Menu
What's new
By:
Advanced search...

2,4 type s

toffee_pie

toffee_pie

Members
Messages
3,245
Reaction score
88
Location
Southampton
Car
Legacy 3.0R SpecB
Guys

did honda do any (or many) 2.4 type S 8th gens? out of interest...

also while am on this have Honda not sold many 2.4 8th gens across europe or were they just not many made in the first place?
 
Eric there isn't a 2.4 type s
The car I think to replace the type S badge is the GT
 
Eric there isn't a 2.4 type s
The car I think to replace the type S badge is the GT body kit.
The type S in the 8th gen is a diesel
 
brett said:
Eric there isn't a 2.4 type s
The car I think to replace the type S badge is the GT body kit.
The type S in the 8th gen is a diesel
Click to expand...
Oh no, you've told him... I was hoping Eric was going accidentally to buy a diesel. :lol:
 
lol

i saw a type s 8th gen, it was french... i am sure it was a type s.

hmm honda have so many variants

gt, gs, ex
 
I think this is what your after. Looks like a euro import if youd like one. That said. Holdcroft have a reallly cheap offer on accessories at the minute so your sideskirts and front lip are about £120 so you might as well get an EX and put the body kit on for less than £1000

http://benzs.blogspot.co.uk/2009/08/honda-adds-petrol-engine-option-to.html

Honda-Accord-Type-S-2.jpg

Honda-Accord-Type-S-1.jpg
 
I see this is for the German market only. Any one if the 8th Gen sold well in the rest of Europe? It is just the UK that sales struggled?

Also, not sure of the point of the 2.4 Type S, it's just a cosmetic upgrade from GT ? At least with the diesel Type S you get an extra 30 bhp.
 
Saying you get 30bhp extra with a diesel has nothing to do with it, that car is a fine looking specimen., its not even a performance model but still.

All I can think of is that basically everyone is eschewing large petrol cars... period.

and yes, its a sad state of affairs when 2.4 is considered large.

The economy, people counting their pennies bla bla.

Is there any link that shows the sales of petrol cars in cc size over say the last 10 years?

I would bet from about 2007 onwards large cars went way down.... alot
 
Honda don't do 'type r' version of accords no more so no point *****ing of the state of the engines now only accept that 2.4 is as large as they get in ivtec form albeit with a very long wait for vtec and and even shorter duration of it.
 
Oh, not arguing with you about the stance of the Type S at all and I'm a petrol fan. Diesel just doesn't generally do it for me BUT the Type S is putting out 180bhp and 380NM of torque - it's no slouch. That coupled with extra urban of 58mpg!

Realistically, a 2.4 NA I4 putting out 201BHP is nothing really special in the grand scheme of thing nowadays.
 
toffee_pie said:
Honda don't do 'type r' version of accords no more so no point *****ing of the state of the engines now only accept that 2.4 is as large as they get in ivtec form albeit with a very long wait for vtec and and even shorter duration of it.
Click to expand...

Honda don't seem to do anything exciting anymore... seriously...

B16A, H22, F20C, K20A... what are we left with? The R and N series engine and whatever hybrid mix - Earth Dreams my foot.... sales are flagging.
 
There is one huge thing to consider the 2.4 puts out 201 HP and its a normally aspirated engine.
Most cars to get this performance has a turbo
 
brett said:
There is one huge thing to consider the 2.4 puts out 201 HP and its a normally aspirated engine.
Most cars to get this performance has a turbo
Click to expand...


The 2 litre EDM CTR put that out 10 years ago. From a 2.4 it isn't really earth shattering. A turbo is not a bad thing and for displacment for bang it is looking like the future of motoring (petrol or diesel). Look at the Volvo 2.5 5-pot, that thing shifts.
 
10 years ago we had the s2000 pushing 240bhp from a 2.L Its not just about the horses, the 2.4 has more torque than any of those engines and is much better for it on a daily basis.
 
Metis said:
... the 2.4 has more torque than any of those engines and is much better for it on a daily basis.
Click to expand...

And that's my point, if it is torque you are looking for then the Type S diesel is a better option B)
 
Or if you want a Bom proof engine go for a petrol
 
jayok said:
Oh, not arguing with you about the stance of the Type S at all and I'm a petrol fan. Diesel just doesn't generally do it for me BUT the Type S is putting out 180bhp and 380NM of torque - it's no slouch. That coupled with extra urban of 58mpg!

Realistically, a 2.4 NA I4 putting out 201BHP is nothing really special in the grand scheme of thing nowadays.
Click to expand...

But get me another marque that can get 190bhp on 2.4 litres..?

BMW use turbos for all the high octane petrols they have., most 2.0 litre cars have 150bhp or less, Honda used to be doing 100bhp a litre but with this emissions ***** they have seemingly cut down on the bhp a wee bit but having said that my 2.4 CL9 is no slouch.
 
toffee_pie said:
But get me another marque that can get 190bhp on 2.4 litres..?
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_V70

2.3 T5 240 metric horsepower (177 kW; 237 hp) in 1998
2.3 R manual 250 metric horsepower (184 kW; 247 hp) in 1998
2.4 R 265 metric horsepower (195 kW; 261 hp) in 2000
 
brett said:
There is one huge thing to consider the 2.4 puts out 201 HP and its a normally aspirated engine.
Most cars to get this performance has a turbo
Click to expand...


thats correct, BMW have turbos in all the high cc 3 series cars that give back up to 40mpg, some of them, off the top of my head say a 325 will have maybe 220bhp... now thats just slightly more than a k24 but with a turbo.

turbos.. meh

try getting one repaired...and i dont have patience for letting turbos cool down before knocking off the engine.


actually its 215bhp, just checked.
 
jayok said:
The 2 litre EDM CTR put that out 10 years ago. From a 2.4 it isn't really earth shattering. A turbo is not a bad thing and for displacment for bang it is looking like the future of motoring (petrol or diesel). Look at the Volvo 2.5 5-pot, that thing shifts.
Click to expand...


its 2013, car manufacturers don't do 100bhp/litre no more... well honda don't. so get over it dude..!

and yes i know all them engines, b16 etc, its all history now.
 
toffee_pie said:
its 2013, car manufacturers don't do 100bhp/litre no more... well honda don't. so get over it dude..!
Click to expand...

Really? It's 2013 and there is Ford's Fiesta ST-2 180BHP from a 1.6 just about to launch, so that's 112 / litre

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/ford/fiesta/63788/ford-fiesta-st-2

But you're right Honda don't - my point is that Honda are lagging the competition rolling out 10 year only engine technology in their premium car and suffering as result. FWIW I love my K24 for what it is - a 2004 2.4 188bhp. But would I buy that new? Nope.

Which leads me back to the 2.4 TypeS in German, I think it looks great, but given it's just a cosmetic change rather than any engine upgrade, is it worth it?

<edit> Oh - and the Fiesta is Petrol! :)
 
2.3 T5 240 metric horsepower (177 kW; 237 hp) in 1998
2.3 R manual 250 metric horsepower (184 kW; 247 hp) in 1998
2.4 R 265 metric horsepower (195 kW; 261 hp) in 2000

i am living in the present, its what is out there right here, right now.

and whats there with the 2.4 honda is seemingly as good as it gets for petrol heads.

BMW have turbos so its a no.

No idea on Subaru, but 07 ish legacy has a 3.0 engine and 'just' 245bhp.

so basically for a NA engine the k24s are about as good as it gets now. And they have the reliability.

So i may be on the look out for a 8th gen 2.4 in the future :)

before they finally die out along with the dodo's...
 
jayok said:
Really? It's 2013 and their Fords Fiesta ST-2 180BHP from a 1.6 just about to launch, so that's 112 / litre

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/ford/fiesta/63788/ford-fiesta-st-2

But you're right Honda don't - my point is that Honda are lagging the competition rolling out 10 year only engine technology in their premium car and suffering as result. FWIW I love my K24 for what it is - a 2004 2.4 188bhp. But would I buy that new? Nope.

Which leads me back to the 2.4 TypeS in German, I think it looks great, but given it's just a cosmetic change rather than any engine upgrade, is it worth it?

<edit> Oh - and the Fiesta is Petrol! :)
Click to expand...


that fiesta has a turbo..

i am almost sure.

I like the 2.4 8th gen, it looks the business, with a mugen body kit it would be superb.

if it it has just a weedy 190hp.
 
I drove our UK 2.2 iDTEC Type S a while back. It was a very nice car, but I'd still have a 2.4 over it any day. Usual petrol/diesel mileage arguments aside. The K24 feels smoother, more refined and packs more grunt. Simples...

I'm very interested to see how the new generation of Turbo Civic Type R shape up though.
 
the toyota gt...looks nice

but not exactly fast, i would think my own cl9 would give it a very good race.

doesn't really interest me much at all.
 
Stevearcade said:
I drove our UK 2.2 iDTEC Type S a while back. It was a very nice car, but I'd still have a 2.4 over it any day. Usual petrol/diesel mileage arguments aside. The K24 feels smoother, more refined and packs more grunt...
Click to expand...
I think the old 2.4 unit is just too long in the tooth to make it an attractive option in a new car... the smaller iDTEC diesel unit (obviously superior on torque and economy, as you'd expect) comes surprisingly close on bhp, and that really doesn't look good.
 
Suppose, but it depends what you're looking for in your car doesn't it? Let's face it, most people aren't car enthusiasts and therefore like "new technological developments" and things like the K series are appreciated by those who like certain things. For example, I'd have a 3.0 Ford Capri over many modern cars, but then I'm a minority :lol: .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top