brake fluid on his FL5 when doing track sessions against the GRC. I think the rotors were fine, so all you'd really need to do is swap out the brake fluid and maybe the brake lines for steel ones.

(Yes, the GRC had trouble with the AWD system too. This wasn't a shot at the FL5, just a response to a question.)

[-]

zerosystem03@reddit

High temp brake fluid needs to be done on any car for the track. I dont remember what Mark was running in that video but for the FL5 it could also be a case of their brake torque vectoring overworking the brakes

[-]

zerosystem03@reddit

Cooling, maybe fuel starvation like in the Integras. I would still put my money on a Type R being more reliable on track over a WRX any day. I know several owners now that have blown up their WRX or STI on track

[-]

T-Baaller@reddit

I am not aware of any CTR/track-specific weaknesses and I think if you're cool with FWD at its size and price it's a fine pick.

If I needed 4 doors I'd have short-listed the Elantra N or a WRX (I see enough snow to want power on my rear axle for winter fun) for my money, but I was more price sensitive when shopping last year, and Honda's been getting away with stupid markups since the pandemic.

I mainly just jumped in to poke a hole in Honda's reliability reputation, being something they've been coasting on.

[-]

zerosystem03@reddit

If WRX is in the conversation, Consumer Reports is irrelevant because that model isnt included, nor is the BRZ. When you pull up the rankings, click "see models" and it will show which ones are part of it

Many journalists/reviewers have said Subaru is reliable for typical grocery getters. For any performance cars like the wrx or brz, reliability gets questionable

[-]

s4ltydog@reddit

And I mean stock for stock yes it IS more powerful. Reliability is out the window IMO Subaru is just as reliable as a Honda or Toyota, especially newer Subarus. That said as I mentioned, I can gain that HP back for a few grand at most in an intake and a tune. Hell bone stock with a tune the VB can reliably hit 300hp. So on my personal car that cost just under 26k, let’s add 5 grand for shits and giggles and I have the same HP as the Type R coupled with AWD for 17 grand less than MSRP on a Type R (which good luck finding that). So I’m still not seeing the value in the Type R…..

[-]

zerosystem03@reddit

So on my personal car that cost just under 26k, let’s add 5 grand for shits and giggles and I have the same HP as the Type R coupled with AWD for 17 grand less than MSRP on a Type R

Where are you pulling these numbers from?

Type R has 315 hp which is 44 more than a WRX, not "only 35". You get that 315 from the factory, without having to void your warranty with tuning

Type R msrp is $45k, about 8k more than the cheapest WRX at $37k. Nobody is paying $50-60k sticker for a Type R in 2025, even with markups

[-]

s4ltydog@reddit

The cheapest current gen Type R in my area is $49, 875 with 7000 miles on the clock. I paid 25,450 for my used VB WRX granted it had just under 20k so it WAS higher mileage but obviously not enough to make a difference. My local pro tune shop charges about $800 depending on the mods you have, a decent intake and exhaust let’s call it $2500 total for parts and installation (it would be less because my labor is free). So in total I’m looking at $28,750 for my car, mods and a tune. So that’s $21,125 less than a used Type R and with those mods it’s actually more common to make 350-380 HP RELIABLY in a VB WRX. So to recap, $21k less for a car that has MORE horsepower and AWD. That’s where I got those numbers. ADD to that, let’s say we factor in suspension since a lot of people are making THAT argument. A GOOD set of coilovers, brembros, control arms etc…. Aren’t gonna cost anywhere NEAR even half the difference in price. My point here mind you is in NO way to say that the WRX is a better CAR stock for stock, obviously it’s not, but it IS a SIGNIFICANTLY better value and can be made to outperform the Type R for significantly less money than buying even a used Type R let alone a new one. That said, you are absolutely right, some people do t want to mess with anything ever, they just want to buy the car and drive it and leave it alone, and for those people I guess it’s worth spending significantly more money to do so.

[-]

zerosystem03@reddit

WRXs are produced in much higher numbers than Type Rs. This is also only the 2nd generation that the US market has gotten a Type R so they are way more desirable than WRXs that have been around for decades. The fact that the resale value on these 2 cars are worlds apart just tells you their perceived value

Your one off examples of what you paid and what's sold near you isnt reflective of the entire US market. Your argument about power is irrelevant when talking about having to tune a car and void warranty, and not everyone buys a car just based off power figures. Sorry that is just an insanely bad take and just makes you sound like a corny bench racer when you talk about costs for tuning to match power figures. Save that for the econobox civic and accord honda fanboys that love talking about engine bolt ons

And how about the fact that some people just simply like Type Rs more than a WRX? That's intangible value and it's an insanely boring way to view cars with just spec sheets. I've driven WRXs and STIs. Hondas simply just feel better to drive in terms of seating, build quality, shift feel. The BRZ is only an exception because of the aisin transmission and even then, a honda shifter is just a clear step above

If you want to make the better bargain argument, go ahead, but this is a thread about Type Rs and you just injected subarus into the conversation for no reason other than your bias for subarus

[-]

mattortz@reddit

subaru being as reliable as honda or toyota. 🙄

[-]

s4ltydog@reddit

Yeah your right, my mistake, per CR it’s actually MORE reliable. I apologize for misspeaking.

[-]

zerosystem03@reddit

CR means diddly squat when the WRX and BRZ arent including those reports. You cant compare a wrx to civic type R reliability based on CR

[-]

ZanshinMindState@reddit

You've basically hit on the arguments in favor of the WRX- cheaper than the competition, AWD, and a huge aftermarket where you can fix most of the weak points of the stock car. Not everyone is going to want to put their warranty at risk to mod their Subaru, though (yes the VB seems to be reliable but there's still risk). And the Type R has some stuff over the WRX that's hard to correct, like the seating position/ergonomics/steering being much better, or the great Honda manual transmission. Granted, even at MSRP the CTR is about 30% more expensive, real-world you can get discounts on the WRX so the actual price delta is more. Is it 30% more car? I don't know. I would say no, personally, but there are people still playing markups on the Civic, so clearly there's a demand for it.

[-]

s4ltydog@reddit

And I think that’s what’s throwing me for a loop because yeah you are right, some people don’t want to fuck with anything at all, they want to buy a car and just enjoy it and leave it alone. In that case absolutely. Is the extra 40hp and lack of AWD WORTH the extra 17k if you manage to find it at MSRP? IMO absolutely not, but what threw me was the fact that Hondas most powerful Civic they have ever built, that has more engineering than ever, has only 10 more HP than a 10 year old STI, only 40 more than a standard WRX and doesn’t even have AWD.

[-]

ZanshinMindState@reddit

Think about it like this, the Civic Type R is putting all of that power through the front wheels. There are limits to how much usable power a FWD car can have. When I had my Type R I never wanted more power, I know people tune them but even at stock it's plenty fast and can struggle to put that horsepower to the ground without spinning the front wheels. 300ish HP is fine for the CTR. It also has less drivetrain losses than the WRX.

I agree that the Type R is overpriced even at MSRP (over $50k OTD for a FWD tarted-up economy car!) but again, people were lining up to pay that plus dealer markups, so what do I know lol...

[-]

s4ltydog@reddit

Oh trust me, between that and all the people paying insane markups on the Bronco when they first came out? I’m an insurance adjuster and I’ve had a fair few since 2020 that I’ve totaled only for them to find out that Gap insurance only covers the reasonable MSRP of the vehicle and not the 20-30k markup they paid. NOT a fun conversation to have…..

[-]

2Drogdar2Furious@reddit

I can keep explaining it to you but I cant understand it for you...

[-]

s4ltydog@reddit

But your explanation hasn’t addressed at best the additional $17k cost for a car that would be objectively worse.

[-]

Ninesixx@reddit

Things like brakes, suspension, cooling, aero are not cheap to develop and test. A wrx doesn't hold up on a track the way a ctr does. That's what you're paying for. Same concept as a gt3rs, granted not as extreme, you can buy 500 horsepower cars for under $50k, why pay $300k for one?

If horsepower/acceleration are the only numbers that matter, none of these ice cars are great value. Go buy a model 3.

[-]

Rashkh@reddit

Horsepower isn’t everything. While they were never compared head to head, Savagegeese did a bunch of tests and the GR Corolla was nearly as fast as a CTR around their track. In a separate test, the GR Corolla was three seconds faster than a WRX TR on a 1:40 lap.

Also, it’s a $46k msrp in the US.

[-]

dovahbe4r@reddit

$68k Type R my local Honda dealer is selling

Your dealer is the missing piece to your puzzle, that's a 20k markup. 2025's are in the high 40's near me with a few at 46. Not sure if they'll move on price or not but still, CTRs are far from 60k cars in the first place.

[-]