Civic Type-R test drive (steering comparison)

[dave23572]

I test drove a 2010 Civic Type-R (FN2) today.

Main reason for doing so was not that I'm looking to buy one, but because I wanted to compare the steering and handling to my 180.
This is in the context of my current frustration with my 180's slow/unresponsive steering (to my taste anyway) as described in my thread:-
http://www.themgzs.co.uk/vb/showthread.php?p=328380

I thought a good modern FWD performance car would be a good benchmark to see if I was just being unrealistic in my expectations of the steering on my 180.

Please note
I'd like to say that I DO NOT want to start another CTR vs ZS "mine is better than yours" thread. I'm a fan of both for one reason or another.

My 180
My 180 is standard apart from polybushed front suspension, ITG induction and a catch tank. 2003 Saloon with 130000m, I've owned it for 8 years.

The steering feels very "lazy" to me and too light, requiring too much steering input and has a rather "soft" steering bite.


CTR (FN2) test drive impressions compared to my 180

The CTR's steering when compared to my 180 is on a different planet!
Much more responsive, much more bite, much less steering wheel input required, much better turn-in. Much more "kart like". Basically exactly how I want my 180 to handle.

SO, how do I make my 180 steer/handle like that?
Or am I basically just going to have to get a CTR FN2?


Other aspects
I was expecting to be more impressed by the CTR engine than I was. I was expecting it to be noticeably quicker than my 180. But whatever the on-paper performance figures suggest, the performance felt more or less on a par.
The engines deliver in different ways, but overall the acceleration felt similar.
The VTEC engine has better throttle response than the KV6 though and a better clutch bite, but I didn't like the CTR gearbox much. The ZS PG1 gearbox has a nicer gear shift. I've never been a big fan of 6-speed boxes, but I'm sure it's something you would get used to.

The CTR seats are much better than the ZS ones. More comfortable and more supportive, but I really don't like the CTR dashboard, which I found to be a very fussy and untidy design. Even though the ZS dash is rather dated, I actually quite like it's simplicity and it's always had very good/clear main instruments.


Back to the point.
Anyway, back to the point of all this, the steering/handling.
I want to keep my 180 ideally, but I really want to sharpen up the steering if it's at all possible.

Dave

[peterzs]

Isnt it all down to the steering rack.

First thing I noticed on my Derv, was the poor turning circle.

Makes it look like you cant drive, getting in and out of tight car parking places. Remember going into a multi story car park, had to have two bites at getting round and down the tight bends.

Would the racks be interchangeable??? Or is that a No, No.

[Ritchy]

What is your tracking like?

[dave23572]

What is your tracking like?

No problems as far as I can tell, doesn't pull at all.

[Ritchy]

But do you have printouts? Whats the toe like front and rear, camber? Tyre pressures? What tyres are you running? What size tyres are you running? All bushes intact?

[Cally180]

Comparing the ZS to my clio sport on track action I'd say their ain't much in it, clio better on entering the corner but the ZS deffently not lagging by much. I would say you have something at fault suspension wise. Either that or as you say expecting too much.

[talkingcars]

For a further comparison try another 180.

[dida4g]

I would try a set of 16's, for me the difference is like night and day, better acceleration and turning circle.
It's a 20yr old chassis now and big wheels weren't a factor.
17's would have got you a "Max Power" cover.

[Mark S]

But do you have printouts? Whats the toe like front and rear, camber? Tyre pressures? What tyres are you running? What size tyres are you running? All bushes intact?

+1

it could simply be a worn bush, such as the compliance bush.

time to check the car over?

[Dan1971]

And when you've checked your car out and find that there's nothing wrong with it - accept that a CTR does what you want from your car better ....

Find the thousands you'll need to change and go get one.

There are years between the cars you're comparing, and gaziliions in the budgets for developing them.

We love our Zeds - but there are better cars out there - sounds to me like you've found yours.

[dave23572]

And when you've checked your car out and find that there's nothing wrong with it - accept that a CTR does what you want from your car better ....

Find the thousands you'll need to change and go get one.

There are years between the cars you're comparing, and gaziliions in the budgets for developing them.

We love our Zeds - but there are better cars out there - sounds to me like you've found yours.



You may be right, but same as you, I love my Zed (had it 8 years and done 115000 miles in it now). I love it's rarity (these days) and it's underdog status, it's a bit alternative.

Ideally I'd like to keep it, but I also want to enjoy my driving more.
My taste in handling is a very tight/responsive/direct front end.
If I can't mod my ZS to make it so, I may have to go for a CTR, but that will be a sad day for me.

Also a much more expensive route to take. With the cost to change and depreciation. Also the CTR fuel economy is only 1 or 2 mpg better and with probably having to run it on V-power fuel may cost more to fuel than the 180. It will be a hard decision, so I hope I can improve my 180 and just keep it.

[ian zs180]

You may be right, but same as you, I love my Zed (had it 8 years and done 115000 miles in it now). I love it's rarity (these days) and it's underdog status, it's a bit alternative.

Ideally I'd like to keep it, but I also want to enjoy my driving more.
My taste in handling is a very tight/responsive/direct front end.
If I can't mod my ZS to make it so, I may have to go for a CTR, but that will be a sad day for me.

Also a much more expensive route to take. With the cost to change and depreciation. Also the CTR fuel economy is only 1 or 2 mpg better and with probably having to run it on V-power fuel may cost more to fuel than the 180. It will be a hard decision, so I hope I can improve my 180 and just keep it.How can you not enjoy the drive of a zs dave . Its one of the best drivers cars out there even by todays standards I love my zs and its a match for most things on the twistes and stuff . I remember tiff needell saying its the best front wheel drive car he has driven I know that's going back sometime now but like I said its still one of the best handling cars out there .

[Eddie]

I would look at the ZS steering rack ratio as well as the power steering.
Most Honda's are built with a fast rack and a very well matched and balanced power assisted steering.
Once you have confirmation of the steering rack ratios have a word with Quaife as they make after market quick racks.
It's something I noticed after driving a ZS for many years and jumping into an ITR, also you have to account for the weight over the front axel, ZS compared to a Honda is going to be miles different so reaction will suffer. I think MG managed to engineer out the front end weight through clever geometry so you may be stuck with what you have.

[Mark S]

the 180 is meant to have a quicker rack than the other zeds and rovers, but these are unobtainable and there is a slim chance it may not be a 180 rack - especially if rover were short when they built your car.

Why not pick up a used 180 rack, as they're 30quid or so, and mod the torsion bar so the pas is not so active, it will add loads of feel through the wheel as well as weight?

[talkingcars]

A zs180 rack is treated as an upgrade by civic owners.

[Ritchy]

I think the newer civics may have epas

[petet16]

I wouldn't be surprised to find it's a 45 rack, a bit like the deal with arb's, they just fitted whatever was available.

[dave23572]

I wouldn't be surprised to find it's a 45 rack, a bit like the deal with arb's, they just fitted whatever was available.



I will get my garage to check those.

Was that a common thing then?
For the assembly line to fit non-180 parts to 180's?

That's really bad if they did.
People paying for what they thought was a full-spec 180 but getting something less.

Does anyone on here know what the ARB diameters should be for a 180?
Also what the turns lock-lock should be for the steering rack

D

[petet16]

The rear arb should be 20mm, it's not uncommon to find an 18mm bar fitted.

[petet16]

The front should be 24mm.

[petet16]

I can't find how many turns a 180 rack should be lock to lock, but I can see from the part numbers that the 180 rack isn't shared with any other zs or 45/400.

[ZRed]

I can`t see how the comparison test is relevant in all honesty.

[dave23572]

I can`t see how the comparison test is relevant in all honesty.



Why not?

It proves that the handling I'm looking for does exist in a FWD car.
It's just a question of whether it's acheiveable to replicate that handing in my ZS.

[talkingcars]

I can't find how many turns a 180 rack should be lock to lock, but I can see from the part numbers that the 180 rack isn't shared with any other zs or 45/400.

IIRC it's 2.5 for the 180.

[petet16]

Good info, I s'pose I could have gone outside to check.:laugh:

[Mark S]

Why not?

It proves that the handling I'm looking for does exist in a FWD car.
It's just a question of whether it's acheiveable to replicate that handing in my ZS.

handling and so called 'turn in', along with rack ratios are different things.

First, you are comparing a 10+? year old ZS with a much newer car, first, just think of the state of the rubber bushes.

Perhaps, different ratio racks? with different levels of power assist? (not got the data nor any intention on looking so can't really comment)

Then (assuming its the 57 plate model) a car with MacPherson front strut and a primitive backwards step rear suspension set-up that was slated as being worse than its predecessor.

It is not really a like for like.

On paper, the ZS should be - in the right hands - a better car through the corners (and i'm sure in the right hands it would be too), and if you put a qualified/quantified driver in each car, they would likely show you that it is still the case assuming the ZS suspension wasn't shagged out.

But a different driver may have different opinions, not having the ability to drive the car to its optimum dynamic capabilities (and I don't mean some hooligan creating tyre squeal), may prefer the feel of one car to another regardless of the cars ultimate capabilities.

Horses for courses, not wanting to get into driving standards over car dynamics, but I can tell you that coaching and driving tuition is more of an eye opener than many give it credit for and the ZS is often the party piece in surprises up against porsches and Ferraris on driving days, so the moral of the story is, in the right hands, the ZS still packs a great punch through the corners and is often used for this reason as a tuition car for driver coaching.

[MG mad]

With the ARBs thing, I know these were adjusted throughout the production cycle, the handling team met every 6 months or so and took onboard customer feedback and modified stuff. I know, during my short time at MGR, that the rear ARB size on the 45 was changed.

[petet16]

In view of the post above, it might be worth contacting Andy Kitson at VHS for an opinion on the best size of arb's.

[petet16]

Question asked, awaiting an answer.

[Quadcam24]

im afraid your kidding yourselves if you think the zs will still out handle new hot hatches, in its day it was one of the best but technology goes a very long way in 12 years.
I remember coming across a very well driven bog standard renault megane 230 F1 on track and despite the fact i was faster around a lap(thanks to a massive power to weight advantage), it was way ahead of my zs through the corners despite the thousands i had thrown at it, it changed direction in a way my zs never even got close too, the meg 230 F1 is itself an old outdated model now, the new meg has moved the goal posts further forward again. All the new hot hatches on track with equal drivers would leave a zs far behind.

[petet16]

Hardly surprising the zs suspension is based on 20 year old designs.

[dave23572]

im afraid your kidding yourselves if you think the zs will still out handle new hot hatches, in its day it was one of the best but technology goes a very long way in 12 years.
I remember coming across a very well driven bog standard renault megane 230 F1 on track and despite the fact i was faster around a lap(thanks to a massive power to weight advantage), it was way ahead of my zs through the corners despite the thousands i had thrown at it, it changed direction in a way my zs never even got close too, the meg 230 F1 is itself an old outdated model now, the new meg has moved the goal posts further forward again. All the new hot hatches on track with equal drivers would leave a zs far behind.



TBH I suspect you're probably right.
It probably can't be made to be in the same class as such cars or the CTR (FN2) I test drove. But I think it could be improved to be closer.
I will soon be contacting ABP about what their views are.

Also, I have today had my steering rack and both ARBs verified as correct 180 parts.

[Eddie]

Point of the post was not to compare the 2 cars, clearly Dave has identified his car has less front end feel than is should, it was only after I moved on form the ZS that I could make a real comparison after driving another car, albeit and Honda.
Dave, I assume you have tried another ZS back to back?
No doubt the ZS is a good car for what it is if driven by a professional racers or not but I think it a little short sighted if people think it's an equal to something in the same class of today's modern offerings.