Civic Type-R test drive (steering comparison)

[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]

Originally Posted by ZRed

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

IIRC it's 2.5 for the 180.

[petet16]

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

[Mark S]

Originally Posted by dave23572

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.