Cupra R compared against Civic Type R on track

Lmbarrett83

Active Member
Sep 8, 2017
1,538
619
Sheffield
Came across this video on YouTube and again thought I'd share.


Both cars were manuals and they even swapped drivers to make it a fairer comparison.
This being the manual means the CUPRA is 310bhp against the Civic which is 316bhp


Highlights

Despite the following
New dynamic chassis setup
Wider track from the new wheels
Modified camber angle
Brembos

The CUPRA has a lot more body roll in the corners compared with the Civic. The Civic is apparently more rigid/planted and catches up to
the CUPRA in the corners.

However

If the CUPRA was standard in the vid it appears to be a lot more powerful than the Type R despite the advertised spec sheet
(Maybe VAG underestiming again)

Hopefully this continues for all the future MY19 CUPRA 290 owners in Q3 :)

It's about 9 mins long and the conclusions are drawn from around the 6 minute mark if you don't want to watch the whole thing.

Enjoy



Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

LouG

Active Member
Dec 1, 2017
1,319
481
Nelson, New Zealand
Depending on whose figures you read, the Civic weighs about 50Kg's more, probably all the non functional plastic crap, so that makes more difference than 6hp in drive out of corners. It seems a DSG may gap the Civic even more.
The pirate car also runs wider rubber, 245's I believe. Depending on tyres, that'll make more difference in corner speed than suspension geometry tweaks.
But, I am horribly biased, I hate Honda bikes and cars, they seem to be owned by numbnuts who can't dress themselves, and Marquez is a twat.
 

Lmbarrett83

Active Member
Sep 8, 2017
1,538
619
Sheffield
A lot of cars are more planted than the Cupra, Hyundai i30N being one of them.

I've read that the 300 isn't as planted, and that its handling was lacking compared with the Civic on the track. That said I was under the impression the 300 was the better comprise for a fwd hot hatch daily.

Then I thought the R was designed to change that especially as the power increase is small and only on the manual and the torque hasnt changed. The other changes look designed to improve its handling.

Shows how the game has changed though as when the 280 came out all the journalists used to rave about its handling and the LSD. Now I'm reading that the added power has upset the balance slightly.

Sure I read though that the Civic actually has a fully mechanical diff on the front axel where as the CUPRA's is mechanical but electronically controlled, and that makes a difference in cornering.

Please correct me if I'm wrong?
 

SteA

Active Member
Jan 12, 2016
226
61
Shrewsbury
A lot of cars are more planted than the Cupra, Hyundai i30N being one of them.

Is that a feeling or objective? The Cupra is already stupidly (far too?)fast on the road and lap times as far as I can tell don’t say many cars are “more planted”, never mind lots... a near standard car (suspension wise) that will be a pretty easy sub 8 BTG is planted by anyone’s definition?

The biggest issue with the Cupra is the car has far too much grip on the road, easy three figure speeds on bumpy corners? Cars that are a lot stiffer may feel more “planted” but lack the outright pace? Like lots of good performance cars, a track or a hill climb is the only place you will push the limits of these cars.

It’s funny really, I’ve driven lots of very quick stuff, inc 580 bhp quattro Audi’s, and the Cupra is the first car that I have felt has reached and passed the limit of pace for the road. Maybe I’m just getting old.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouG

LouG

Active Member
Dec 1, 2017
1,319
481
Nelson, New Zealand
It depends on the road. I doubt the I30 will be as usable on most of our roads. Besides track tests are pointless, unless you live on a track. I couldn't live with the Type R (and I did consider one until I saw it), I'd be so humiliated at being laughed at all the time for being a saddo elderly boi racer.
Anyway, my Cupra is quicker up to 160 km/h, and that's "walking for a month" speed down here.

PS. Take motoring journalists and internet geeks opinions with a wheelbarrow full of salt. Most of them suffer from latest is greatest syndrome.
 

Lmbarrett83

Active Member
Sep 8, 2017
1,538
619
Sheffield
It depends on the road. I doubt the I30 will be as usable on most of our roads. Besides track tests are pointless, unless you live on a track. I couldn't live with the Type R (and I did consider one until I saw it), I'd be so humiliated at being laughed at all the time for being a saddo elderly boi racer.
Anyway, my Cupra is quicker up to 160 km/h, and that's "walking for a month" speed down here.

PS. Take motoring journalists and internet geeks opinions with a wheelbarrow full of salt. Most of them suffer from latest is greatest syndrome.
By all accounts it should be very usable. Although it's down on power in both of it's versions, it has the adjustable dampers, e-lsd, rev matching and specially designed tyres.



Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 

Lmbarrett83

Active Member
Sep 8, 2017
1,538
619
Sheffield
But the Golf R was, which is pretty much the same car as the Cupra 300 4drive
Back in the day though I remember seeing a video where they pitted a 280 against an R and I think they believed the 280 edged it on the track.

Not seen much else for the 290/300.

The Cupra ST 4drive I class as a different car. Like you say it's similar to the R. The fwd and it's front diff handle differently.





Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 

Jaco2k

AWD FTW
Mar 11, 2018
1,037
633
Tampere, Finland
www.youtube.com
That is a correct analysis - the FWD car has a much clever diff (which is not on the 4drive...) and is lighter.
I already took my 4drive to the track and threw it to the limit a couple of times and it does understeer.

On a track, I also agree that the FWD car would be faster, but on everyday life... Things change.
It is one of the most pointless references we can have is to compare the track performance of these cars - I for one only go to the track 2-3 times a year and I would not sacrifice the everyday life with the car for a couple of seconds a lap on a track.

The 4drive, for instance, is slower around a track than the FWD model, but in winter it is a pleasure to drive and, due to the extra weight on the rear axle, it feels more planted on the road.
It is a great road car - I had the Octavia VRS before and the rear always felt "twitchy"
...this car feels "planted".

But at the traffic light grand prix, speaking of experience, the 4drive will have most cars for breakfast - that would include the FWD Cupra and the already mentioned Type R ;)
 

Lmbarrett83

Active Member
Sep 8, 2017
1,538
619
Sheffield
That is a correct analysis - the FWD car has a much clever diff (which is not on the 4drive...) and is lighter.
I already took my 4drive to the track and threw it to the limit a couple of times and it does understeer.

On a track, I also agree that the FWD car would be faster, but on everyday life... Things change.
It is one of the most pointless references we can have is to compare the track performance of these cars - I for one only go to the track 2-3 times a year and I would not sacrifice the everyday life with the car for a couple of seconds a lap on a track.

The 4drive, for instance, is slower around a track than the FWD model, but in winter it is a pleasure to drive and, due to the extra weight on the rear axle, it feels more planted on the road.
It is a great road car - I had the Octavia VRS before and the rear always felt "twitchy"
...this car feels "planted".

But at the traffic light grand prix, speaking of experience, the 4drive will have most cars for breakfast - that would include the FWD Cupra and the already mentioned Type R ;)

I was only commenting on the vid you posted which was comparing track performance. It would have been nice to see where the fwd CUPRA 300 would have faired.


When it comes to real world everyday driving I agree 4 wheel drive seems the best all rounder with more consistent performance.

In my manual 280 there are loads of variables and dare I say takes more driver skill.

*Standing start
* Rolling start
*Transmission
*Conditions
*Driver
E.t.c

Less to worry about in a DSG 4drive :)

Most my races are usually against the time than other drivers though so it's not a massive deal.

That said hopefully my 300 lease will be my last fwd drive hot hatch. 4 drive from then on after!


Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaco2k

Jimbobcook

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Nov 24, 2012
6,149
2,531
Back in the day though I remember seeing a video where they pitted a 280 against an R and I think they believed the 280 edged it on the track.

Not seen much else for the 290/300.

The Cupra ST 4drive I class as a different car. Like you say it's similar to the R. The fwd and it's front diff handle differently.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Would it be this one?


It's @theoldboy favourite video I think haha
 

Deleted member 103408

Guest
It is.

All I can say is my front wheel drive car brings a smile to my face every day and like the above video I preferred it to the 4 wheel drive Golf.
Don't care if other cars are faster, better in many ways. This car has character that I do not see me getting bored with.

Good thing we are not all the same :)
 

Jaco2k

AWD FTW
Mar 11, 2018
1,037
633
Tampere, Finland
www.youtube.com
Moral of the story: both FWD and the 4drive cars are different - in and out the track, differences are minimal, each has strengths and weaknesses and neither at that far behind the Type R.
Oddly enough, I happen to currently be visiting my friend who has a time-travelled Megane RS from 2010 with only 30.000km on it (less than my almost new Cupra) and that I drove when he got and loved it.
...but... I had forgotten how hard that suspension is.
Still a great car also, though.
 

LouG

Active Member
Dec 1, 2017
1,319
481
Nelson, New Zealand
We don't get the ST here, but I doubt that I'd sacrifice the rolling acceleration of my Cupra for .5 sec faster to 100. Not to mention the other disadvantages of 4WD, like weight, less frisky handling etc.