SapphyMike

Any good?

Kinda fancy one.

Are they nippy? Good to drive?

Anyone got any real experience of them?

I know they're reliable.

89xr2

New ones look stunning imo.

Matt Evans

I had one as a company car back in 2000, was an awesome bit of kit. Well built, comfy, handled very well, went like stink when you wanted it to.

The spoilers a bit like marmite, you love it of hate it, mine was in pirates black (like an aubergine metallic) and it looked ok with the wing on.

Downsides - thirsty when your ragging it (like most cars) and seemed a bit lifeless out of the vtec zone.

Id recommend one, either that or an Octavia Vrs.. similar cars IMO.

tabetha

I've done about 20 hours in one if that counts!!
Ace cars very well built, go extremely well but do have to be thrashed to get it, but very willing engine, not exactly torquey though.
Good brakes/steering/suspension even the bog std stuff, just a bit more like a m/bike than a car in power delivery, gets very tiring constantly changing gears.
Had 40mpg from one taking it easy, vastly better quality than a cossie.
Feel fast up to about 80/90 then it really tails off.
tabetha

Matt Evans

one other thing, check for oil level, mine was a thirsty bastard for oil. Common apparantly, or so Honda said at the time.

I would imagine being hammered on low oil aint much good for 'em LOL

SapphyMike

Im just in so many minds as to what car to get lol.

Its a toss up between an ST220 Mondeo and an Accord Type-R, which is cheaper to buy right now..

foreigneRS

have had 3 or 4 and loved them. if i could only have one car, that would be it

SapphyMike

Would you have one over an ST220 Mondeo then? And why?

foreigneRS

i've never tried the mondeo, but i think so. the drive was brilliant, superb engine and a nice interior with a/c. very fun to drive, but practical too.

RS Grant

iTrader: (1)

They have a problem with synchro in the box, IIRC its 4th or 5th that goes... sure if you google it then there'll be a few more in depth results for it.

They handle well, sound great with a Cold Air Intake (Typhoon, AEM etc) and as well as the great Recaro seats, they are pretty well equipped too. I almost bought a 99 in Pirates Black, but ended up going for an Impreza Turbo in the end........ but it was a very close decision.

I would think the ST220 will be a quicker car and probably slightly better equipped than the Honda.. but would expect the Honda to cost less to run on a day to day basis, but parts are likely to come with added TypeR tax, specially from dealers.


Cheers,
Grant

SapphyMike

I like the mod cons idea of the ST220, but I just like the idea of a bit of cheapish, reliable fun with the Accord..

Was it reasonable to run cost wise?

foreigneRS

don't know, only ever had to put petrol in and didn't take any notice of mpg

SapphyMike

Thanks for the replies guys.

The Accord is faster 0-60 on paper, but in the real world the ST may shave it.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Tough decision.. I love the thought of a revvy 4 pot. Will they go past 8k with a chip, safely?

I also love the ST.. its such a good car!

danneth

honda and type-r says it all

ballin

iTrader: (1)

Very very good cars, would have one over a mondeo any day

SapphyMike

Cool.

Can they be made to rev over 8k?

RichieST

iTrader: (2)

A couple of my mates have them, I drive them every now and then, and am in a passenger in one 2-3 times a week.

Seats are very, very hard. If you are over 6ft, expect a sore back and sides, and a numb bum after being in it for an hour or more. Rear seats do not fold down, so don't expect to get much of any size in it. Front seats bolsters will have worn badly if the car has more than 80k miles on the clock.

One of them had the crank pulley bolt snap off inside the crank leading to a very costly repair. It has happened a couple of times before from what i have read on an accord type r forum. The other of my mates have had a few reliability issues.

VTEC gets very tiring. Having to be at 6000 revs + all the time just to make the thing move uses a lot of fuel, and seems hardly worth it sometimes. Its like loads of turbo lag, but without the turbo kick when you finally get there. Its very hard work keeping the thing inside vtec.

The wheels corrode faster than a vauxhall under the sea, if they havent been refurbed, then expect that they will need doing.

However, they do handle quite well, but there is no getting away from the fact thats it is a big car, and does feel like one.

I chose my st170 over one, just prefer the way it drove, easier to live with day to day, the understated looks of it, the better handling, and it is about the same speed point to point that an ATR.

I would go for the st220!

RichieST

iTrader: (2)

Oh, and the engines sound like a sewing machine

SapphyMike

Might have to have a test of both then!

thebigyin

had one, couldnt get on with the lack of go outwith the vtec zone,i liked it otherwise.

foreigneRS

there is no lack of go outside the 'vtec zone', it's just that there is so much more in it that it seems like not much. like a turbo car off boost.

besides, the accord has a 2 stage vtec system giving good torque at low, medium and high rpm.

Rob84

Heres a good review of the ATR

http://www.channel4.com/4car/rt/larg...oad+test/125/9

SapphyMike

Thanks for the link