This week's Autoweek has an article on the Type R (page 10). It doesn't start out talking about the R. It mostly laments how the marketing guys have taken over some of today's "performance" cars. Hidden in there are are a few paragraphs that praise the 97 ITR. If I find the article at their web site I'll post a link.

If this has already been posted in another thread, a mod can delete this thread. I did a quick search and found nothing.

jmb

 

Looking forward to seeing it

 

scan & post please

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by w@@T &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">scan & post please </TD></TR></TABLE>

 

Ask and ye shall receive...

I thought the short article was pretty interesting, especially since they're talking about a car that's been out of production for about 4 years. A lot of mags (even the "tuner" mags) haven't really had much coverage for the R in recent years.

SCC used to have the car in it just about every month, but haven't seen too much coverage lately.

The article reminded me why I bought the ITR over the GS-R. It would take me a heck of a lot more than the 3K difference to get the GS-R to the R's performance, and the extra investment up-front was worth it.


* BTW I didn't crop out the ad because the source information for the article is in the bottom left. Not a bad mag, and it's kinda nice to get some new car info every week (hence the name )

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Autoweek Article &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">"-but an era is over. Elvis has left the building." </TD></TR></TABLE>

wait.. so does that mean people will stop stealing them???

 

Haha....that article is dead on!

 

If you are a thief and reading that article...take note....hint hint stop stealing these cars....hehe

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by KnowForever &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">wait.. so does that mean people will stop stealing them??? </TD></TR></TABLE>


Same thing I was thinking.........

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by v-attack &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If you are a thief and reading that article...take note....hint hint stop stealing these cars....hehe</TD></TR></TABLE>

 

people would not steal them if there was no demand... its simple economics...
hopefully one day there will be no more demand for the b18c5 (i doubt that day will ever come) and then we can leave our doors unlooked like the car was a mustang!

 

Thanks for posting that up!
clicked and saved

 

Interesting that Rich Chang from Super Street wrote the article. Obviously he has a grasp of the subject matter and a vested interest therein.

Good read.

 

He does have a point about the whole name thing. It is getting rediculous. I hope the next car I buy does not have 10+ words in its name.

 

kind of interesting ...sometimes I wish I could go back in the day when people respected the R and didnt just look at it like "my swapped 92 civic is faster so it must be better"

 

I like knowing that I own a car that is considered a "legacy" by some people.
good article Captain Rich

 

I will never stop loving my R

 

I have to disagree that my 01 R is a watered down version of the 97 R. I don't have AC ( it was always an option in Canada ) and my car is white ( although I don't see what a color selection can do to undermine the performance of the car ). Mine makes arguably more Hp and Tq than a 97 stock for stock, weighs the same ( I think ) and has the same suspension and brakes.

Tell me how mine is functionally inferior to a 97 ( style taste not withstanding..)

Otherwise the article is right on..

 

I have a 1989 UD Griffey card.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by lotus &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I have to disagree that my 01 R is a watered down version of the 97 R. I don't have AC ( it was always an option in Canada ) and my car is white ( although I don't see what a color selection can do to undermine the performance of the car ). Mine makes arguably more Hp and Tq than a 97 stock for stock, weighs the same ( I think ) and has the same suspension and brakes.

Tell me how mine is functionally inferior to a 97 ( style taste not withstanding..)

Otherwise the article is right on..</TD></TR></TABLE>

i dont think he was saying the newer r's are 'inferior' but they don't have the aura that the former ones did. i think he was trying to say that the original r's were highly sought after despite being available only in 1 color and having no ac, and that was unusual for the time. when they were reintroduced, they had more options...just my interpretation

 

i will be looking for it. saved to my disk


Modified by 97hatchback at 3:40 PM 10/17/2004

 

I think he is trying to say CDM R &gt; USDM R .............. oooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh

bottom line: blame suv's

Acura RSX Type-S A-Spec Special Edition v2

 

I agree with the whole, "the scene is dead", kinda vibe, but as far as the type r becoming a marketing gimic in 2000 is bull ****, my ITR is just as much an ITR as the rest.

 

ITR's are alive.

 

Ahaha, all the 2000+ ITR owners are getting an inferiority complex now. All the guy is saying is that when the car was reintroduced for 2000, it had lost its edginess, compared to the other cars in Acura's lineup. Its not everyday you get a car for sale where you cannot get AC. That said something about the car in '97, it was special.

2000+ didn't seem so special anymore, thats when all the bandwagon jumpers bought the car

&lt;Canuck who puts on his flame suit and runs and hides&gt;