Honda England were let loose to build a car that would compete with Subaru and Mistsubishi's Evo. They came up with the Accord Type R, a lightened (around 1200Kg) track version with no sound deadening or luxuries (air con was an option). It has a hand made tweeked H22A7 from Japan giving 212bhp and revs to 8000rpm. Torsen LSD and recaro's as standard. 0-60mph 6.1seconds and the limiter cuts in at 155mph (Honda's offical figures are more pessimistic).
The car sold in low numbers (only 1200 in the UK) due to the high price but received critical aclaim including 5 stars from Evo magazine (the car lovers bible) and is described as the best handling FWD available. It has been the subject of many track magazine tests including one where is beats an Integra Type R around the track.
Honda Japan noted the success (on the track not the sales ) took the Accord Type R and developed the Accord Euro R (hense the 'Euro'peon tag). It's a similar chassis (ATR and AER suspension is interchangeable) and Engine with cosmetic differences.
The Accord Type R was available in Europe only and the Accord Euro R was available in Japan only.
as impressive as the accord R is. in my eye it is nowhere near a worthy competitor against the evo and STi. they're not even in the same class. and though im not questioning your statement, but i find it hard to believe that a accord R to be the best handling FWD. i've driven it in gran turismo 4 so i think i know what im talking about (haha, that was a joke just incase you bitches dont know sarcasm). and i honestly dont think its better then a integra type r, but thats my opinion. i havent driven either one (except in GT4)
GT4 a?, well you've one up on me because I've driven them both in real life but not in GT4 of course they're in the same class both 4 door saloons and both about the same price. The main difference is the Evo and WRX are a rally cars and the ATR a track car. You also have to remember the ATR is no longer produced and you have to compare it to the Scoobies and Evo's of the day, saying that I had a blast with an Evo IX FQ320 a week or so ago and there is very little in it (but in truth my ATR is mildly tweeked so not standard)
Don't believe the hype, the classic scooby has around 250bhp in the UK (I think it is only 227bhp in the USA?? - not sure) but is heavier and more lossy through the AWD system. The ATR, although having slightly less power, has a better power to weight and handles better. Not only is the ATR in the same class as a classic Subaru it will beat one around a track - fact.
It's true that scoobies have come on along way in the past few years under pressure from Evo's and the STi are now much lighter (thank god) and have more power.
Here's a link to some UK spec's. This particular WRX is 225bhp and weighs 1400kg making 161bhp per ton the ATR is 212bhp and closer to 1200Kg making 177bhp per ton. Insidentaly all the stock ATR's I've seen dynoed make 218-220bhp giving 183bhp per ton.
i know this thread is old, and ive been searching and hoping to do a conversion, but the links below shows pretty much the difference between the 2, the biggest difference, the tail lights/rear end. also, the euro R came with the f20a option for either auto, manual, or tip tronic(semi auto). (same engine, just different top color and one has more torque)
one last thing, they were both made in the same country, just sold in different countries.
I'm trying to see if I could use the Ultra Racing Rear lower 4 point brace on my 2001 USA Accord. Both rear subframes look pretty damn close, but I could use some detailed pictures of the your rear subframe to make sure.
Honda and the Honda marquee are registered trademarks of the American Honda Motor Company, Inc. Neither American Honda Motor Company nor its subsidiaries or affiliates shall bear any responsibility for Honda-Tech.com content, comments, or advertising. Honda-Tech.com is not affiliated with American Honda Motor Company in any way. American Honda Motor Company does not sponsor, support, or endorse Honda-Tech.com in any way.
Copyright/trademark/sales mark infringements are not intended or implied.