[redcars]

I had 5 and 6 speed manuals because of the performance advantage over the slush boxes of the day. Now you have DSGs and conventional autos with with so many gears, the ZF 8 speed is especially good. It makes the decision tough.

[Ricochet48]

Oh boy my specialty... comparing the G42 and ITS haha! But seriously, I've discussed these two on countless forums & fb groups, mostly getting lambasted for making an apples to oranges comparison.

I was 100% cross-shopping these two. If you want to spend $55Kish on a sporty car, they should both be on your radar. As an Acura RSX-S owner, I was even more hyped in general... but I only expected $5K over the CTR and not to lose features from the Integra Aspec. At the same price of the M240i(x), the ITS is dead in the water for my preferences.

The ITS might be on your list if two things are high value to you--1) large rear seat space / hatch storage and 2) an engaging 6MT. If both are not requirements to you, you should likely look to the AWD German offerings. Neither were requirements or even positives to me (don't need extra space, 6MT can be frustrating in heavy city traffic where I live).

To buy the ITS you also have to be okay with a spartan interior that's basically the same as a $30K Civic. They cheaped out so much you don't even have rear AC vents, passenger memory, and of course zero sunroof (which is a must for me, but others dislike). The seats are also a downgrade from the $7K cheaper CTR and you don't get the better racing HUD for some reason.

The ITS will be slightly cheaper to maintain as it's a Honda K20, but oddly enough gets worse gas mileage than the M240i (yay ZF8). Resale rates will be within 5% in 5 years, so that's not a huge difference either. Buying the G42 lightly used is my plan anyways, let the first owner take the large depreciation hit is my philosophy these days.

Performance wise, the G42 will destroy the ITS from a launch (about 25% quicker) and nearly hit a 12s 1/4 (about 10% faster than the ITS). It will of course perform better in wet conditions with AWD too. The ITS will only be ahead about 1% on the track (based on the lightning times of the G42 vs. the CTR). So you really must be into tracking to care about a 1% difference there and forgoe about a 15% speed difference in daily driving conditions (as well as give up luxury interior features as hinted).

I am glad the ITS exists as a car enthusiast, but for someone that lives in a dense, snowy city that doesn't need to carry passengers and would prefer more interior luxury... the G42 is better for me at this time. I'm honestly not sure if I will ever sell my DC5, it only has 50K miles on it haha, might just be a weekend driver.

[RICH S202]

If i were to get another manual drivers car it would be the Toyota Corolla GR...just my 2 cents

[Ricochet48]

Originally Posted by RICH S202

If i were to get another manual drivers car it would be the Toyota Corolla GR...just my 2 cents

The Corolla GR would be last on my list of similarly priced options.

It has less rear legroom than the M240i (29.9" vs. 32.2"), and just 3 inches more of headroom. Meanwhile at least the CTR/ITS has a much more usable 37.4" of legroom. So the utility of the Corolla is much less imo.

Also the interior quality is even worse than the ITS and garbage compared to BMW. Similarly the nameplate is even more low quality. I would not want to tell people I drive a souped up Corolla. Even an Acura would be more respectable.

Finally the suspension quite rough, even compared to the CTR. With the G42 you can switch to comfort mode and chill.

[Clark_Kent]

Evaluating speed, power, or track times in percentages is non-sensical. The reality is it's a cheap way to try to bend an argument in one's favor. It may sound minuscule but depending on the circumstances, a "2% difference in track time" could equate to a vehicle in a completely different tier from a performance and price point perspective.

[XC3LLR8]

At the end of the day what does being 1% or 2% faster on a track even mean? None of these are track cars from which money or tire sponsorships will develop. Track time in these cars is nothing more than a means to fun stories over beer and good food at the end of the day.

[Ricochet48]

Originally Posted by Clark_Kent

Evaluating speed, power, or track times in percentages is non-sensical. The reality is it's a cheap way to try to bend an argument in one's favor.

How do you bend a 0-60, 1/4, track time, mpg, legroom, storage space? Those are hard data points.

The 'feel' or engagement is more subjective though. I still doesn't change the actual data though if you're looking for a specific speed, utility, or efficiencies.

One can say they prefer the feel of the ITS 6MT, but it won't magically make it get a under 4 second 0-60. I can also say the space in the G42 is sufficient for me, while still recognizing it's much less than the ITS...

Originally Posted by Clark_Kent

It may sound minuscule but depending on the circumstances, a "2% difference in track time" could equate to a vehicle in a completely different tier from a performance and price point perspective.

I noted the M240ix was ~1% behind the CTR. That'll be a driver race unless you're semi-pro. I've seen much slower cars crush on the track or SCCA, the driver mod was much more important than the actual vehicle. If you track 20x a year, 1% might matter, but most would prefer to dominate on the street where they spend 99.X% of their driving.

[Ricochet48]

Originally Posted by XC3LLR8

At the end of the day what does being 1% or 2% faster on a track even mean? None of these are track cars from which money or tire sponsorships will develop. Track time in these cars is nothing more than a means to fun stories over beer and good food at the end of the day.

Agreed. I recall quoting track times around the Ring 20 years ago and my friends mockingly asking when I was going to race there.

Of all my 'car enthusiast' friends, literally only a handful have done any track time. Now that we're older, an even smaller amount do.

I do know that if I'm at a stoplight in a G42 and an ITS rolls up, it would get dominated while costing the same. Same with a race from a roll, in the snow, and even mpg as noted.

If they preferred a 6MT and more rear space, so be it though. More power to them, not my problem. I'll take a sunroof and 400hp haha.

Side note--curious what the sales numbers of the G42 are compared to the ITS (as well as the 2 series vs. all Integras).

[RICH S202]

Originally Posted by Ricochet48

The Corolla GR would be last on my list of similarly priced options.

It has less rear legroom than the M240i (29.9" vs. 32.2"), and just 3 inches more of headroom. Meanwhile at least the CTR/ITS has a much more usable 37.4" of legroom. So the utility of the Corolla is much less imo.

Also the interior quality is even worse than the ITS and garbage compared to BMW. Similarly the nameplate is even more low quality. I would not want to tell people I drive a souped up Corolla. Even an Acura would be more respectable.

Finally the suspension quite rough, even compared to the CTR. With the G42 you can switch to comfort mode and chill.

Hairy muff, i thought you were looking for a driver's car, not an armchair on wheels lol

[danallxt]

Of all my 'car enthusiast' friends, literally only a handful have done any track time. Now that we're older, an even smaller amount do.

I do know that if I'm at a stoplight in a G42 and an ITS rolls up, it would get dominated while costing the same. Same with a race from a roll, in the snow, and even mpg as noted.

Interesting discussion, glad i started it. It all comes down to personal priorities in what one wants in a car ownership. We're all different. No wrong position here.

I'm 74 and have road course tracked, and 1/4 mile dragged this car. Never have done a street stoplight race nor ever intend to, so that means nothing to me. Having said that; to me 1/4 mile times and track times are NOT a priority in car ownership, there are a lot more subleties to a car than those criteria that are important to me.
If a manual tranny and HP were most important I'd simply own a new Mustang.

[Ricochet48]

Originally Posted by RICH S202

Hairy muff, i thought you were looking for a driver's car, not an armchair on wheels lol

Hairy muff? Wat.

You think the G42 is an armchair on wheels? You know like 1% of cars sold in the US are stick right? Also very few are coupes or even sedans these days. SUV/CUV's and heavy electrics dominate the market, check the stats...

Of all my friends, I know literally a handful with 6MT's and only 2 of us daily drive them. Since moving to the heart of downtown, it's become quite a labor in traffic.

The G42 is a superb driver's car and extremely sporty compared to what most Americans drive. My friends are buying hybrid CR-V's & RAV-4's and think I'm nuts for considering something as 'wild and impractical' as a G42.

[Ricochet48]

Originally Posted by danallxt

Interesting discussion, glad i started it. It all comes down to personal priorities in what one wants in a car ownership. We're all different. No wrong position here.

I'm 74 and have road course tracked, and 1/4 mile dragged this car. Never have done a street stoplight race nor ever intend to, so that means nothing to me. Having said that; to me 1/4 mile times and track times are NOT a priority in car ownership, there are a lot more subleties to a car than those criteria that are important to me.
If a manual tranny and HP were most important I'd simply own a new Mustang.

First off, congrats at being 74 and still tracking and such, very legit. I bet less than 1% of all G42 owners (all ages) will ever track their cars consistently though. That's for the M2 crowd.

I agree that everyone has different preferences. Mine as noted were based on my living situation and what matters to me. Merging onto the highway quickly or accelerating fast from a stop will be part of my daily experience (as will snow a bit in the winter). A track will not, so I put much less value on it.

Things like a sunroof and quality interior are very important to me too (one of the reasons I don't care as much for the ITS... the interior of my RSX is nicer and has a sunroof haha).

The ITS wins at the track (by 1%) and cargo/passenger space. The 6MT is a feature some love and other that are stuck in traffic loathe. The G42 wins in every other category though imo (speed, awd, luxury, mpg, classiness, etc.)

[RICH S202]

Originally Posted by Ricochet48

Hairy muff? Wat.

You think the G42 is an armchair on wheels? You know like 1% of cars sold in the US are stick right? Also very few are coupes or even sedans these days. SUV/CUV's and heavy electrics dominate the market, check the stats...

Of all my friends, I know literally a handful with 6MT's and only 2 of us daily drive them. Since moving to the heart of downtown, it's become quite a labor in traffic.

The G42 is a superb driver's car and extremely sporty compared to what most Americans drive. My friends are buying hybrid CR-V's & RAV-4's and think I'm nuts for considering something as 'wild and impractical' as a G42.

Hairy muff = fair enough.

Wish i'd never commented on your post now. You're answering your own questions.

Cheerio

P.S, you come across as a right fucking knob, hope you realise that. 😃

[redcars]

I had the 4 eyed Integra and miss it. Probably a death trap by today's standards, but light, a few hundred pounds over a ton. It was an Integra first and an Acura second unlike the latest car which is Acura first. Styling really doesn't differentiate between the TLX or Honda.

[PBANDJ]

I have always preferred the look of German cars compared to modern Japanese cars, but I do like the new ITS. Like the 2 series, I think the ITS looks better in person. I drove a gold one and have seen a blue one with black wheels and a white one with gold wheels.

[Evilmoretea]

Can I ask what OP means by “nervous on centre” feeling I’m considering upgrading to n M240i from the current 230i and the driving experience/steering is very important to me. I know it’s light even in the 230i but is there something worse with this on centre thing?

[donnyfontaine]

Originally Posted by Ricochet48

Resale rates will be within 5% in 5 years, so that's not a huge difference either. Buying the G42 lightly used is my plan anyways, let the first owner take the large depreciation hit is my philosophy these days.

I used to be of this mind too and still am for the most part but after a used WRX and some used S Audi’s, I struggle to feel this way for any “performance” oriented car. People aren’t buying an S or M240 to drive it like an accord. Most of the time if it’s a lease or they intend to sell soon, they drive the hell out of it, ignore the break in period, and it’s the next persons problem. I’ve had 6 cars and 2 were new, an S3 and the M240. I plan on keeping it for a while, and knowing there were no mods, it was properly broken in, properly maintained, never abused or even pushed at all til it was warmed up…. More than worth the money (to me at least). Esp since the era of ICE cars is ending and I want to avoid hybrid/electric as long as possible.

Whenever I get a rav or RDX or something yep I’ll go back to 3ish years used and under 30k miles. But for something like this, there are tangible benefits to buying new

Plus, I got the ‘22 mid last year and to this day I’ve only seen 3 others in person, and random strangers have lots of nice things to say about it because it’s still rare

[MPR]

Originally Posted by donnyfontaine

I used to be of this mind too and still am for the most part but after a used WRX and some used S Audi’s, I struggle to feel this way for any “performance” oriented car. People aren’t buying an S or M240 to drive it like an accord. Most of the time if it’s a lease or they intend to sell soon, they drive the hell out of it, ignore the break in period, and it’s the next persons problem. I’ve had 6 cars and 2 were new, an S3 and the M240. I plan on keeping it for a while, and knowing there were no mods, it was properly broken in, properly maintained, never abused or even pushed at all til it was warmed up…. More than worth the money (to me at least). Esp since the era of ICE cars is ending and I want to avoid hybrid/electric as long as possible.

Whenever I get a rav or RDX or something yep I’ll go back to 3ish years used and under 30k miles. But for something like this, there are tangible benefits to buying new

Plus, I got the ‘22 mid last year and to this day I’ve only seen 3 others in person, and random strangers have lots of nice things to say about it because it’s still rare

I'm with you, buying new provides the comfort of knowing 100% of the break in and maintenance history. If someone leases, they know they are under warranty for the duration of their possession so they do not care about the long term.

Years ago I was in the buy-used camp, but after buying new for the first time with my BRZ, I am now a fan of buying new. Aside from knowing the cars full history, I also like knowing that nobody has farted in my seats.