# boy are those civic type R's quick



## Guest (May 30, 2004)

at long last i managed to really push the V6 tonight, but wasn't all that impressed.

had a type R, snapping at my heels. now, unless he had it chipped or some thing, cos i really struggled to see him off.

i believe the latest type R, is 205bhp. ok, that ain't so bad. especially when i've 250bhp. i thought it wouldn't be too much of a prob to see this fella off. i switched over to tip mode and began to floor it. red lining through each of the gears. but that piece of jap crap, just sat on my heels, all the way!

the read out on my my tac was 158mph, which is a first for my v6. only pushed her to 140 before now.

has to be said - i'll be looking for a new car cos the handling on my TT, was pretty shabby in comparison to my last car (GTV V6), which i pushed over the 150 mark on a few occasions.

found the ride to be very soft and not holding the road as tight as i'd of liked. now i know i can spend fortunes on suspension kits etc, but why should i? the damn thing cost me 30k.

keep your eyes peeled for a cheap V6 going soon on the FOR SALE section. The TT, has the looks but it ain't got the grunt.

not a happy TT owner. :x

should have purchased the porker :?


----------



## robquatt (Oct 20, 2003)

Consider this POWER TO WEIGHT RATIO, your car weighs about the same a combine harvester and the civic a carrier bag.


----------



## Rsport (May 26, 2003)

200BHP @ 1170Kilo !!!

Same performance as the TT, so if he drives behind you ( in the slip stream) you would'nt leave him  He will bump you :wink:

Time for a Stage 3 @ AMD Â® 8)


----------



## Guest (May 30, 2004)

Rsport said:


> 200BHP @ 1170Kilo !!!
> 
> Same performance as the TT, so if he drives behind you ( in the slip stream) you would'nt leave him  He will bump you :wink:
> 
> Time for a Stage 3 @ AMD Â® 8)


if only the TT could have held the line, then maybe he would have had a slip stream he would have wanted to be in  . i found mine to be very floaty, almost a disconnected feel to the drive. from what i could see in my mirror, the type R seemed to hold the tight line well.

i have thought about the AMD, but won't this affect my warranty?


----------



## sico (Feb 6, 2003)

3.2_dsg said:


> at long last i managed to really push the V6 tonight, but wasn't all that impressed.
> 
> had a type R, snapping at my heels. now, unless he had it chipped or some thing, cos i really struggled to see him off.
> 
> ...


Civic type R beat you
GTV V6 handles better
Should have got porker

Hmmmm sounds a bit sus.

GTV V6 is know by all to be very poor handling and deffo without a doubt not as good as TT.

Also Type R is fast but you should have lost him no prob esp at those speeds.

Not really a Type R owner by any chance!? :roll:


----------



## Guest (May 30, 2004)

i truly am a TT owner.

admittedly the TT does handle better at more leisurely speeds than the GTV. but i kid you not! at high end speeds the GTV felt tighter. the GTv is scary as hell when braking from high speeds. were as the TT is a class above.

i wish i was joking about not seeing off the type R 

the only thing that would make me feel better is the possibility that the type R, was an import. i believe the new imports come with 300bhp credentials.


----------



## ttstu (Nov 1, 2003)

Unfortunately the only Type R that I've come up against was before I had the TT. A C class Merc stands no chance! Mind you the one I was following overtook in the 3rd lane of a 3 lane road if you know what I mean! MAD! All the others I've come across in the TT have been on a roundabout etc and not in a position to to give it some. They all take a long look at the TT, so obviously feel it's fair game!

A great handling car by all accounts. Not how I would describe the TT. Plenty of grip but in the end that gives way to... not a lot!


----------



## sonicmonkey (Mar 20, 2004)

So you hit 158 mph on a public road??? :? :?

And what does it matter if he was snapping at your heels? For me ownership isn't all about ego maniac 0-60 times and no offence to any Civic drivers out there but its not the most attractive looking car on the road.

If you want a motor that allows Max Power Traffic Burnouts coupled with nerdy pub stories about BHP and torque curves I'd short list a tuned up Scooby......


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

Mad speeds. You are lucky you didn't end up in jail.

Next time try to see how well your TT accelerates in more civilised speeds.

But I have to agree with you, that the TT doesn't handle as well as it should in these high speeds (I have driven mine up to 140 in Germany).

I found that an A8 was 1000 times better at high speeds than the TT.


----------



## Guest (May 31, 2004)

sonicmonkey said:


> So you hit 158 mph on a public road??? :? :?
> 
> And what does it matter if he was snapping at your heels? For me ownership isn't all about ego maniac 0-60 times and no offence to any Civic drivers out there but its not the most attractive looking car on the road.
> 
> If you want a motor that allows Max Power Traffic Burnouts coupled with nerdy pub stories about BHP and torque curves I'd short list a tuned up Scooby......


didn't we have this discussion on Pizza Hut's car park last tuesday?


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

It seems like you bought the wrong car. :?

Did you read the performance figures, compare this against other cars, go for a testdrive, etc, etc before you paid your money?

This could be quite costly for you.

Will you be upset if "Jap crap" flies past you in the Porker?

What is it that you actually want out of the car? If it's just performance then you simply it wrong. If it's about the whole package then this may be the car for you but as you've found, you're not gonna whip everything you see evertime.

Alternatively since it will cost you a bit to change cars why not get a stage 3 mod done. I was up against an AMD stage 3 R32 (same engine as yours) at a recent trackday and I was only a small fraction faster.


----------



## andytt (Sep 25, 2002)

I'm sorry, you all seemto be missing the point here....

We drive TT's. he's got a Civic... a freakin Civic.., and you're all blubbering about how fast it is and how the TT is heavier, and blah blah f'kin blah.

It's not all about speed ya know!... we get there in style, wheras versions of his car come with travelling rug and box of tissues on the back seat!!..

Did any of you really buy a TT because it could beat all the boy racer cars? NO!. you bought it cos it's an icon, and looks the dogs baws.

Now, 3.2_dsg, go outside look at your car... if it doesn't make you smile then you've bought the wrong car for the wrong reasons. Go get a saxo, dump a calibra engine in it and maybe then you'll be happy... ya [email protected], on and why not give it nitros too!.


----------



## ttstu (Nov 1, 2003)

Just took a look out the window, and I'm still smiling. It works!


----------



## andytt (Sep 25, 2002)

ah, the TT grin.......

I bet when you lock it and walk away, you have to look back.. admit it!!.


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

3.2_dsg said:


> but that piece of jap crap, just sat on my heels, all the way!


Serves you right for buying a lardy, Nose heavy, underpowered Automatic then doesn't it.

The CTR revs to 9k. Jap it is, but crap it certainly is not. :?


----------



## Wak (May 6, 2002)

Had a little burn with a civic on Friday....

saw him coming up on the outside lane at speed and decided to see what she could do, was in 6th and starting to head up hill, so just floored it.

gathered pace he was still coming...pace gathered to equal speeds and we are going up hill , noticed he wasnt coming any more and I started to gain pace and leave him....so signalled and moved over into his lane in front foot firmly planted and slowly leaving him behind going up a gentle hill on the M3.

Then decided that was enough risk to the licence so back into the middle lane and let him catch up and pass.

I think the other thing to remember regardless of his lightweight car or my chipped TT is we dont know much about what can be done to these cars.

you are still going to come up against other marques usually driven by enthusiasts who are just as enthusiastic about modding them.... I may have lightly roasted a Standard Type R on a Motorway burn but the next one may have a few more horses ...you never know! :?


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

what a fantastic thread - nice one! oppinion to follow!


----------



## sonicmonkey (Mar 20, 2004)

3.2_dsg said:


> sonicmonkey said:
> 
> 
> > So you hit 158 mph on a public road??? :? :?
> ...


Nope - not me guv


----------



## nutts (May 8, 2002)

The Civic Type R always gets a good review... motoring journo types seem to love it. Goes well, revs even better, handles well.

It DOES as Wak pointed out depend on driving ability, modifications, type of road, etc... I've not had the pleasure of any Type Rs yet, but on the M1 I have had the pleasure of 2 STi's. Neither had anything more than mine... in fact I was gobsmacked the first time, when I closed the gap as he was pushing it in front :? :?

Mines modified... if the Type R was also, then anyone that goes up against it is going to be unhappy, especially if they think it's standard 

Get your 3.2 suspension sorted, get a Miltek and chipped and then see if you are still happy... I'm guessing the nice side of Â£1500 would sort it all out from AmD


----------



## Wak (May 6, 2002)

only thing is they'll never be able to do anything about the torque limits of the DSG.....

:? if a tuned T-R can go to 270s with similar torque and less weight the T-R will still going to have an edge. :?


----------



## nutts (May 8, 2002)

Agreed, but sort out the handling and fitting a Miltek will at least give the driver a  8) + a little extra horses never hurt anyone :wink:





Wak said:


> only thing is they'll never be able to do anything about the torque limits of the DSG.....
> 
> :? if a tuned T-R can go to 270s with similar torque and less weight the T-R will still going to have an edge. :?


----------



## robquatt (Oct 20, 2003)

I think the chances of coming across a civic that is modded much beyond its original horsepower are very slim, 205bhp from a normaly aspirated 2.0 litre engine is over the magic 100bhp per litre figure for normaly aspirated engines. Filters exhausts etc. may give tiny gains but nothing that would make any difference on the road i should have thought. However it is still a very quick car.


----------



## Jazzedout (May 8, 2002)

I didn't have any problem gaining on a Type-R that approached me on the motorway. Someone has slowed me down and we both started pushing the car from approx. 100km/h and the Type-R could not follow, especially at higher speeds. :? The funny thing is that he was stuck behind me when I was waiting for the slower car in front of me to pull over and really pushed for a race. :? He wasn't holding back or anything.


----------



## TT.GR (May 8, 2002)

Hello,

Yesterday I went for a cruise with my girlfriend, and a Punto GT came behind me and passed me, he waited me to open but I didn't do anything.

After a couple of kilometres I decided to pass him because he was going too slow and when I came close he oppened the gas and he started spinning at 100mph flaming from the exhaust 

This thing was for sure over 200hp and it's very light, but it didn't turn, In the next turn Punto went to the opposite lane, I didn't follow him because I know these guys are willing to die in order to be in front of you :evil:

Anyway after six months it's time to move forward, MTM chip, Milltek exhaust+cats :twisted:


----------



## robquatt (Oct 20, 2003)

TT.GR said:


> Hello,
> 
> After a couple of kilometres I decided to pass him because he was going too slow and when I came close he oppened the gas and he started spinning at 100mph flaming from the exhaust


Spinning the wheels at 100mph, forgive me if i find that really quite hard to beleive :? .


----------



## maersk (Feb 1, 2004)

Ah so nice to eavesdrop on adult conversation.
:x 
If this is all for real then I suddenly understand Brunstrom and his cameras!
:wink: 
Ho, Hum.


----------



## Wak (May 6, 2002)

robquatt said:


> I think the chances of coming across a civic that is modded much beyond its original horsepower are very slim, 205bhp from a normaly aspirated 2.0 litre engine is over the magic 100bhp per litre figure for normaly aspirated engines. Filters exhausts etc. may give tiny gains but nothing that would make any difference on the road i should have thought. However it is still a very quick car.


sorry, I have no idea what they have under the bonnet, thought they were turbo'd.......so retract my comment on 270 bhp!


----------



## Jazzedout (May 8, 2002)

robquatt said:


> I think the chances of coming across a civic that is modded much beyond its original horsepower are very slim, 205bhp from a normaly aspirated 2.0 litre engine is over the magic 100bhp per litre figure for normaly aspirated engines. Filters exhausts etc. may give tiny gains but nothing that would make any difference on the road i should have thought. However it is still a very quick car.


The S2000 is basicaly the same 2.0lt engine with 240hp as standard. :? Don't forget that these engines rev at 9000rpm!!


----------



## caney (Feb 5, 2004)

3.2 DSG,as scotty says you should have done your homework ! civic typeR 0-60 6.8 SECS,TOP SPEED 146 MPH. the new v6 is even heavier than the 225 model and has only 25 horses more so if anything it's slower than a 225 imo. but as many tt v6 owners would argue it's about the drive not the performance. civic typeR -1200kg? v6tt-1500kg  you are giving away 300kg so of course he's as quick as you! have you not heard of power to weight? enjoy your TT mate it is a fabulous car and don't worry about road racing as it means sh#t. i have been beaten by lesser powered cars on the road too! a guy on this forum recently did a 14.1 sec 1/4 mile in a v6  honda civic typeR 16secs and iknow this to be true as i go to all the jap shows with my mate who has a scooby. enjoy your car mate or stick nitrous on it


----------



## LeeS3 (Mar 24, 2004)

Well a recent trip down to a private track saw me keeping pace with a Porsche 911 turbo.

I was well chuffed. Have been totally trashed recently by a none turbo'd 911. (pre tweak)

Not much of the twistes and he obviously had the edge, but I also think he was equally surprised at my high speed acceleration (100-120).

Ps. Go check the gear changer on a TR, I ran a mile!

Ps. I've seen the Top gear test of a TR and S2000 and the TR won.. :roll: 
All to do with getting the power down out of corners on a front wheel drive car..


----------



## robquatt (Oct 20, 2003)

LeeS3 said:


> Well a recent trip down to a private track saw me keeping pace with a Porsche 911 turbo.


What generation 911?!?! Are you sure it wasn't parked?!?!?


----------



## himpe (Jun 11, 2002)

robquatt said:


> LeeS3 said:
> 
> 
> > Well a recent trip down to a private track saw me keeping pace with a Porsche 911 turbo.
> ...


ROFLMAO

[smiley=stupid.gif]


----------



## Rsport (May 26, 2003)

If you have moved to the other lane, he would'nt past you.
If you just want performance you for the "jap crap" 

Ps: A great Topic.

(better than how to wax my wheels) :wink:


----------



## westty (Jan 3, 2004)

When i test drove a Type R i found everything happens above 5000rpm ,likened it to riding a two stroke bike (or my VRF with the powerband @8000rpm),not enjoyable at all unless you want the the engine screaming all the time (boy racer mode), plus you feel like you're rowing the car with the gear stick, though admitedly the gear change was sweet, was weird having the gear stick in the dash though. :lol:

So do you think a Boxster will do the TR ,cos your going to pay a load more for the porker and probably still get blow away by the TR. :?

You should have got the manual V6 cos theres got to be loads more to come from that engine only your restricted by the DSG 

The Type R has a cracking engine ,looks sh#t(imo) and handles like a go-kart, they are tinny (how do you think they make that weight) and Honda will offer you a sh#t part ex against one and give no discount which means they can shift them ......wonder why? :wink:

Lets face it its the looks that attract most to the TT though it's quick ,especially when modded, but if you dont turn and look at the TT when waking away from it and the looks dont do it for you anymore, forget the Porker get yourself an Evo cos they're faster ,cheaper and are also handy for picnics.


----------



## LeeS3 (Mar 24, 2004)

himpe said:


> robquatt said:
> 
> 
> > LeeS3 said:
> ...


Believe me I have a witness & so did he! Both gfs. So go figure.

Either he wasn't trying (and I am pretty sure he was) or he was worried about the legality of the private track. It wasn't a race (I don't do such things) - just a few entertaining blasts & I admit he would have wasted me if the roads had been different. As it was I was comfortable keeping up the pace. Which I naturally let him set after the novelty of being up front wore off.

I was chuffed to bits.

By the way the tweak was for optimax and I reliably recorded 260 bhp and 300 lbs torque on stars RRs.

I am sure he was more miffed by 3.2 DG


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

kmpowell said:


> Serves you right for buying a lardy, Nose heavy, underpowered Automatic then doesn't it.


Is he talking about a TT :?: :roll: :x


----------



## robquatt (Oct 20, 2003)

LeeS3 said:


> Believe me I have a witness & so did he! Both gfs. So go figure.
> 
> Either he wasn't trying (and I am pretty sure he was) or he was worried about the legality of the private track. It wasn't a race (I don't do such things) - just a few entertaining blasts & I admit he would have wasted me if the roads had been different. As it was I was comfortable keeping up the pace. Which I naturally let him set after the novelty of being up front wore off.
> 
> ...


Well the current 911 turbo has 420bhp and is arguably the fastest point to point car in production (so say evo mag), so you would get wasted in every single conceivable scenario. Im assuming its a big old arse happy nail of a 911 and there were no straights then and only then is there is some hope for your story.


----------



## nutts (May 8, 2002)

Having tracked my mod'd 225 TTC and also the latest gen 996 Turbo, I can quite categorically state that there is no way that a chipped TT would stand a chance against a 996 Turbo   Simply awesome performance... words fail to describe how quick it really is 8) 8) 8) both on cornering and ESPECIALLY out of a corner and into a straight   

Braking from 140ish on the Brooklands straight at Thruxton and thru Church at 100ish is the type of speed that most cars (the TT included) can only dream of 8) )

Was it a 996T or an earlier version? 993? 911 whaletail? :?


----------



## Matthew (Oct 6, 2003)

kmpowell said:


> 3.2_dsg said:
> 
> 
> > but that piece of jap crap, just sat on my heels, all the way!
> ...


In your opinion.


----------



## Bryn (Feb 12, 2004)

westty said:


> forget the Porker get yourself an Evo cos they're faster


Can't agree more if it's balls out performance you want go for an Evo V1 with an HKS stage one tune hardly any motorised object with four wheels can touch it from zero to 140mph including a Maclaren F1!!!! real dynamite for about 16K!!!!!! only down side is it's about as attractive to look at as a fridge!


----------



## LeeS3 (Mar 24, 2004)

LeeS3 said:


> It wasn't a race (I don't do such things) - just a few entertaining blasts & I admit he would have wasted me if the roads had been different. As it was I was comfortable keeping up the pace. Which I naturally let him set after the novelty of being up front wore off.


It was a black 996 turbo.


----------



## markp (Apr 29, 2003)

A good friend of mine owns a type R. We've had a few little games when we meet on the A120 bypass on the way to work in the mornings - I don't know why he bothers as I always pull away from him! Mines got a few mods (AmD, Miltek, etc) so he's never going to get past unless I let him. If you mod your TT then you have a car that'll really dimiss a lot of cars - great fun proving your point and suprising the other car driver - they really look peeved when you pull away. The best tussles I have had are with Boxsters - standard 2.7 or 2.5 and I'm quicker, the S and there's nothing in it appart from backing off when the other driver wants to drive at silly speeds. I can't believe someone would contemplate driving at 150mph + on a public road - aside from the risk of being banged-up for a year, you've only got to hit a bump or something and you're dead. A few years ago a good friend of mine crashed his 911 at an estimated 120mph and was killed - witnesses said a pheasant hit his car and that caused him to loose control - please people, have a laugh, prove you're point, but don't risk your life (and others). Sorry to harp-on, but life's too short if you get my drift...

My mates comments as a Type R owner will interest you - he thinks 225 TTC's are about even until you get to higher speeds when the TT will gradually pull away. He's raced a V6 and he said his car had the edge a lot more than he does over a 225 (I told him they were probably running them in!). Types R's go well and are great fun to drive - but they look like a turd in a dress and that gear stick... reminds me of a 2CV! For the money though there tough to beat for Â£/performance, clio 180's aside.


----------



## robquatt (Oct 20, 2003)

Bryn said:


> Can't agree more if it's balls out performance you want go for an Evo V1 with an HKS stage one tune hardly any motorised object with four wheels can touch it from zero to 140mph including a Maclaren F1!!!!


Please stop being ridiculous, Mclaren f1 627bhp 1137kgs 0-100mph 6.3seconds 0-200mph 22.00 seconds, now i know evos are seriously quick but please lets get back to reality. Are you perhaps our 996 turbo beating s3 owner in disguise :? .


----------



## sico (Feb 6, 2003)

robquatt said:


> Bryn said:
> 
> 
> > Can't agree more if it's balls out performance you want go for an Evo V1 with an HKS stage one tune hardly any motorised object with four wheels can touch it from zero to 140mph including a Maclaren F1!!!!
> ...


Yeah I find that one hard to swallow. The F1 is one serious bit of kit, was the fatest road car but think it has now been beaten.


----------



## properperson (Apr 14, 2004)

Yeh but pig ugly though.

stick with the TT - it isn't all about speed.....


----------



## DXN (May 18, 2002)

All cars are modable so to speak.

http://www.lancaster-honda.co.uk/modifi ... ifications

http://www.civictype-r.co.uk/index.htm


----------



## L8_0RGY (Sep 12, 2003)

andytt said:


> I'm sorry, you all seemto be missing the point here....
> 
> It's not all about speed ya know!... we get there in style, wheras versions of his car come with travelling rug and box of tissues on the back seat!!..
> 
> ...


Too right mate.

Some cars may beat the TT or be a challenge for it, but have they got the looks? Have they got the body of the TT where everytime you look at it and smile and think "i'm proud to own this"

You are talking about extremes here, as how many times in England, let alone the town/city where you were can you go 100mph let alone 158??!!


----------



## Dont I Recognise You (Oct 10, 2003)

hmmmmm

been avoiding this thread for a while, but what the heck 

I'm all for having a bit of a play with anyone that shows willing - but at the end of the day when things get towards inappropriate speeds I'd rather back off thank you very much.

Had a run in with some sort of Porsche a week or so ago on a stretch of deserted dual carriageway.

We both floored it from the roundabout and he stayed behind me for about a mile before taking the next exit.

Yes, we were 'making progress', but neither of us did more than ahem bend any speed limits *

As he pulled off I got a flash and a wave from him.

Which in my book was very nice - 2 owners of 2 nice cars acknowledging each other without going stupid.

Good enough for me 

* To any police officers readin this - this is of course all completly made up and I would never condone breaking any speed limits anywhere, ever.
Racing should, of course, be kept to private circuits.


----------



## L8_0RGY (Sep 12, 2003)

Don't I Recognise You? said:


> * To any police officers readin this - this is of course all completly made up and I would never condone breaking any speed limits anywhere, ever.
> Racing should, of course, be kept to private circuits.


 :lol: Very good disclaimer.

I don't think you should be the one worrying though DIRY.


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

So there are faster cars out there, but for a complete package(car only not aftersales) I would find it hard to beat the TT anywhere near the price.Imprezzas and evos are great cars but look like sticklebricks compared to the TT and the interiors ,well subarus are farmers cars aren't they


----------



## rolandgttuning (Jan 6, 2004)

Hi,
I think all would agree its easier to make a good looking car (TT)go/stop/handle better than to make an Evo look good. Now that would be impossible IMO.Never under estimate just how much a car can be improved even with minimal expense.The GTT/ICM Â£8k 1.4 litre FWD Renault 5 GT Turbo regularly beats even the WRC Evo's and Impreza's, cost, up to Â£400k,on tarmac events in the British rally championship.
Unbelievable? Result sheets and trophys to show.


----------



## ronin (Sep 6, 2003)

rolandgttuning said:


> Hi,
> I think all would agree its easier to make a good looking car (TT)go/stop/handle better than to make an Evo look good. Now that would be impossible IMO.Never under estimate just how much a car can be improved even with minimal expense.The GTT/ICM Â£8k 1.4 litre FWD Renault 5 GT Turbo regularly beats even the WRC Evo's and Impreza's, cost, up to Â£400k,on tarmac events in the British rally championship.
> Unbelievable? Result sheets and trophys to show.


Why on earth would you want to spend Â£400k modding a car


----------



## rolandgttuning (Jan 6, 2004)

HI Ronin,
Â£400k is what a World Rally Car (WRC) costs to build. This is what the likes of Colin McRae, Richard Burns, Petre Solburg,etc drive in the world rally championships

Regards Roland


----------



## jam (May 8, 2002)

LeeS3 said:


> LeeS3 said:
> 
> 
> > It wasn't a race (I don't do such things) - just a few entertaining blasts & I admit he would have wasted me if the roads had been different. As it was I was comfortable keeping up the pace. Which I naturally let him set after the novelty of being up front wore off.
> ...


either the guy in the turbo can't drive to save his life or you are talking utter b*llocks

even a 996 C2/C4 would leave an S3 for dead, never mind the turbo!


----------



## robquatt (Oct 20, 2003)

jam said:


> LeeS3 said:
> 
> 
> > LeeS3 said:
> ...


Well said, this forum never ceases to amaze me with ridiculous claims of speed and power and giant killing this quote is my favourite.



Bryn said:


> Can't agree more if it's balls out performance you want go for an Evo V1 with an HKS stage one tune hardly any motorised object with four wheels can touch it from zero to 140mph including a Maclaren F1!!!! real dynamite for about 16K!!!!!! only down side is it's about as attractive to look at as a fridge!


Utter tosh!


----------



## LeeS3 (Mar 24, 2004)

Well as I said it wasn't a race, and I totally agree with all comments regarding the superbness of the turbo 996.


----------



## Gworks (Jan 20, 2003)

I've raced a couple of Civic Type R's and have slapped every last one of em. Even with there high revs, Ive still managed to out gain em by miles, and when it came to corners, game over, they had no chance. Saying that, mine is pushin the 280Brake mark, and is on a nice set of coilovers! :lol: Screw those Jap praising sods! lol, they can kiss my black behind! :lol:


----------



## robquatt (Oct 20, 2003)

gworks said:


> Screw those Jap praising sods! lol, they can kiss my black behind! :lol:


now now, civic type R is low end jap sports car, would an r34 skyline gtr have to kiss your black behind?


----------



## Vtec Abuser (Aug 10, 2004)

gworks said:


> I've raced a couple of Civic Type R's and have slapped every last one of em. Even with there high revs, Ive still managed to out gain em by miles, and when it came to corners, game over, they had no chance. Saying that, mine is pushin the 280Brake mark, and is on a nice set of coilovers! :lol: Screw those Jap praising sods! lol, they can kiss my black behind! :lol:


Sorry to drag this thread back up again guys. But it does bug me when people compare modded v's standard.
Plus the handling comment is a bit, shall we say, far fetched (down to the driver IMHO). The CTR is more of a track car than a TT Roadster will ever be, even if it is on coilovers. Now I know a 280 bhp TT will probably have the legs on a standard CTR, although i'd give it a bloody good go. But put it up against a modded CTR and I think you'd be in for a shock mate.
Not wanting to start a flame war. Just like to point out a few facts and add my 2p worth.
Cheers guys.
PS. Hello by the way, i'm new. :wink:


----------



## RobbieTT (Sep 6, 2003)

Vtec Abuser said:


> gworks said:
> 
> 
> > I've raced a couple of Civic Type R's and have slapped every last one of em. Even with there high revs, Ive still managed to out gain em by miles, and when it came to corners, game over, they had no chance. Saying that, mine is pushin the 280Brake mark, and is on a nice set of coilovers! :lol: Screw those Jap praising sods! lol, they can kiss my black behind! :lol:
> ...


Thanks for adding to the forum. I'll make sure to log on in a few months for your next comment on this thread.


----------



## Vtec Abuser (Aug 10, 2004)

Nice to see Non TT owners are made to feel welcome on this site. Especially if they add a non-praising comment about the TT.... [smiley=thumbsdown.gif]


----------



## RobbieTT (Sep 6, 2003)

Indeed.


----------



## jwball (Jan 18, 2004)

Jazzedout said:


> robquatt said:
> 
> 
> > I think the chances of coming across a civic that is modded much beyond its original horsepower are very slim, 205bhp from a normaly aspirated 2.0 litre engine is over the magic 100bhp per litre figure for normaly aspirated engines. Filters exhausts etc. may give tiny gains but nothing that would make any difference on the road i should have thought. However it is still a very quick car.
> ...


Just to add my piece, I have recently sold a Civic Type R 30th Anniversary to make way for my TT which should arrive shortly. Just to correct a few things, the standard bhp on the CTR is 197. The engine is completely different to the S2000 engine, the S2000 engine is a longitudinally mounted 2.0 VTEC unit and was basically designed solely for the S2K. Upon release it set the world record for the highest specific output for a N/A production engine. Whereas the CTR engine is a relatively new i-VTEC unit and differs wildly from the S2K.

As for the car itself, don't get me wrong, they are a quick car for the money, and whilst driving mine I caught many a standard TT off guard. Where the Honda lacks is in the quality and style department as a number of people have already noted. Inside the plastics are cheap, the stereo is crap, the steering lock is on a par with a lorry, and the styling is an acquired taste. It's also not the most relaxing car to drive, as the power is so far up the rev range, so plenty of gear changes are the order of the day to make the most of the engine.

On the upside, the engine is bullet proof, reliability is pretty darn good on a whole, and the handling would leave a TT looking rather out of place on a track.

However the questions I asked myself when I opted for a TT were, a) how often do I drive balls out round a track?, b) which looks better? c) which one would I rather own?

After answering those questions, there was only one outcome, I don't think I need to say anymore.

Sorry for this essay, just wanted to add my bit.

P.S. for the person who thought that Imported CTR's are 300bhp, they're actually around 220 on 100 RON Jap fuel.


----------



## robquatt (Oct 20, 2003)

jwball said:


> Jazzedout said:
> 
> 
> > robquatt said:
> ...


Very well said.

You should see me reel in my friends modded s2000 over 80 mph (be calm mr Powell :wink.


----------



## Vtec Abuser (Aug 10, 2004)

jwball said:


> Jazzedout said:
> 
> 
> > robquatt said:
> ...


fair points there mate. Each to there own and all that. It all boils down to personnal taste at the end of the day. After all, if we all drove the same car, it would be a one boring world.


----------



## nutts (May 8, 2002)

I've never been one to slag off other cars... as has just been said the world would be a very boring place if everyone drove the same car! 

Strangely, the first time I had a play with a CTR was only a few weeks ago... and it did surprise the sh!t out of me  With a mixture of straights and twisties in around Gawsworth and Macclesfield, we had a good play and neither could say that one was better than the other 

Surely we all like cars? So lets just live and let live... It ain't any car's fault that it may be driven by a kn0bhead chav, so slag the driver off not the car :wink:


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

Yawn.

Anyone for a game of this:








?


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

robquatt said:


> jam said:
> 
> 
> > LeeS3 said:
> ...


Absolutely. My fridge is far better looking than an Evo.


----------



## Widget (May 7, 2002)

You can't polish a turd!


----------



## Matthew (Oct 6, 2003)

3.2_dsg said:


> at long last i managed to really push the V6 tonight, but wasn't all that impressed.
> 
> had a type R, snapping at my heels. now, unless he had it chipped or some thing, cos i really struggled to see him off.
> 
> ...


Well, now you know which your next car should be. Pop along to a Honda garage and get a fully loaded type R; Your V6 will bring good money. If you want a Porsche, buy a Porsche.

Sorted.


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

It will all be irrelevant if the Govt gets it's way with this new speed restricting technology anyway!

If it happens bye bye TT, hello Ford Focus!!


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

digimeisTTer said:


> It will all be irrelevant if the Govt gets it's way with this new speed restricting technology anyway!
> 
> If it happens bye bye TT, hello Ford Focus!!


Even more of a reason to own something "stylish" surely? (Unless you happen to think the Focus is more stylish!)


----------



## chowy (Jul 5, 2004)

Time to put this thread to rest!!!!

Here's the proof of performance.

Go to this web site and select Civic Type R vs. TT 225 (No V6 but there is a R32) and select start

Always a good source for my car is faster than yours (Porsche Turbo and Macca F1 is in there too!! LOL)

http://www.jsread.com/tvr/quartermile.htm

Have Fun!! :lol:


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

chowy said:


> http://www.jsread.com/tvr/quartermile.htm
> 
> Have Fun!! :lol:


What an excellent site!! :lol:


----------



## chowy (Jul 5, 2004)

digimeisTTer said:


> chowy said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.jsread.com/tvr/quartermile.htm
> ...


It even takes into account traction off the line with 4wd etc... fantastic!!


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

And it 'proves' without a shadow of a doubt that the TT is faster than a Renault Clio Cup too.


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

Chowys M3 ate my TT :wink:


----------



## chowy (Jul 5, 2004)

digimeisTTer said:


> Chowys M3 ate my TT :wink:


Performance isn't everything as a few have already said on this thread!! :wink:

But a tuned TT........... (Just thought I'd get it in before someone else did  )


----------



## TTej (Sep 10, 2003)

brilliant site chowy. Scotty any change of having a section on this forum of silly things like this, quater mile tests, wheel configeraters etc. would be useful for these types of threads 8)


----------



## Vtec Abuser (Aug 10, 2004)

Well all the Motoring magazines might as well cease trading now that website is about. After all it's conclusive proof of which car is quicker than the other.... :? 
On a serious note, you can have some fun by placing the McClaren F1 against a Mini Cooper.. :wink:


----------



## Steve_Mc (May 6, 2002)

digimeisTTer said:


> Chowys M3 ate my TT :wink:


I just ate Chowy's M3 :wink: :wink:

of course in the real world with corners, etc. etc. blah blah 8) :wink:


----------



## bilbo baggins (Jun 10, 2004)

westty said:


> When i test drove a Type R i found everything happens above 5000rpm ,likened it to riding a two stroke bike (or my VRF with the powerband @8000rpm),not enjoyable at all unless you want the the engine screaming all the time (boy racer mode), plus you feel like you're rowing the car with the gear stick, though admitedly the gear change was sweet, was weird having the gear stick in the dash though. :lol:
> 
> The Type R has a cracking engine ,looks sh#t(imo) and handles like a go-kart, they are tinny (how do you think they make that weight) and Honda will offer you a sh#t part ex against one and give no discount which means they can shift them ......wonder why? :wink:


Hi

I owned a Type R the real power is at about 6000 rpm and up and yeah it was fast!, 2 months i sold it and boutght a 225 TTR.

I didn't mind the honda's looks and thought the gear change quick but it was just uncomfortable and like you the best way i could describe it was as a road going go-kart, difficult not to spin front wheels when wet and when it snowed no chance i had to park it up.


----------



## rolandgttuning (Jan 6, 2004)

HI Guys,
Two very important things the TT has over the Civic:- turbo (simply add chip to gain a very nice 50 horse power will effortless torque)&4wd.
They arn't that quick guys, a properly sorted Renault 5 is quicker,they do have 
acertain appeal factor though. And fair play they do seem to get on the track when they can.


----------



## Vtec Abuser (Aug 10, 2004)

A properly sorted R5 should paste most things, but it depends on how you define "Properly sorted". There was one at Santa Pod at the weekend running low 12 sec 1/4's.  So yeah that would beat a CTR, but it would eat 99% of the cars on this website too :wink: .
They're are a very tunable car, Just a shame they have the reliability of a suicide bomber.


----------



## jwball (Jan 18, 2004)

Vtec Abuser said:


> They're are a very tunable car, Just a shame they have the reliability of a suicide bomber.


My R5 only ever broke down once from a blocked radiator, and even then it was ok after having a new one fitted. It just got a bit warm.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

chowy said:


> digimeisTTer said:
> 
> 
> > chowy said:
> ...


Seen it before. :?

It's utter unscientific crap and proves absolutely nothing.

For example the Gallardo (wet) vs TVR cerbera sees the TVR beat the 4wd Gallardo(which gets off the line quicker in the wet than dry as it allows some wheelspin to avoid bog down) off the mark. Ha Ha.

I think the ClioSport types believe it though.


----------



## gringosteve (Dec 20, 2004)

Hi

Im from www.civictype-r.co.uk, and drive a type R. Happy to answer any questions. Havent read all of your posts, but have got the idea.

The standard type-r has 197BHP, with max power being at around 7,400 mark.

The car revs to 8250ish, has 6 gears, a 2 litre engine and I-VTEC. The mahor VTEC change occurs at around 5800 revs, although there are cam changes lower down the rev range too.

Jap versions have a 220bhp version of the same engine..but there are very few of them on the roads...they tend to be white with white alloys so stand out a bit. They also have an Limited Slip Diff/

It is possible to chip them too...such that VTEC change over comes on much early, and red line is nearer 9000.

There are also supercharger kits and Turbo kits...the super charger kits being better mated to the engine.

The standard UK spec car is capable (on paper) of doing 0-60 in 6.4 seconds. With minor mods mine is down to 6.2 secs.

They have a gearing limited top speed of 146mph in 6th gear.

They are praised so well in the press due to the extraction of large amounts of power from a relatively small and light NA engine. They have a very light and stiff body, few creature comforts, and a very very good handling package.

a standard UK type-r driven by a competnent driver will beat a V6 TT on dry roads...on wet roads would probably be a different story due to your useful 4WD.

IMO Type-R's and TT's are in a different class. TTs are refined coupes with big engines, nice leather interiors and climate control.

Type-R's are relatively raw lightened Hothatches with a very high revving NA engine.

Any questions...just ask

Steve


----------



## sico (Feb 6, 2003)

Good to have you on the Forum Steve. 

My friend has a type R. I quite like them, your right the TT is a 2 seater and the type R a four seat hot hatch so you cant compare like for like.

The new model out next year (I think) looks nice.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Steve,

I've not experienced one but I've always held this belief that they're well suited to country roads and fun on track but so not suited to day to day driving. My thoughts are that unless you're driving round with the engine revving then you're always gonna be short on power. The V-TEC thing seems to me a bit like the old turbo cars only with the surge much higher up the range. I've only ever driven a Celica T Sport with that technology and that was on track so I've never reallyl experience the normal use of it. It did feel sluggish coming out the pits before giving it the gun.

I'm interested in your view on this.


----------



## V6 TT (Sep 24, 2002)

gringosteve said:


> a standard UK type-r driven by a competnent driver will beat a V6 TT on dry roads...


...sorry to bite, but there obviously aren't any competent 'r' drivers in my neck of the woods if this IS the case... :roll: :?

Great car for the money though - bangs for the buck and all that!


----------



## gringosteve (Dec 20, 2004)

scoTTy said:


> Steve,
> 
> I've not experienced one but I've always held this belief that they're well suited to country roads and fun on track but so not suited to day to day driving. My thoughts are that unless you're driving round with the engine revving then you're always gonna be short on power. The V-TEC thing seems to me a bit like the old turbo cars only with the surge much higher up the range. I've only ever driven a Celica T Sport with that technology and that was on track so I've never reallyl experience the normal use of it. It did feel sluggish coming out the pits before giving it the gun.
> 
> I'm interested in your view on this.


Hi

Thanks for the decent welcome. 

Ive driven a race prepped 180bhp TT on Aulton park..was a decent drive and my first slice of track based fun. I like the TT's and have been in a fair few of them...they are just a bit to civalised for me at the moment...maybe in a couple of years.

The Type-R does eat up country roads, but they are not necessarily its best place...they are wicked on good ground, but the hard suspension makes them very hardcore on bumpy road..makes them a handful.

They excel on nice evenly tarmac coated twisties...and fit track day use very well.

The Toyota technology on the t-sport is similar, but Honda execute it far better. In someways it can be thought of as Turbo-lag...but the Honda gear box is so excellent it is easy to keep in the power band as you change up and down...you can floor it from first and keep it in the top 2000 revs all the way to 6th gear without moving from the power band.

If you are not in the top 2000 revs, then you are not using the full potential as you said, but the joy of IVTEC over standard VTEC is that the cam change is more progressive, so even lower down in the revs you still get a fair amount of power and torque - similar to a standard sports 2-litre. U can drive round with decent speed without going near 6,000 revs, and enjoy top fuel economy.

The engine does bog down a bit below 1500/2000 revs.

I use my honda as an every day car. I travel around 500-900 miles per week without any problem, and can blow the majority of things on the road away with a quick down shift through 2 gears. If your not prepared to slot up/down a gear box this car is not for you though. Planting your foot in 5th gear at 60mph gets you nowhere...but changing down to 3rd at 60 gets you going at lightspeed in no time!

Thanks

Steve


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

gringosteve said:


> scoTTy said:
> 
> 
> > Steve,
> ...


hehehehe... its a good job this forum contains a number of people who drive something that can't be considered amongst "the majority of things on the road" then... :lol:


----------



## gringosteve (Dec 20, 2004)

V6 TT said:


> gringosteve said:
> 
> 
> > a standard UK type-r driven by a competnent driver will beat a V6 TT on dry roads...
> ...


lol...thats not a bite, its a fair comment based on your observations. 

I have personally never raced a TT...any of them, so I am only talking from other observations...

but 197 bhp in a very light car should be able to give you a run for your money.

TT V6 is

250bhp @ 6300 RPM
236 llb/ft @ 2800 RPM

0 - 60 Time = 5.94 
1/4 Mile Time = 14.43 
1/4 Mile Speed = 99.40 mph

Civic Type r 2004 is

197 bhp @ 7400 RPM
145 llb/ft @ 5900 RPM

0 - 60 Time = 6.4
1/4 Mile Time = 14.5 
1/4 Mile Speed = 97mph

So you can see, despite the massive power/toruque difference, in a straight line it will be very close.

...But your massive torque advantage will make it much easier to extract speed from your car, this will give it an advantage coming out of bends etc. The type-r will come into its own when entering the bend at speed. Yours will also suffer as it drops out of the boost zone further up the revs.

On a dry day i think it will be a close call with two good drivers. On a wet day the type-r hasnt got a prayer, and if the driver doesnt know how to keep it in the VTEC zone you will p1ss all over him.

As you can see I am not biased when it comes to cars, just honest

Steve


----------



## gringosteve (Dec 20, 2004)

jampott said:


> gringosteve said:
> 
> 
> > scoTTy said:
> ...


LOL...was a sweeping generalisation that it will easily p1ss on lots of more expensive motors...not trying to say its the quickest car in the world, becuase it blatently isn't.

Its just a fast car..as is the TT V6. But totally different animals.


----------



## nutts (May 8, 2002)

Welcome to the forum Steve 

Nice to see (from both sides) some fair and honest discussion and lighthearted banter 

If you fancy seeing what you Type R will on track against some TT's check out this thread... http://www.********.co.uk/ttforumbbs/vi ... hp?t=32189

Oh and it might be a different proposition when not pitted against the lardy 3.2 TT, ie against the easily mod'd 1.8T :wink:


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

I used to have 'access to' a nold CRX 1.6 VTEC. I say access to as it was my flatmate and boss' car, but as it was a company car and we worked for the same company, I could drive it whenever I wanted to.

Fantastic piece of kit and at the time (J reg) only three cars produced the magical 100bhp per litre. THe CRX, the M3 and the McLaren F1, so it was in pretty good company.

However, like many other's have said. 'out of the zone' it felt listless. Something backed up by a recent RR session where an ex-TT driver brought along his S2000. Was utterly amazed at the lack of Torque available - which would go a long way to explaining why this is the case.


----------



## caney (Feb 5, 2004)

TT V6 is

250bhp @ 6300 RPM
236 llb/ft @ 2800 RPM

0 - 60 Time = 5.94 
1/4 Mile Time = 14.43 
1/4 Mile Speed = 99.40 mph

Civic Type r 2004 is

197 bhp @ 7400 RPM
145 llb/ft @ 5900 RPM

0 - 60 Time = 6.4
1/4 Mile Time = 14.5 
1/4 Mile Speed = 97mph

i drove a type r before buying my tt and it's a cracking car for the money but preferred the looks and build quality of the tt. not sure of those 1/4 times though :? i've never seen a civic dip under 15 secs at the pod :?


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

I also didn't think that the V6 got under 6 seconds for the 0-60. Or is it just that no one wanted to correct him?

THe official PDF from the Audi UK website states a 0-100km time of 6.4...


----------



## proeliator2001 (Feb 26, 2003)

It's been a while since I posted on here but I just couldn't resist :lol:

I own a CTR and have done since last May. I had a 225TTC on order (avus silver, red leather and all the extras) but cancelled when I got back to the UK due to dealer problems/wait (I'm impatient what can you do :wink: ). I love the TT, I think it looks great, the interior is the best I've ever sat in (bar a 360CS) and it was quite fun to drive despite the bad press it gets for handling.

After cancelling the order I had a look round for other cars and tested a fair few. Then I saw a second hand CTR for sale and, having heard good things about them, decided to give it a go. I didn't consider it before as the looks didn't really appeal to me (I love it now though, which is probably the best type of relationship, one that grows rather than fades lol). 5 minutes of driving it and I wanted one. I then got a 2 hour loan from the local Honda dealer and bought a new one they had is stock the very next day (I'm impatient remember!).

They are damn quick cars considering they are just a hatchback with no turbo. Spending under Â£1000 you're unlikely to exceed 220 bhp and to get the same power as a quick 500 quid revo mod you're talking a supercharger and the best part of Â£5k! I've had plays with TT's and at speeds in double digits they is very little in it. Higher speeds and the torque advantage shows and a TT will edge away but it's hardly worth mentioning. TBH, and I am sure most of you think the same with your own cars, unless the car you are leaving is 150 bhp or less, or the car leaving you has 300 bhp or more, the difference in acceleration is practically bugger all.

BTW, there are several people on our website who have cracked 15 seconds at the pod with bog standard cars and that, with a notorious lack of front end grip (due to us Brits not geting the jap market limited slip diff :roll: ) is a bloody good achievment in my book.

I'd argue that the standard CTR will out corner any standard TT and possibly out brake one too but overall, again, there is not much in it.

Quality wise, no contest, TT wins for "feel" and although we have a fair share of problems, the TT is no angel (coil packs, dropping windows, dash pods etc etc).

And who ever said the gearlever reminds them of a 2CV, you really ought to try it - it's the most natural positioning for a gearbox you could imagine plus has feel and precision only Euro cars dream off. Don't forget that the CTR engine has been often touted as the best 4 cylinder engine/gearbox package in the world!

Anyway, different things to different men. I like both the TT and CTR and would be happy with either but for very very different reasons. Touring around, driving 8/10th, posing, feeling good - TT. Hammering around, wanting a smile from a rewarding drive, having to hump stuff around (the CTR boot is massive!), parking without worrying too much that some scrote is going to key the car - CTR.

With that I'll sod off back to the CTR forum and leave you guys to it but if anyone is around the Northampton area and fancies a play with a CTR in a fairly safe manner please feel free to pm me 

BTW hello to WAK who i freaked out some time ago on Project Gotham Racing 2 on Xbox live after saying "do you have a TT" to which he replied (with his screen name ending in TT) "of course, how did you guesss :roll: "
to which I replied "is it white?" Long pause from Wak lol. I also bumped into him at the top gear filming  Small world!


----------



## jwball (Jan 18, 2004)

proeliator2001 said:


> It's been a while since I posted on here but I just couldn't resist :lol:
> 
> I own a CTR and have done since last May. I had a 225TTC on order (avus silver, red leather and all the extras) but cancelled when I got back to the UK due to dealer problems/wait (I'm impatient what can you do :wink: ). I love the TT, I think it looks great, the interior is the best I've ever sat in (bar a 360CS) and it was quite fun to drive despite the bad press it gets for handling.
> 
> ...


Having gone the opposite way, CTR to TT; I'd have to agree with a couple of your comments. However I love the TT and feel that the quality of the whole package outshines the Honda (maybe I'm biased). But on the whole they are two great cars for very different reaons.


----------



## Wak (May 6, 2002)

proeliator2001 said:


> BTW hello to WAK who i freaked out some time ago on Project Gotham Racing 2 on Xbox live after saying "do you have a TT" to which he replied (with his screen name ending in TT) "of course, how did you guesss :roll: "
> to which I replied "is it white?" Long pause from Wak lol. I also bumped into him at the top gear filming  Small world!


Small world indeed, I'm sure you are stalking me! :lol:

You are in this picture somewhere!









Was a good day the TG event.....lots a clubs there and lots of respect except perhaps the drunken very loud beach buggy beatle club ! :lol: :lol: whoever they were..


----------



## proeliator2001 (Feb 26, 2003)

I'm not stalking you honest, but thanks for the free use of your wireless connection whilst I type this out :twisted: :lol: (go on, try not to look through the curtains now!)

Mine is the silver one on the end in the first picture and my head appears to have sprouted out the top of the gentlemans head with the white shirt 

Agree with you re the bettle mob, what a bunch of muppets. Though the Scooby brigade seemed very intent on being in each shot regardless of whose way they got into!


----------



## V6 TT (Sep 24, 2002)

Kell said:


> I also didn't think that the V6 got under 6 seconds for the 0-60. Or is it just that no one wanted to correct him?
> 
> THe official PDF from the Audi UK website states a 0-100km time of 6.4...


...Hi Kell, just saw this...'under 6' - answer? They do (well mine does), and I guess his times are from some drag strip somewhere (they're to precise to be a typo)? Real world times are usually somewhat different to the book for a number of reasons...

Dean


----------



## Iceman (Jul 3, 2004)

Every time i see a TT it bring a smile om mine face.
Further just one word: *Maxtrac.*

wfg, Hans.


----------



## Vtec Abuser (Aug 10, 2004)

caney said:


> TT V6 is
> 
> 250bhp @ 6300 RPM
> 236 llb/ft @ 2800 RPM
> ...


Mine does! :wink:


----------



## stupidgrinner (Jan 8, 2005)

Hey 3.2...just read your post.
Perhaps you want to post to Tinman with your apology, re: his motor being keyed.
He was wondering why people do it!  
Stupidgrinner.


----------

