Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

Discussion in '2002 Honda Civic Type-R' started by USRACING, Oct 6, 2002.

  1. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    Everywhere in the world has hicks, and everywhere in the world has rycers (you would be surprized)

    you will never win an attack trying to say a certain area has 1 single charactoristic (like texas and rednecks) If you think you can, you are just an idiot.
  2. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    hey i know that
  3. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    FYI the Honda Civic Type-R has the highest re-sale value after 1 year of ALL cars being sold in UK, they go for on average 90% of the new-price...Yes, higher than Merc, Beemer or even Porsches.
  4. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    FYI SUV's Have higher resale values in the usa then hondas
  5. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    And of those, Subaru's are the highest.
  6. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    I didn't say that Hondas in general carry the highest resell value, only this specific model and this is true AFAIK in other countries also. So bying a Civic Type-R will most probably be a very good deal in terms of economy and 2:nd hand selling price. This is not something that can be said for MOST American cars, Chevvy musclecars for example tends to lose ~30-40% within a year which would make them a REALLY bad deal to buy new.
  7. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    This is oh so true....
  8. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    who cares what is the highest are you trying to turn this into an american vs every other country battle if so you are just as bad as anyone else on here talking shit on civics
  9. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    so where do i sigh up to buy a type r in the usa? who cares i don't buy a car looking to get my use out of it then sell it
  10. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    wha? I'm not talking shit on Civics, I'm just stating that while among high resale values SUV's may be the highest, and Japanese vehicles still blow domestics out of the water.
  11. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    read my post next time please
    now i will explain it so you get what i was trying to say
    if you were trying to make the whole resale arguement into an american vs every other country then you are no better then anyone else on here talking shit on civics.
    no where did i say you were talking shit on civics. I said you were no better then them because you are turning this into a pointless american vs (insert country here) arguement. As for resale values i know no 69 honda that you can (if kept in good condition) you can get more money then you paid for. How ever if you have a say 69 hemi cuda in good condition you will have a way higher resale value will you not? intresting how that works but hey this is a stoopid arguement. A honda gets a better resale value thats great! A TA has better straight line excelloration to! And my eclipse will destroy your honda who cares shut up this is stoopid
  12. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    I read it thoroughly, by the wording it seemed that you were saying that I am shitting on civics. And I was just pointing that out for those that were claiming that Japanese cars don't have as high of a resale value.

    1966 Honda S800, 1974 Honda Civic RS, 1983 Honda City TurboII R, just a few examples.

    Straight line acceleration is useless if that's all it's got (and it is). Eclipses are comparable to the same class Honda, not necessarily better (unless you want a highly modified car that does the 1/4 in under 10 sec - give it up)
  13. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    You might want to read the topic of this thread again before issuing such a statement...Most normal people even going for a sporty alternative wants to figure out the financial side of the deal. If you borrow lots of money to buy a car then you usually want to know that you'll get something back sooner or later. Don't tell me you'd buy a car that you knew was not possible to sell on or carrying a close to ZERO 2:nd hand value? Would make as much sense as bying a car you beforehand knew will be constantly repaired with huge bills.
  14. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    If thats all you are worried about then why even get a car? Why not just buy an SUV? If your looking for performance you do not want a honda thats for sure unless its an nsx or s2000 and well for their price you could get way better cars.
  15. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    I have no use whatsoever for a SUV and quite honestly find them offensive and tasteless. And a SUV ain't economical in any sense, fuelguzzler to disgusting degrees without giving any performance or handling back. You couldn't be more wrong on the performance-issue, a Type-R will give you more performance for the money vs. better fueleconomy than any other sportscar! Unless you have a long straight road(which is hell) this car will keep up with Porsche, M3 and Corvette without too much trouble due to amazing agility and low weight.
  16. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha no civic keeps up with a porsche stock to stock and well an m3 i can't even keep up with in my GS-T so no civic is keeping up with them either and well we all know the zo6 destroys all three of the aboved mentioned cars and well a c5 will just laugh at a civic as well. Just cuz you slap an r on the car doesnt make it blistering fast my friend. Its not that i do not like the car i just think that you have delusions of grandur when you see a civic. And do not even go trying to say if you run a new vette against a Type r on a road course it will win cuz well the new vettes can handle just as well if not better then skylines which can out handle civics. As for SUV i agree with you on that but if you want resale value thats where they are. And we once again as you reminded me before were talking about investments not what you want!
  17. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    I'm happy I could amuse you:)
    But as a matter of fact I own and hobby-race a C5(2001, F45-suspension) and I have experienced that on tight and twisty tracks the C5 will be very hard pressed to get rid of a Type-R. Now you might start to claim that this might be due to me being a crap driver but on the same occasions I have had no problems hanging on to/overtaking M3s, 911s or Ferraris. The Type-R driver was just a friend that has a liking for trackdays. I can get rid of him by say 2-3sec/lap over a track that takes ~2m20s - 2m30s but only thanks to a couple of straights/uphill bits.
    If you find this hilarious or offensive then that's your problem really, I know from multiple real-life experiences that one should NOT scoff at cars because they lack bhp or have a funny(read SUV) shape, they could surprise even a Viper or Z06.
    Ultimately the Viper/Z06 will win as regards to ALL tracks and open road but like I said, a twisty track will favour the lithe handling and low weight of the Type-R over these other 2!
    And that with 30% of the running costs of those...
    Better braking and higher speed through chicanes/hairpins/multiple corners. So I am considering buying a Type-R for the cheap thrill and perfect understatement it makes, your reaction confirms this as a good idea, I love overtaking Supercars in a shopping-trolley:)
    Persistent rumours claims that Honda chose to give the Type-R only 200 bhp instead of the 240 in the S2000 because the Type-R would probably beat it which would be totally unacceptable.
    Having seen multiple S2000's on track I am inclined to agree, give the Type-R the same bhp and it will not lose ANYTHING against the S2000(which I also beat with ~2-3 sec due to the same uphill bits/straights).
  18. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    DAMN KIDS!!!
  19. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    The Civic Type-R may be nimble, but I sincerely doubt it's THAT nimble, now it may handle a little better than a Corvette (I doubt it but it's possible), but the Corvette handles well enough and is fast enough to likely leave the CTR behind even in the twisty areas.

    Now a Mustang, the handling of the CTR should be good enough to beat an SVT Cobra in the twisty areas with a good driver behind the wheel.
  20. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    i agree with you 100 % password (and i dont agree with you alot<A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC=""></A> )
  21. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    I'll ignore previous speaker(Formulawhatever) since he is clearly clueless and can only resort to abuse.
    As response to the above, you say you doubt it but it's possible, right? So if you admit it "might" be possible, how can you then do a logical 180 and say that the Vette "is fast enough to likely leave the CTR behind even in twisty areas"? This is where so many people lacking experience go wrong, BHP means NOTHING in a corner!
    Weight(/-distribution), tyres, suspension and proper line is EVERYTHING in a corner.
    And nowhere have I said that the CTR will beat the C5, I said "it will run equal/it will manage to keep up" through twisty bits, where BHP is mostly irrelevant. Now you all know that the Lotus Exige will beat the C5 both 0-60 mph and cornering-force? This despite that it only has 178 bhp, roughly 50% of a Corvette. But with roughly 50% of the weight,sticky tyres and lower gearing of course it can be quicker.
    The CTR weighs ~700-800 lbs less than the C5, this gives a bhp/weight-ratio that is not too far apart. The lower weight and excellent chassis then enables it despite thinner tyres to keep a similar cornering-speed.
    A stripped-out 15-year old Golf with sport-suspension and DOT-approved extra-wide racetyres will go through a corner quicker than a new Porsche, M3 or C5. I've seen Lotus Elises lapping as fast as a Porsche GT3 or Z06 on short tracks, superior grip&handling makes up for the severe lack of speed on the straights.
    For straight-line speed nothing beats a Z06/Viper in the end(0-170mph) but that's another issue isn't it?
    One of the major differences between CTR and C5 on a track is how you drive, the C5 seldom strays out of 3rd&4th gear but on the CTR you are constantly shifting from 2:nd to 6:th not to fall out of the very narrow powerband.
  22. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    Hey, I'm all for the CTR, but I think you're raising it onto a higher pedestal than it deserves. What I'm saying is that although the Civic might be able to handle better, and it is possible that a very good driver could keep up to a C5, I think the C5 handles well enough to go through the corners fast enough to still leave the CTR behind through quicker acceleration out of corners, or in other words the C5 will remain gaining distance on the CTR in the twisty areas, except perhaps for entering turns. I don't think the CTR handles quite well enough to hold a high enough speed through the turns to keep up. With a few handling mods of course (like maybe just front and rear sway bars would be enough to make it handle well enough) the CTR definitely could, but I'm leaning towards no for the stock CTR.

    The C5 certainly doesn't handle as well as so many fanatics seem to think, but remember that it handles better than so many of us skeptics think.
  23. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    Everything is relative, yes, but I love what the CTR gives for the money. IMHO there is no other car in the world which gives this kind of handling for even close to the money.
    As for C5 you are correct, stock it does not handle as well as reviews would make you think. Or rather I should phrase it like this, the C5's handling is not as accessible as the CTRs handling stock. There is an awful lot of bodyroll and squirming even though the tyres are still gripping well. My mods is Hotchkiss swaybars and polymer bushings, these 2 things make the handling much more confidence-inspiring, allowing me to take it to the limit quite easily.
    If you got long sweeping corners the CTR will lose out but like I said before and I will stand by this, in tight corners or complex combinations the CTR will not lose an inch to the C5. I have several vids taped from within my car where you can hear all tyres squealing in my C5 and I can still not get rid/catch up to a Type-R or S2000. I also couldn't believe that a car with 200/240 bhp and rolling on 205/225-tyres could keep up with me! And this is after the 2 mods I have done, it takes quite a lot of getting used to.
    But the quicker the track the more the CTR suffers from lack of power.
    Also cartests never shows how easy a car is to drive for "normal" people and the CTR is probably one of the easiest car to take to the limit on a track. So for a lot of hobbyracers driving a Porsche they might find that a Type-R is very hard to shake off. Only a VERY talented driver can fully use the potential of the really expensive supercars.
  24. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    Ok, I thought you were referring to a stock CTR, that changes things, as I said one with a few handling mods should be able to keep up in the turns. There's one car that gives better handling for less, but it's only useful for one thing, and that car is the Lotus 340R which can be found for about $20,000 USD right now.

    That's why I like the CTR so much as well, it's a class dominating car that offers surprising performance from a car so many people expect so little from.

    It does often prove to be a kick in the nut-sac to many an overconfident american fan.
  25. Re: Buying a Civic is a bad investment.

    Not wanting to spoil the party but if you can get a 340R for around 20.000 buy me 2 please! New price is 50.000 and I have never seen a single one(and I have been looking) for less than 40.000 2:nd hand. The cheapest Lotus would be an Mk1 Elise and those generally start around 25.000 non-crashed, this then being 96-97 makes. So to continue this Topic there's a car that has practically no depreciation even over a 5-year period!! Never did figure out where to stuff the luggage in the 340R though...

Share This Page