Integra Type-R vs. Celica GTS Performance Numbers

[Bill (5)]

I'm not looking to start an argument about which car is better. I'd just like to know the 0 - 60 and 1/4 mile times for both cars. I've already test driven both cars, and it feels like they have similar straight-line performance, but I'd like to know the numbers.

Thanks,
Bill

 

[George Knighton]

In article , (Bill)
writes:

I'd
just like to know the 0 - 60 and 1/4 mile times for both cars.

You have two problems when asking for times from Type R owners.

First of all, it's not the car's mission to produce these short-distance sprints. Second, the car's times will vary depending on how old the motor is and who's launching it. Even with brand new Type R's, magazines report wildly varying times to 60 between 6.6 and 7.1, and you're going to run across owners who claim their broken-in cars run to 60 in 6.5 or even less.

It's also not the Celica GTS's mission to go after the limited production, racing oriented Type R. As it is, the new Celica is a fresh, new design with a lot of potential, but it's place in the year 2000 is going after the GS-R, not the Type R. They're just completely different animals.

'00 ITR #110 (USDM)

 

[Bill (5)]

On 12 Jan 2000 03:24:29 GMT, (George
Knighton) wrote:

In article , (Bill)
writes:

>I'd
>just like to know the 0 - 60 and 1/4 mile times for both cars.

You have two problems when asking for times from Type R owners.

First of all, it's not the car's mission to produce these short-distance sprints.

This is true of all performance cars. The Type-R is no harder to drive than the Celica, if that's what you're getting at. Both cars need to be revved like hell. You just need to know how to shift in the higher RPM range.

Second, the car's times will vary depending on how old the motor is and who's launching it. Even with brand new Type R's, magazines report wildly varying times to 60 between 6.6 and 7.1, and you're going to run across owners who claim their broken-in cars run to 60 in 6.5 or even less.

This is also true of the Celica, since it uses similar technology.

I just wanted some times from those who have actually raced their Type-Rs. Honda's own numbers would be nice, but asking manufacturers for 0 - 60 and 1/4 mile times is like pulling teeth these days.

It's also not the Celica GTS's mission to go after the limited production, racing oriented Type R. As it is, the new Celica is a fresh, new design with a lot of potential, but it's place in the year 2000 is going after the GS-R, not the Type R. They're just completely different animals.

I don't agree. The Celica has more in common with the Type-R, performance-wise. It's light (2500 pounds), like the Type-R (2600 pounds), and puts out only 15 less horsepower. It also puts out a few more lb/ft of torque. Toyota might be competing with the GSR, but the Celica has more in common with the Type-R from a performance standpoint.

'00 ITR #110 (USDM)

 

[Joey P]

if it helps i ran my 2000 integra GsR in the 1/4 mile and i was consistenly hitting 15.5 - 15.6 which is basicly the stock time

Dark Violet Pearl Y2k Integra Gs-R
][-][][\][))//-\\

 

[George Knighton]

In article , (Bill)
writes:

Toyota might be competing with the GSR, but the
Celica has more in common with the Type-R from a performance standpoint.

Having driven both, I can't agree with you.

Mind you, I'm not bad-mouthing the new Celica. I think that if they get around to putting them on the track, the Integra's going to see some racing competition this year. Good to see.

'00 ITR #110 (USDM)