Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





2000 Integra Type R vs. 2000 Celica GTS

24

Comments

  • Very kewl site! See how many ITR owners talk trash! too bad you can't find any of them around when you wana race.
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    Again, you ignore all other tests and chose to pick the one that had the best #s, fine.
    Then look at the June '97 R&T test and see the 6.2 and 14.8s. Also C&D got 14.8s for the 1/4 as well as. When you buy an ITR the dealers provides the C&D article along with it. M&T same thing. There was only 1 magazine that got 15.2s with an ITR and you keep mentioning that #.
    Do you think it would be fair for me to mention old C&D's test results of 15.7 or the recent C&D's tests of 15.6? No I don't think you 'd like that. You pick the fastest one you can get. In ITR's case there is more than one magazine/test that resulted in 14.8.
    Again, never seen the GT-S do the 1/4 in under 15.2 and that was only in one magazine!
    I think we've beaten this subject to death and you just can't deal with the fact that the ITR is faster. At least the ITR did get sub 15s #s, the GT-S never has!!
    The ITR with A/C is still 60lbs lighter than a GSR and 25hp more on a light car will do wonders.
    Every one I know that has driven a GSR and went to test drive a GT-S said the cars feel like the accelerate the same, thus explaining the recent C&T comparison test where the GT-S got the same #s as the GSR - what a joke..
    You keep talking about handling and again only mention the best # of .89g. Fine. May I remind you that the GT-S has 16" wheels and still loses to the ITR with 15x6" ones. Not only does the ITR have 15" but they 're 10mm narrower compared to the 205mm of the GT-S tires. Mount 16" wheels(which are also wider - at least 6.5" wide on GT-S?)on an ITR and watch it go .95g or higher. I wonder what the GT-S would get with 15" rims. .84-.85? That's what the GSR gets with some good ZR Dunlop or Pirellis on it with its 15" (see older SCC tests). Not much different "bro"!
    So with comparable wheels the GT-S would be more inferior to the ITR's handling.
    On the track the ITR would clean up in short order. The lack of Limited Slip on the Celica would cause its driver to only see the rear of the ITR for a few moments while it pulls away from the GT-S.
    And .2 or .3s on the 1/4 mile means at least 2-3 car lengths. Go to www.acura.net and select Type-R videos (2mb AVIs). In one drag race the Type-R raced a Nissan Silvia with 210hp and it beat it by about .2s In this case the Type-R managed a 14.74 and the Silvia (JDM only) pulled a 14.9x.
    The Nissan was more than 2 car lengths away. At 95mph a couple of tenths of a sec. means a few car lengths' distance. AT 60mph is a different story. .2s equates to less than a car's length.

    Look noone said the Celica sucks or it's not a good car. It's just that you cannot say the 2 cars are the same because assuming all the best #s (from magazines) the 6.6s 0-60 (not counting the R&T June article of 6.2s for ITR) is the only thing I 've seen that matches the ITR. Skidpad, slalom and 1/4 miles are always a little higher on the ITR. So which one is the fastest & best handling car driven by equal drivers? Dah, the Type-R which won't be the king FWD sports car for long.
    The 2001 ITR (and maybe GSR) will no doubt be improved and by then we wouldn't be having this conversation again until Toyota comes out with another version of the Celica..
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    www.acura.net is wrong. Meant to say www.vtec.net
    (which has been up & down lately..)
    Anyone want to see 1/4mi. drag race videos of ITR with other cars I can always e-mail them to you..
    And they 're all stock driven by amateur drivers who brought their own ITRs to the strip. But I warn (Celica owners)you the slowest trap times were 15.0s with 14.7 the fastest.
    In one of the videos the ITR got killed by an older MR2 Turbo (naturally..). The MR2 pulled like a 13.9s and the ITR a 14.9. That 1 sec. was about 8-10 car lengths distance!
    I will probably not post here anymore so go ahead and fantasize all you want.. And my name is not Harold Mr. Fly, eh Bly, that's why we have profiles..
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • In reply to this: "a friend that used to own a GSR, and he told me that most Integra Type-R ("Real Slow) what he called them don't come down to play"
    I autocross my ITR and have seen the couple of other ITR's that are in the area at about half the races. What I haven't seen is any Celica GT's or Preludes in the two seasons that I've raced. There's plenty of GSR's and Civics. I would like to see the '00 Celica race this coming season. I like competition- may the best driver win!
  • I almost forgot. Your also trying to sell me that ITR gets a whole second faster thanthe GSR in 0-60 with an extra 25 horses too?????? hmmm so if I add an extra 15 to mine I can look for .75 second increase also huh??? Is that true??? Then it would have the exact same amount of HP under the hood. And I would have 0-60 time of under 6 seconds.
  • nutypenutype Posts: 15
    I think the point of the matter is that the Type R is a great car but way too over priced. My friend recently bought one for 29,000 bux. Not worth it. I just recently bought a project 89 Civic si in immaculate condition with a 95 GSR motor B18C1 for only 5,800bux. Runs low 13's all day long and out handles both cars almost 1G. I also have a daliy driver a 99 ex coupe with prelude motor. You don't need to spend the kinda money to go fast, handle well. I would take the Celica over the Type R any day. Honda makes great cars but there are other choices in that price.
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    Sounds to me you 're a little slow.. I hinted to trdcelicagts before to look at my profile.
    Do you think a 16yr old can afford a '97, '98 & '99 car? And do you know a lot of people barely old to own a licence that are married? I 'm in my 30s and I bet you older than you are. I don't care about women's phone#s or people looking at my car. Every time my brother goes to the track with his ITR, there are people standing all around it all the time and some even take pictures of it. That doesn't mean anything to me. If that's what I wanted I 'd buy a used 911 or something and show off.. but I 'm not a show off like you or immature because that's what you sound like, sex appeal and all that crap.. What the hek is that all about? Cars don't make the man, and you 'll find that out as you mature and grow older.
    Now back to the cars.. I hate to repeat myself but looks like all you Celica people suck in math. How is the ITR a whole second faster than the ITR in 0-60? The GSR always gets tested at 7.2s ('97 models & older were 6.9-7s due to OBDI computer). Now that's a .6s difference! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the ITR gains an extra .2s (15.6 vs 14.8) from 60-95mph.. Why is that so hard for you to understand? It's only natural that the ITR keeps pulling away after 60.
    Now, I don't know if your ITR buddy is imaginary
    because it sounds like he doesn't even know his car, or was it trdcelicagts that mentioned the ODBII? ALL ITRs have the ODBII chip so don't give me that crap about the '00 ITRs will be slower due to the "new OBDII.." ODBI chip was discontinued in all Integras in May of '97! ITRs came to the US in early June of '97.
    Why are you asking me where I get my #s? Don't you even read car magazines? Motortrend, C&D, R&T and Sport Compact Car all got a 14.8s in the 1/4 with a USDM ITR.
    Both '97 & '98 USDM ITRs put down 161-163hp at the wheels when dyno'd.
    Everyone knows (except you & your buddies) the JDM (Japanese Domestic Market) ITR puts down
    3-4hp more at the wheels on the dyno! I 'd hardly call that "a lot more aggressive"..
    So please don't talk to me about Integra specs & technicalities because I 've done a huge amount of research and participate in 3 Honda/Acura forums.
    The only difference between a JDM ITR & USDM ITR is the 4-1 header vs the 4-2-1 in US ITR and the 1/2" wider exhaust in the JDM that results in
    3.5-4hp more. That is why the JDM ITRs usually get 14.7s in the 1/4 and the US ones 14.8s.
    But don't worry, there are plenty of GSRs that will give you a run for your money that do the 1/4 in 15.1-15.2s with just bolt-on mods (cold air intake/header/exhaust). You 'll run into some I 'm sure, give it some time. My friend (I haven't taken mine to the strip yet but I will) got a best of 15.28s with only a home-made intake (modified the stock one) with his GSR.
    He had also lowered the air pressure in the tires to 22psi. The first time he went out he was getting 15.6's with no mods at all. 2nd time around with the modified intake his best run was 15.4x. 3d time at the strip he was really surprised when he started getting in the 15.2's. No exhaust, header, nothing. He just "bent" the air intake to suck in air from the side & back by the front of the passenger side like the ITR's intake does.
    You 're also forgetting one very important thing.
    The ITR's engine is built by hand unlike the mass produced GT-S. Mass produced engines vary from one another and that's a known fact. This explains the Celica's inconsistent 0-60 times. The ITRs are very consistent and C&D as well as SCC have said numerous times that Honda engines are the most consistent mass produced engines manufactured.
    I think the story about the problematic Celica tested by C&D a month before its release to the US public is bull. Toyota has had years to perfect this car. Are you telling me that they finalized the proper fuel maps in the computer for the US in the last couple of weeks before production? I don't buy that for a minute. I think we will see great incosistencies in future tests just like the ones we 've seen so far ranging from 6.6 to 7.5
    So why didn't Toyota supply a "more aggressive" Japanese GT-S but instead gave the magazine editors a sick puppy? Yeah right.
    I 'm looking forward to some more road tests next year when there will be no excuses. I 'm told SCC will conduct a comparison test soon (as they usually do) with a sooped up GSR to match the Celica's HP & wheel/tire combo.
    From past tests (and there were many) SCC's GSRs easily managed .87g with 16" wheels & tires (and .91+g with sports springs & shocks).
    Oh, and feel free to visit www.honda-acura.net to see what people are doing the 1/4 in their ITRs.
    Like I said before, they 've posted numerous 14.7 & 14.8s runs and they uploaded their timeslips to prove it (you can imbed jpegs in your posts there)
    Two even posted their 0-60 times that they spend a lot of money to record professionally and to my amazement there were a few low to mid 6's!
    They may 've burned their clutch after a few runs, who knows, but they claim their cars are stock. In any case, all the figures I use here I got from major car magazines and you can't argue with those or tell me I made them up.
    I 'm hoping we 'll see some Celicas at the auto-x
    events next year. They should be in the same class with the Integra, Prelude & VW VR6.
    Better get your mods now because the 2001 tegs are not too far away..
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • just a note to remind you that My website for this type of dicscussion is up now, I would love all you people to carry on this discussion over there..

    http://www.7thvision.com/celica/

    Larry D
    00 GTS
  • I've personally seen my friend do numerous 14.4 second 1/4 mile @97 mph times bone stock. (93 octane gas, Stock tires...some air let out, good track conditions). I can do 14.6's all day long on worn out stock tires in my stock R. We both have A/C too. You cannot compare a GSR to a Type R. Honestly the two cars are very different. Most GSRs(I/H/E usual mods) cannot break 14's. At our track they do 15.2-15.5's. It has very much to do with the launch. Very driver dependant. We have test drove the new Celica GTS and while better than a GSR. Stock Vs. Stock. I believe the ITR will still win. I cannot wait till spring to see some of them at the track and I guess we will see what they can do.
  • Guys. I have no idea what to say. It just blows my mind to think that you can do 14.4 in a car that doesn't even have 200 horses and weights in around 2700lbs. If you can not do it in a car with 2500lbs. and 180 horsepower with better gearing. To that post Johnnyboy I would have to seroiusly doubt it. And I am sure harry would too.
    Unless your not telling us something, like gutted interior or something. If I told that time to anyone around here they would all laugh. And that is just from my experience with local Teggy owners not from what I think. Because I am staying out of this. All I am saying is you better watch for the time slips from the GTS's cause you might be very suprised!!! If we get some decent drivers behind them. Car Mags or not.
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    It's all very simple Jason. You have the weights mixed up. The GSR doesn't even weigh 2700lbs! Look it up at Edmunds or anywhere else.
    The ITR's weight is 97lbs lighter than the GSR which weighs 2670 - my NY registration says:
    2601! which is the weight recorded by customs when the car entered the US in CA. That's why Acura didn't put a sunroof and cruise control on the ITR and made the engine lighter on top of that - to keep the weight down. When ITR came the big News was that the car is 100lbs lighter than the GSR & every magazine has mentioned it. Maybe you missed that little piece of information..
    Ok, follow me now.. We 'll take the heavier weight 2670 minus 97 = 2573 which is almost exactly what was reported by magazines when the ITR came out.
    When you add A/C to the ITR it goes up to roughly 2610lbs which is the heavier I 've seen it (I 've seen 2600lbs but I 'll use the bigger #s to appease you).
    Now a STRIPPED Celica GT-S weighs 2500lbs. Last comparison test by R&T said 2560 but nicely loaded which makes sense.
    Add ABS & spoiler to make it comparably equipped to the ITR and it goes up at least 30lbs. You should also know that over 90% of GT-Ss come with a sunroof which adds at least another 30lbs to the weight bringing the total up top at least 2560lbs!
    I guarantee you the difference between the avg. GT-S and ITR w/A/C is less than 50lbs.
    Now if you can find a stipped GT-S without a sunroff, spoiler or ABS you should be able to shave off .1s in the 1/4.
    Remember I told you there were a couple of people in honda-acura.net forum that reported mid 14s with their stock ITRs? But I didn't insist on those #s even though they had the timeslips to go with them. I stuck with the 14.7-8 range because that's what all the mags reported (except 1 which was like 15s - forget which one).
    I don't know JohnyboyR and never even had a conversation with him on Edmunds but here 's your proof since you wanted to see it from real people and not from magazine tests.
    I also think that the GT-S once broken in and taken to the track with a good driver it could probably do 15 flat in the 1/4 or maybe better. I wouldn't be surprised. I never said it wasn't capable because I 've seen broken in GSRs completely stock do it in 15.4 (.2s less than the usual 15.6 reported by the usual mags)

    Johnnyboyr: I never compared the GSR to the ITR and would never dare to do so. I though I mentioned that with I/H/E GSRs do the 1/4 in 15.1 or so. I never said they 're sub 15s. But with cam gears I 've seen them in the high 14s easy. They put down about 170-175hp at the wheels with bolt ons and some Spoon cam gears. I own a '99 GSR & my brother a '98 ITR (#78). The ITR is far superior to the GSR. I always look forward to driving his ITR and I 've raced him on 2-3 occasions at the light. Even when I got a head start one time (at least a full second) at the light because he didn't see the green light right away, he still caught up to me at around 70mph and was about 3-4 car lengths ahead of me at 90-95mph. How can I compare the two? I still got killed at the 1/4 with a head start! Not to mentioned I almost litterally got killed trying to keep up with him on twisty roads. He just pulls away and takes the turns like he is on railroad tracks and disappears while I 'm all over the road with my tires squealing like a pig trying to keep the GSR from going off the road.
    No comparison.
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • For one thing, HP, gearing, driver and weight are not the only factors in acceleration.. in fact, HP means *NOTHING* for acceleration, torque is what keeps a car accelerating, not HP, however, the amount of work (hp) X tq equal a greater value at 8000rpm than at 1500rpm of course :) Beyond that, the tq and hp curves matter and quite frankly I was not impressed with the dyno sheet on the new GT-S's, I also don't feel that they have as good of braking, handling or body rigidity that the ITR has.. but I would love to see one come to Sebring International Raceway for a fun day of driving on a road course on April 2nd. That's the only true test for these cars since that track will test everything, acceleration, top end power, low end power, transistions, ultimate grip, handling, braking, etc. etc. etc.. if any of your GT-S owners want to come out go to http://www.nsxflorida.com/ for more information on the event.. there will be at least two ITRs there so show up and lets find out which is better on the track.. not any of this "Well motortrend said that...." or "Yeah well autoweek said this!!!" that's all BS and worthless information, specially considering toyotas tendency to "slightly tune" magazine cars (see 93 supra TT).

    Dave-ROR
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    I 'm only in my mid 30s and you 're not too far behind if you 're in your mid-20s..
    All kidding aside, I could 've had a sports/sporty car earlier. Believe me I 've had my share of hotrods before I got married. It was hard to convince my wife with a baby to let me get one. Now that my son has grown a little and my wife has her own sedan and my Civic is paid off I figure it was time to get a "toy". I wanted a fast 4cyl. car that would also get good mileage too and the GSR was the best choice.
    6 months ago, I had no clue about the new Celica coming or about its specs and if I waited I would 've missed out on the $1K dealer incentive on the Integra which enabled me to get the car for $19.8K
    - $450 under dealer invoice! I know people that paid $19K for their 140hp Integra LS! I think I got an excellent deal. ABS, leather, sunroof, all standard and the fastest 4cyl. (in the US)naturally aspirated mass produced car - at the time. It was summer time (June), the price was right and with that 8100rpm redline how could I refuse? Not to mention the GSR (along with the Mustang) has the most after market parts available to it..
    I knew it was no Type-R but at least I saved $4-5K
    Had I been in the market for a car in the Fall or winter, I 'd probably be looking at a GT-S but not till Jan/Feb. timeframe. The Celica is too hot and only now prices have started falling a little below MSRP - and that's on autos. It's very hard to find a 6sp.
    You guys keep saying that the GT-S is thousands less than the ITR. If you go to the Sportcars/Coupes forum and look at the '00 Celica topic you 'll see dozens of people that paid
    $24-25K for their loaded auto GT-S. Some even more. 69% of all Celicas (GT & GT-S) imported to the US are autos.
    Chances are the GT-S next to me at the light will be an auto and will quickly see my taillights :-)
    So far I 've seen one test conducted on a auto GT-S and the author said the 0-60 times were too embarassing to mention. Also anyone who test drove an auto said the car was sluggish. I think they 've done a great injustice to the GT-S to pair it up w/an auto tranny. But it's smart sales strategy and they 're selling because a lot of people want the auto and like the looks of the Celica. They don't care about accel.#s and all that. I 'm glad Toyota came out with a good car. It was long overdue and I 've always liked the older Celicas. My brother used to own a '90 GT.
    Nice car, smooth engine, handled well (with 15x7" aftermarket alloys) and pretty reliable.
    To me Toyotas have always been up there with Honda/Acura for quality & reliability.
    I wouldn't care which one I owned and I 'm glad that their is a lot of Sports Coupe/hatchback competition now. Competition should keep prices down for a while (under $25K I hope). Sorry for the long note.
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    Wow, what I am I saying? I 'm in my early 30s!
    geez, I need my 2nd cup of coffee!!!

    imagegst: do you own an Eclipse GS-T? or a Type-R?
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • My buddy has a '00 GT-S and challenged me to a race over on HWY280 in SF late at night. It's a nice wide freeway. He pulled up next to me and he down shifted and got a good car length ahead of me (I was not expecting to race). Then i down shifted to 3rd. It was all over after that. I caught up to him and just passed him like he was standing still. I got about 1 1/2 car lengths in front before I stopped pulling away from him. At this point my speedo said about 135 and slowly climbing. Thats when I let off because of a 40MPH junction. He was pretty surprised at how easily the ITR pulled away from him. He expected a much closer race. He definately wants to race me again. This time I will be ready so he won't even get a chance to pull away from me like this last time . Don't get me wrong though, i'm not knocking the celica. I think it's a great car. Also a nice platform to start from if you wanna fix it up.
  • I just wanted to let you guys know that I got a Spectra Blue Mica 6-spd GTS with:

    sunroof
    wheels
    spoiler
    leather
    alarm
    ABS
    floormats

    for $22995

    MSRP was $24639

    I was pretty happy with the price although I'm sure some people are getting better deals than that already.

    I'd also like to say that the Spectra Blue Mica is the coolest color that is available for the Celica in my opinion. Find a dealer that has one and check it out!
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    heltor:
    Did you look at GS-R before you got the GT-S? Except for 16" whelels, GS-R comes standard with all those "options" and Acura (TLC) advantage, better warranty, proven reliability and can be had for under $20K. GT-S is good car but not worth the premium. I couldn't justify the difference over GS-R and got 2000 Prelude last month (paid $21.6 K).
  • 1. The Celica looks cooler than the Integra in my opinion. In fact, it's the coolest new design for a car that I have seen in anywhere near that price-range.
    2. The Celica is faster than the GS-R according to all the magazine articles I saw.
    3. Toyota makes the Supra.
    4. I've seen Toyota reliability first-hand. My Dad had an '83 celica that lasted for 250k miles and still ran nearly perfectly when he sold it for $500.
    5. My girlfriend has a '99 Integra GS so I wouldn't want to have a car that looked exactly like hers.


    I like the competition between Toyota and Honda that seems to be starting though. I hope that in the near future we see some super powerful high-revving engines from both companies.
  • Heltor forgot to mention that he got 0-60 and quarter mile times that are a 1/2 second quicker than a GSR, Celica's proven to be one of the best cars when it comes to reliability compared to anything on the road, and a brand new design, also better handling, short throw 6speed tranny( no need for a short throw kit here) compared to a 5 speed, Aluminum racing pedals, And an interior to set the standard for everyone else to follow. It was well worth it to me!
  • Only1Harry: it's qst, not gst, the name is from a business I own, not a car :) For the record, I don't currently own a eclipse GS-T nor a Type-R.

    Heltor: Wow, toyota made the supra? Damnit, i need to go buy me a paseo right now!

    sigh.

    Dave-ROR
  • So now that Honda makes Formula 1 engines I need to buy a Honda lawnmower! lol
  • So what is it gonna take to get all you people who either own a new celica or are interested in the new celica to come over to my celica page and start posting all this nice nifty stuff over there? I have alot more than just a message board..

    Aftermarket links, reviews, specs etc.. working on an owners database etc. Ever seen one of the pages for a car like dsm.com or newcougarowners.com etc.. well thats what its all about.. Please come support this page.. I need everyones help to make it big.

    CLICK ME -> http://www.7thvision.com/celica

    Larry D
    00 GT-S
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    If you have a picture of a dyno run with the power & torque curves of a 6-sp GT-S, I 'll visit your site. I 'd like to compare them to that of GSR & Type-R's. I 've heard from someone that the GT-S puts down 153hp at the wheels (which is almost the same as '94-97 GSRs, 148-151hp at the wheels) but the the torque curve is not as flat all the way through the high RPMs like in the Integras. I haven't seen it myself so if you can get someone to send you one, I 'm there!
    :-)
    PS. Pretty girls would be nice too (fighting to make it through the crowd to give a Celica owner their phone#..) heheh
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • Check out the SCC with the Celica on the front. It has the new celica dyno sheets showing it pulling 157.? at the wheels. Also you can goto Rodmillen.com. He has a dyno sheet on there of it pushing 154.1 at the wheels. So its about in line with the output. The GTS is 180 at the crank to the GSR having 170 at the crank( unless the almighty Integra sites show 175 or something now) but thats 10 extra ponies. So if you said the GSRs dyno sheets are showing 148-151hp at the wheels. Its in line with the Celica's 154-157 bout an average of 6 hp or so. The amount of loss for both cars are about the same(13%). Actually the if you look at type r's dyno runs they get even more loss, usually 14% - 15%. On Mark's car averaged 165 ponies at the wheel because of the limited slip diff. thats stock in the ITR's. Limited slips usually rob a few ponies to insure that the horsepower that does get to the ground is pretty even so there is less spinning wheels on the track but you already know that.
    Also Mark pointed out to me those puny 15" rims that come stock on an ITR help out on the strip as there is more rubber to be worked with and less weight to be turned than in a 16" rim. The only think thats bad with a smaller rim is its usually not as wide. But then again when was the last time you saw an import use 16 or 17 inch rims with drag slicks?????? There are always 14" or maybe some 15" steel rims. Mark said that its also very possible to get good high 14s with a stock TypeR using slicks instead of the radials. Huge difference in lauching in that first 60 feet!!!! And then still be able to say all stock!!! Yeah stock motor, interior, suspension etc etc. Who would know there was slicks on it. But I don't know what I am talking about. I am just reiterating what he was telling me!
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    Let me explain what he is trying to tell you. The lighter the wheel, the better it is on the suspension and the steering response and helps handling overall. True, the Type-R has very light 15" wheels - 12.7lbs. But you could upgrade them to a light 16" wheel of 13-13.5lbs. There are lots of them. No doubt the Celica 16" wheels are not heavy. They had to keep the weight down and alos give it good & quick steering response, so I doubt they 're more than 14-15lbs - still light for a 16".
    What slicks accomplish up to 60ft is a good launch with good grip and minimal spinning, but I 've seen Type-Rs spin them for a good 30ft with slicks too. Depends on the driver and how you ease off the clutch..
    And yes, the ITR is robbed from some horses at the wheel due to the LSD. We know that too.
    So thanks for all the info we already knew. I don't see the point. I 'm guessing you 're trying to say that ALL those type-Rs that get high or close to mid 14s had slicks? Did Motortrends stock ITR have slicks too? or R&T's, or C&D's or SCC's? I don't think so. Or what about all those people at the acura-honda.net forum? They all lied according to your buddy Mark? Has he ever gone to the strip to see what his ITR can do in the 1/4? If yes, and he hasn't hit sub 15 #s then tell him to practice and he 'll get it, or let a real driver have a go at it, ok? You can put slicks on the GT-S and it still won't match the #s of the ITR. Like I said before, a guy and a bunch of his friends, took out all the seats from the car, put slicks on the GT-S, modified the intake to take in colder air and put a free flow muffler on. They went back to the stip 3 times and had at least 8 runs each time. They accomplished a best 14.96s which I think is admirable and logical considering 1 car mag (MT) had a best time of 15.2s (we won't count the 15.4's & up..)
    The guy's 2 or so posts are in the Sports/Coupes Forum under '00 Celica and go back about 1.5mos.
    Someone just wrote to me a couple of hours ago about the 154hp dyno run of the GT-S, maybe he got it off the Rodmillen web page too.. It's in the right range. I 'll go check the charts out.
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    Kinda tricky to find because all they 're trying to do is sell you stuff...
    The 2 mods consisting of air intake & exhaust resulted in a nice 15hp gain, comparable to an AEM intake & DC Sports (or others) exhaust HP gains for GSR.
    What's very noticeable in the dyno chart, is the torque curve which is not very smooth at all like the GSR's & Type-R's. It's almost like a rollercoaster where the Integra's torque curve is almost flat up to 7200 or more rpm.
    The Celica's goes up until 4300rpm and then drops all the way to 6200rpm to under 100 and then climbs up again to its peak of 114 through 6800rpm and then starts droping from there..
    Now I know why Mr. xxxqst said he didn't like the dyno charts. The Celica actually loses 16 lb/ft of torque from 4300 to 6200rpm.
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • only1harryonly1harry NYPosts: 1,140
    Meant to say the torque chart is not very smooth UNLIKE that of the GSR's & Type-R's.
    The GSR runs at maximum torque from around
    4Krpm to 7200rpm and the Type-R all the way up to about 7600rpm. Flat line!
    The Celica's power curve is also not very smooth either and the power doesn't seem to really climb unitl 6200rpm and stops at 7200 where the GSR starts sharply climbing at around 4800 up to 7600rpm. The only good thing I see in this power curve is that the HP stays almost flat (peak) from 7200 to 7800rpm (then followed by sharp decline/loss like in the GSR). The GSR stays at peak HP from 7600 to 8000rpm and then drops. Same as ITR but from 7900-8300..
    '99 Integra GSR
    '06 Civic LX coupe
    '11 BMW 335i coupe xDrive
    '13 Honda Accord sedan (wife's car)
  • and uh it actually looses 16 ftlbs of torque. LOL Harry when are you going to tell me soemthing I don't know. The bottom line is dollar for dollar there is nothing that beats a 2000 GTS. Even if you spent MSRP on it instead of the hopped up price. If I spent the extra money I saved from not buying an ITR on the GTS. There is no way it could be out handled, or out ran by any Acura or Honda. And all this BS will do nothing for you. If there is an ITR that can run 14.4s stock then there is something wrong with your Gtech meter then Johnnyboy. And yes the GTS does have better gearing than the GSR or ITR. The 98 ITR's weights in at 2650 lbs at the lightest to the GTS's 2500. and has an extra 15 horses. The GTS has all but the same exact power to wieght ratio as the ITR. with better gearing(6 speeds Johnnyboy) you do the math. Hmmmmm and the GT-S is what 4 tenths slower????????? And is only 4 tenths quicker than the GSR. Ummm it don't add up. Something has to give. But you tell me if the GT-S has the same power to wieght ratio as the ITR and have better gearing than the ITR. They are both front drivers, both the same displacement, etc etc. Then how is the ITR sooooo much faster???? hmmm It makes what Mark was saying so much easier to see. OHHHH thats right it has those 15" rims and the special stickers on it. And the special drivers in it that make it go anywhere from 14.9 which was the fastest time given to me about 30 posts ago, until now which acording to Johnnyboy is now down to 14.4's all day long completely stock! Oh yeah I forgot I saw on the Tonight Show that Jay was saying by putting on slicks that it can run 13.5's. I even have that one tapped! Yeah and when the poor little GSR ( which the GT-S was made to compete against) can only run 15.6's stock. Which I have never seen at the drag strip, even with slightly modified GSR's. But that extra 25 ponies and a hp robbing limited slip give the ITR the extra .8- 1.2 seconds??????? It needs to be da bomb!!! Then the extra 55 horses I had in my alltrac should have put it deep in the low 13's. Which it didn't. Even with all wheel drive. So when you can give me an explination why this math don't add up post a reply. I would love to hear your excuses.
  • If you gentalmen would be so kind as to turn back to your SCC Oct. 99 issue and take a gander at the torque curves that SCC is some kind to provide for us. The torque curves are all but the same until 6000 rpms which is when the biggest HP increase is and you get pinned to your seat. At that point the GSR is putting out about 20 ftlbs more than the GTS. But upon further inspection you will find the GTS is usually making more torque throughout the powerband about 66% of the time. And the GSR is making more torque than the GTS for only about 2000 rpms. But then the GSR's second cam is actually ingaged fighting the GT-S's smaller cam. So actually if the GT-S would have engaged the second cam sooner the GSR wouldn't have a snowball's chance you know where. And then you must also remember with the GT-S's gearing I never fall below 6000 rpms after 2nd gear. Oh yeah and look at that I almost forgot the GSR stops making torque after 6000 rpms. Thats a shame. So for the last 2000 rpms of the GSR and probably the Type-R's also the torque goes from 117ftlbs to about 97. Gee that sucks too!
    And if you look at HP curves the GT-S curve is very strait until you hit 6gs and the second cam kicks in. DAM you feel that! all the way through to the next shift. The GSR's and Type R's second cam kicks in a little earlier. Which makes the power curves look differently than the Celicas. BIG DEAL! Are you going to whine if I cut a piece of cake differently too???? You just feel it more when you feel the second cam kick in.
  • You Type R girls seem to be very upset about the Celica GT-S it seems to bother you it's so good and it just as fast and better looking and better handling for less! No wonder your mad. Get over it and sell your junk ITR. lol
This discussion has been closed.