[BGBF18]

Two different design languages and layouts, but equal in ugliness.

Perfect for junior tech bros desperate for breakout performances at C&C.

[JohnnyBeagle]

lol @ the people dismissing the CTR in this thread because it doesn't have a BMW badge on it

It's one of the most fun cars to drive. There's more to vehicle enjoyment than straight performance numbers, which is why it's on so many top driver's cars lists.

[SonicJlee]

All, I appreciate the feedback! Thanks for watching the video even if it was only 10 seconds of it. Yes, my delivery is boring (I occasionally fall asleep while editing). I recognize that people prefer shorter videos – I’ll aim to keep future videos to 10 mins or less. For this one, I was answering a multitude of questions that I had received from other videos.

Cliff notes:
Dealer asking prices for the FL5 Civic Type R are close to the base MSRP for the G87 BMW M2 – people are cross shopping them, like I did.

Similarities: They both have aggressive front bumpers for cooling, aggressive fender flares, fixed multi-piston brakes calipers up front with 2 piece rotors, a 6-speed manual transmission, well bolstered front seats, individual settings (for engine response, chassis/suspension, braking, etc.), back seats that can accommodate adults and car seats, enough cargo space to fit multiple suitcases, and are offered in colors that are unique to these models.

The M2 beats the Civic Type R in every performance category: horsepower, torque, acceleration, braking, and skid pad. Also the M2’s exhaust is louder and sounds better.

The Civic Type R beats the M2 in practical categories: significantly lower MSRP, better MPG, and more cargo and passenger space.

The M2 offers more features, tech, and a nicer interior with higher end materials, consistent with the higher MSRP. It feels more substantial and more serious – it is very capable but relative to the Type R it needs to be driven harder to be fun.

The Civic Type R is over 600 pounds lighter than the M2; the weight difference is noticeable when driving. The Type R is more fun at low speeds – the suspension is stiffer and the handling is flat. It is a point and shoot type of car. It is confidence inspiring. The Type R’s shifter is smoother and less notchy than the M2’s shifter. The M2’s shifter isn’t bad, but relatively speaking, the Type R’s shifter is better.

I didn’t “pick” a car in this video as my intention was to answer questions that I received on both cars. I own both and I think they are great in their own way. You get more with the M2 and that is reflected in the price. Having owned 2 F80 M3s (a base trim followed by a competition trim) and having driven other M cars (F87 M2, E90 M3, E46 M3, Z4M, Z3M, E39 M5, etc.), I think the G87 M2 is a great M car and has a bit of old school M car charm. The Type R is more playful. I may make a short video to share my thoughts on which I would choose if I could only keep 1.

[evanescent03]

Originally Posted by SonicJlee

I think the G87 M2 is a great M car and has a bit of old school M car charm. The Type R is more playful. I may make a short video to share my thoughts on which I would choose if I could only keep 1.

i've never driven an M2 but i've driven a CTR (FK8) on the street and track. it's a really fun and really practical car. definitely doesn't have the high-end feel or appearance of any BMW M car, but still really fun.

i've owned a wide variety of cars and continue enjoy bouncing around between different brands and categories. at the end of the day, it's a very subjective scoring system that we all use to buy cars.

these two cars have a lot of big differences, but i'm sure there are quite a few folks cross-shopping them. similar price realm, manual trans, back seat, considered "fun," possess track capabilities ...

the integra type s interests me because it looks better than a CTR, can be had with black interior and price makes more sense (CTR at MSRP is good, but the ADMs kill the car for me).

[evanescent03]

i'm not film critic, but i think a lot of the stuff you talked about was good, but i think you're talking a little too slow and have too much dead space between thoughts. the data sheets were up forever. haha. overall good stuff. fun car.

if get an ITS, maybe i'll do a video comparison vs my M3CS and watch heads explode. lol.

[Squidget]

Originally Posted by SonicJlee

Cliff notes: (stuff)

I think this is a good summary of the differences and I more or less agree with them. I concur that the presentation could be better, but I think people are unfairly acting like the content doesn't matter because the presentation is slow paced. The content is fine.

I had no problem watching the video because 1) I am a car nerd, fan of all cars and 2) don't have ADHD apparently.

I'd suggest one thing, though. If you want to compare these cars, you need to address the most fundamental difference, and the thing we call "layout": FWD vs. RWD.

One of the reasons car people (including me) will say you cannot compare these cars is because you just can't simply compare FWD and RWD cars. At anywhere near the limit, they behave totally differently, and require different driving techniques. It's the elephant in the room, and you've got to talk about it.

I grew up driving both FWD and RWD drive cars, but as soon I made enough money, I went RWD only. I hate understeer, I hate torque steer, I hate not being able to rotate with the throttle, I hate having the fronts overloaded while the rears are doing nothing.

For me personally, a FWD car, no matter how good, cannot be fairly compared to a RWD (or rally-oriented AWD), simply due to limitations of physics. It's no coincidence that FWD disappears from sports cars when they hit a certain price threshold.

[DC2RtoCT9Atof87]

Originally Posted by Squidget

I think this is a good summary of the differences and I more or less agree with them. I concur that the presentation could be better, but I think people are unfairly acting like the content doesn't matter because the presentation is slow paced. The content is fine.

I had no problem watching the video because 1) I am a car nerd, fan of all cars and 2) don't have ADHD apparently.

I'd suggest one thing, though. If you want to compare these cars, you need to address the most fundamental difference, and the thing we call "layout": FWD vs. RWD.

One of the reasons car people (including me) will say you cannot compare these cars is because you just can't simply compare FWD and RWD cars. At anywhere near the limit, they behave totally differently, and require different driving techniques. It's the elephant in the room, and you've got to talk about it.

I grew up driving both FWD and RWD drive cars, but as soon I made enough money, I went RWD only. I hate understeer, I hate torque steer, I hate not being able to rotate with the throttle, I hate having the fronts overloaded while the rears are doing nothing.

For me personally, a FWD car, no matter how good, will ever be able to compare to a RWD (or rally-oriented AWD), simply due to limitations of physics.

But you can rotate a FWD car with the throttle… you lift!

I kid I kid, I get what you mean and you are 100% correct.

[JohnnyBeagle]

CTR gets quite a bit of rear rotation hehe

keep in mind FWD with a capable LSD is much different than the generic FWD economy cars most people are familiar with

Honda refined this car from the FK8 and took a lot of what they learned from the FK8 based TC R race car in the Touring category to make this and the new TC R. It really is an incredible car, far beyond what you'd think just looking at the specs and performance metrics.

[02M3ForMe]

Originally Posted by SonicJlee

All, I appreciate the feedback! Thanks for watching the video even if it was only 10 seconds of it.

Great comparison of the two cars.

You inspired me to go find a CTR to test drive. It’s fantastic. Great handling with an impressive amount of front-end grip and a fun, agile point-and-shoot nature. Nice shifter/clutch. Enough power for the street. I enjoy the looks of it; the wing and front fender treatment are well done. My overall impression is that the car drives far above its Civic branding. Far above. I think it’s an excellent buy at MSRP.

I agree with your general assessment of the pros and cons of each car relative to each other. The conversation changes if CTR ADM is factored in; put a BMW badge and BMW pricing on the CTR and expectations drastically change. If the manual isn’t a requirement, I think a RWD 230i M-Sport actually gives the CTR a real run for its money as far as street fun factor is concerned. Put the GR Supra 6MT in the 230i and I’d take the 230i.

[Salespunk]

Having owned an FK8 CTR I can say with certainty that the CTR can be rotated VERY well with the throttle. At the limit it is very balanced and you will only get the "traditional" front end push if you drive like a moron. Otherwise you can easily rotate the rear end of the car mid corner.

[stylinexpat]

If only Honda had put in a 2.5 Liter engine with 400 HP then we would be talking. 2 liter engine for a Type R seems a bit weak for acceleration performance numbers as you can see between Type R Honda and say AMG Benz or Audi RS3. 0-60 and 1/4 Mile trap speed numbers for Honda are pretty weak but asides that it’s a great car. M2 numbers are on a whole different level. 1/4 mile trap speed numbers difference are almost day and night difference

[SonicJlee]

Originally Posted by evanescent03

i'm not film critic, but i think a lot of the stuff you talked about was good, but i think you're talking a little too slow and have too much dead space between thoughts. the data sheets were up forever. haha. overall good stuff. fun car.

if get an ITS, maybe i'll do a video comparison vs my M3CS and watch heads explode. lol.

Thank you for the feedback! This is good info that I can address, or at least try to.

[SonicJlee]

Originally Posted by Squidget

I think this is a good summary of the differences and I more or less agree with them. I concur that the presentation could be better, but I think people are unfairly acting like the content doesn't matter because the presentation is slow paced. The content is fine.

I had no problem watching the video because 1) I am a car nerd, fan of all cars and 2) don't have ADHD apparently.

I'd suggest one thing, though. If you want to compare these cars, you need to address the most fundamental difference, and the thing we call "layout": FWD vs. RWD.

One of the reasons car people (including me) will say you cannot compare these cars is because you just can't simply compare FWD and RWD cars. At anywhere near the limit, they behave totally differently, and require different driving techniques. It's the elephant in the room, and you've got to talk about it.

I grew up driving both FWD and RWD drive cars, but as soon I made enough money, I went RWD only. I hate understeer, I hate torque steer, I hate not being able to rotate with the throttle, I hate having the fronts overloaded while the rears are doing nothing.

For me personally, a FWD car, no matter how good, cannot be fairly compared to a RWD (or rally-oriented AWD), simply due to limitations of physics. It's no coincidence that FWD disappears from sports cars when they hit a certain price threshold.

I had originally planned to do a short drift in the video (I probably would have embarrassed myself as it has been over a year since I've tried) in support of this this topic as I'm biased towards RWD. I was excited to pick up the M2 as I had been without a RWD car for over a year (In a moment of poor judgement, I sold my MKV Supra and my other cars are AWD). However, I decided to hold off in this particular video as the FWD in the Civic Type R is surprisingly good and most of the viewers are probably folks who are in the market for a Type R who are ok with FWD. I really haven't found any faults with the Type R's FWD system (yes, at the end of the day, it is still FWD). I'll address this topic in the follow-on video. I appreciate your feedback!

[mitchels]

Originally Posted by SonicJlee

I had originally planned to do a short drift in the video (I probably would have embarrassed myself as it has been over a year since I've tried) in support of this this topic as I'm biased towards RWD. I was excited to pick up the M2 as I had been without a RWD car for over a year (In a moment of poor judgement, I sold my MKV Supra and my other cars are AWD). However, I decided to hold off in this particular video as the FWD in the Civic Type R is surprisingly good and most of the viewers are probably folks who are in the market for a Type R who are ok with FWD. I really haven't found any faults with the Type R's FWD system (yes, at the end of the day, it is still FWD). I'll address this topic in the follow-on video. I appreciate your feedback!

I really appreciate your videos. I currently have a FK8 and love it. I never owned a RWD car before so I've been thinking about adding a Supra or M2. My wife has an SUV so this will be our 3rd car. Not sure if I can justify owning 3 cars, but I would like to own a RWD car and not to give up my FK8. I look forward to your next video!

[j23]

I can't help but wonder why anyone would hate on either of these cars, man.

The M2 is an absolute refined beast that blends sportiness and luxury flawlessly. It's a well-rounded performer, but let's be honest, BMW M cars haven't necessarily dominated any specific aspect in the past couple of decades.

Now, the Civic Type R, that thing is an econobox rocket, and that's precisely what makes it a blast to drive. It's lightweight and ridiculously responsive. It's not meant to give you a high-end or luxurious vibe, but the sheer fun it delivers is off the charts.

This whole notion that FWD cars are somehow inferior or lack the fun factor simply because of their front-wheel drive setup is downright ludicrous. FWD cars can be an absolute riot when it comes to delivering an exciting driving experience.

[Squidget]

Originally Posted by j23

This whole notion that FWD cars are somehow inferior or lack the fun factor simply because of their front-wheel drive setup is downright ludicrous. FWD cars can be an absolute riot when it comes to delivering an exciting driving experience.

That's a more binary take than I was expressing, to be clear. FWD is fun, I hooned hot hatches for years. I personally just enjoy what RWD can do more.

RWD scales better as you add more HP. You have to make more and more concessions because the fronts can only do so much. Just ask Audi, who are really pushing the limits of front-bias driving with mixed results.

It matters here because we are talking about the M2. At the level of track performance it is designed for, RWD (and rally-level AWD) is superior to FWD. It's just the physics of traction.

Again to be super clear here: cars can be lots of FUN even if they have less performance. Not the same thing. So none of this is to diss anyone else's choices or say FWD is "unfun."

[farns2345]

Originally Posted by LCDRJohn

Since they cost the same (LOL), I'll take the BMW. Worse yet, the Acura version is selling at a $10K over MSRP too.

I drove the Last gen R, and it is one of the best tuned FWD rides. Not sure if anyone can knock the chassis tuning for what it is. Damping as good as a GT3.
The issue is, it is still a vacuum cleaner 4CYL, and has a package that is based on a $25K car. I stopped driving FWD cars years ago, mostly because I found them to be simpleton cars. (I had an Integra R). Push till it understeers, lift to gimble the chassis, accel back into understeer. Meh.

“simpleton” cars…i would say more like fun sporty cars that more people can afford.

all cars are overpriced, but this m2 costing about $100k CAD after taxes is absurd.

[PLF69]

Originally Posted by farns2345

“simpleton” cars…i would say more like fun sporty cars that more people can afford.

all cars are overpriced, but this m2 costing about $100k CAD after taxes is absurd.

Only car left worth there price maybe are the 1LE Camero's but if you don't use em on track it's not worth it.

[M2siast]

Originally Posted by farns2345

“simpleton” cars…i would say more like fun sporty cars that more people can afford.

all cars are overpriced, but this m2 costing about $100k CAD after taxes is absurd.

Which car is better value than the M2?

[Squidget]

Originally Posted by M2siast

Which car is better value than the M2?

That's in the eyes of the beholder, of course.

But I think I get your point. The M2 offers up a lot of benefits for the cost (4 seats, RWD, etc.). As long as those are things you want, I don't see any obviously better bang-for-buck on the market.

There are cheaper cars, but they all compromise on something that the M2 does well. Usually comfort or practicality. Or they are used.

[LCDRJohn]

when it comes to "value", think of this:
My E92 M3 was $69,415 in 2012.
My M2 was $74,200 in 2023.

The M2 bests the E92 in every category, and in some, by a country mile. Adjusted for inflation, that E92 M3 would be $92,000 today!!

So how is the new M2 not a bargain???

[Squidget]

Originally Posted by LCDRJohn

The M2 bests the E92 in every category, and in some, by a country mile.

Internet Nitpicking: I remember the E92 having a more satisfying steering feel (hydraulic), slighter better visibility, and more room in the rear seats. And that beautiful v8 exhaust note. And I very IMO think the e90 bodystyle is one of the prettiest ever made.

But yes, these are very small nitpicks. Adjusted for inflation, the G87 is is cheaper and wipes the E92 in performance. And the interior is a whole different class. It's a great deal, which is why I got one.