Megane Sport Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 76 Posts
G

·
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
CTR is a very fast car, have to say i had a friendly race along a private airstrip with one in my old Corolla T sport which is very similar to a Type R as it revs up to 8250 rpm and has a trick Vtec engine, the CTR lacks traction control and i noticed that the car behind was very twitchy in the wet, so pick a damp day and i am sure you will out do him purely on traction out of corners.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,724 Posts
the ctr is slower in most all situations i find due to lack of torque. when you push out of a tight corner you have to wait until the vtec kicks in at silly revs all the time riding on about 90-110lbft/155-160bhp. the peak power is impressive but an old 172 has more torque in stock form than a CTR !! a 182 has about 25lbft more 40nm !!

forget peak power for a second and concentrate on the very small torque figures

honda CTR = 145lbft :?
megane 225 = 221 lbft ! 8)

76 lbft more !!

and apart from having another 22bhp also. just removing resonators in exhaust and adding a £30 induction kit on a 225 megane has yeilded 243bhp and 237lbft.. all for £35 and 2hrs labour

add a remap £340 and you can have nearly double the torque and 75% more horsepower.

chassis wise a cup is better. but the CTR`s steering is like a preface non cup way overassisted and lacking in feel you may have 197hp but you wont know the limit until its too late.

Best Auto Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
 

·
Founder
Joined
·
8,209 Posts
trouble with the CTR is on paper they dont look that good but with the right driver they are pretty fecking quick cars, I had one on the motorway a while ago keeping up with me (when car was standard) there wasnt really much in it TBH, if you believe what the clio owners say they rekon a 182/172 is an equal match for a CTR but I rekon the CTR is deffo a bit quicker than the clio, I got my ass kicked at york dragway by a CTR 3 times in a row and that was with a filter and decat (in me old 172)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,724 Posts
jonseal said:
trouble with the CTR is on paper they dont look that good but with the right driver they are pretty fecking quick cars, I had one on the motorway a while ago keeping up with me (when car was standard) there wasnt really much in it TBH, if you believe what the clio owners say they rekon a 182/172 is an equal match for a CTR but I rekon the CTR is deffo a bit quicker than the clio, I got my ass kicked at york dragway by a CTR 3 times in a row and that was with a filter and decat (in me old 172)
ahh but the problem is a honda vtec always puts out 197hp if not more i.e 205bhp genuine.
a clio 172 hardly ever puts out 170bhp if they did then a ctr would still be faster up top above 120mph a 182 (180hp) above 130mph.
nearly all 172`s/182`s cant match their claimed power, some 172`s out out more than some 182`s on RR`d days as standard !! one guy even had 154 BHP from his 172 !

if you take a genuine 180bhp 182 cup and race it against a genuine 197 ctr with power to weigh on clio`s side it will be completley even until either a.) silly 130mph then superior power of ctr will slowly creep until 147 or b.) the CTR driver gets too hot because he couldnt afford the £1500 extra for basic airconditioning on top of the £16,000 fixed list prices.

Best Auto Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
 

·
Founder
Joined
·
8,209 Posts
RRs tend to be less reliable than peoples 1/4 mile times tho, too many variables on the rolling road, I've seen the same car differ by 30 BHP on a rolling road from 1 week to the next, that was a clio BTW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,724 Posts
jonseal said:
RRs tend to be less reliable than peoples 1/4 mile times tho, too many variables on the rolling road, I've seen the same car differ by 30 BHP on a rolling road from 1 week to the next, that was a clio BTW
true but as a frequent member of cliosport i see peeps stock motors on RR`d and the results are by and large not encouraging, its always easy to boost it back up again with inlet manifold work and ecu tinkering though.

Best Auto Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
the ctr is slower in most all situations i find due to lack of torque. when you push out of a tight corner you have to wait until the vtec kicks in at silly revs all the time riding on about 90-110lbft/155-160bhp. the peak power is impressive but an old 172 has more torque in stock form than a CTR !! a 182 has about 25lbft more 40nm !!

forget peak power for a second and concentrate on the very small torque figures

honda CTR = 145lbft
megane 225 = 221 lbft !

76 lbft more !!

and apart from having another 22bhp also. just removing resonators in exhaust and adding a £30 induction kit on a 225 megane has yeilded 243bhp and 237lbft.. all for £35 and 2hrs labour

add a remap £340 and you can have nearly double the torque and 75% more horsepower.

chassis wise a cup is better. but the CTR`s steering is like a preface non cup way overassisted and lacking in feel you may have 197hp but you wont know the limit until its too late.
Meggerman...keep off the smoke.

Having owned both, yer talking pesh.

Allow the honda to get to the red and it's going to hurt you. As I said in my previous post if the civic doesn't get it right, the megane is going to win. If he does, a standard megane 225 (cup etc) is going to lose.

In addition, the steering. Forget getting yourself lathered up about what the mags say...the civic steering is crap, but so is the meganes (i have the cup). The only thing is, you get used to the (limited) feel that both cars give and manage.

I don't know why your quoting torque figures...you very rarely race in mid range...well, maybe you do.

I know it hurts...but let it go... :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,180 Posts
zx10r said:
Allow the honda to get to the red and it's going to hurt you. As I said in my previous post if the civic doesn't get it right, the megane is going to win. If he does, a standard megane 225 (cup etc) is going to lose.

Heres a man who knows his stuff :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
788 Posts
jonseal said:
I got my ass kicked at york dragway by a CTR 3 times in a row and that was with a filter and decat (in me old 172)
I seem to remember a standard one doing the same as well mate... :lol: LOL
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Unless zx has driven both at the same time in the same conditions, how can he make a reasonable comparisson.....torque figures speak for themselves. It was mentioned once the Honda hit the red bla bla, funny though cos peak torque aint at the redline.........so wot you on about.

Like I said any fool can drive fast in a straight line, I've put my money where my mouth is when I used to race, not to mention again!!!! being one of the first and only civilian class 1 instructor police pursuit drivers in the country.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
pj

It would seem that forums in general do not need to adhere to your worthy point that you need to drive both vehicles at the same time etc...pjdt77...that's not possible mate. Better get in touch with EVO / Autocar et al and tell them that their comparison tests are flawed...a whole industry built on a false premise.

I owned the two cars for an overlap period...is that enough to allow me to pass comment over and above other people who you have allowed to pass comment but may have only read about the two cars?

I'm completely fine with the relationship between torque and bhp...it would seem from your comment that you may not be.

I will not labour the points I have made earlier...they have completely different characteristics and the winner will depend on the conditions. There...you OK with that?
 

·
Founder
Joined
·
8,209 Posts
Vtec Abuser said:
jonseal said:
I got my ass kicked at york dragway by a CTR 3 times in a row and that was with a filter and decat (in me old 172)
I seem to remember a standard one doing the same as well mate... :lol: LOL
yeah it was my 172 that had the decat m8, your CTR was standard and still quicker, could never get below 15.3 in the 172 what were you doing 14.3s or something?
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
No your quite right m8, maybe I know nothing of engineering, having spent 17 years as a class 1 aircraft engineer, working mainly on helicopters. I suppose my national diploma in Aeronautical Engineering means nowt, you are correct. The only thing I know about the difference between BHP and Torque is that the abbreviation BHP doesn't contain a vowel!!!!!!
Maybe everyone who writes for magazines are the be all and we are wrong. Funny though cos you very rarely see two magazines quoting the same figures / observations as each other, ie top speeds 0-62 etc etc.

But sure thats ok with me m8, thanks for your feedback though, everyone is entitled to an opinion, even me. :D :D :D
Have a great easter. PJ
 
1 - 20 of 76 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top