[rui]

I have an 2004 Celica and love it. It's reliable, economical, sporty, and practical.

The styling was inspired by the 1995 Lamborghini Calà concept. YMMV but I think it looks great, particularly in post-facelift guise.

 

[rui]

Acura sort of dropped the ball on the new Integra.

So many thought this was a prototype of it and were all super excited
View attachment 23163

Then this happened...
View attachment 23164

The Integra is the same it ever was: a more luxurious Civic.
There's no Coupe version for the same reason there's no Civic Coupe anymore: because they don't sell.

People tend to suffer from "rose-colored-glassitis", and only remember the one-off pinnacle of something. In this case the DC2 ITR.

 

[rui]

Except those pinnacle models are what made the nameplate iconic. Of course you’re right about the Integra historically being a fluffed Civic. However it feels disingenuous to complain about people wearing nostalgia glasses when that exact same nostalgia is exactly what Honda execs are trying to milk by reviving that name plate.

Im not a Honda guy so it’s no skin off my back, but this situation is the result of Honda nostalgia baiting then delivering a lame vehicle. Nobody would care if the base Acura was still called the ILX.

Lame? It's the base model. Is it any lamer than an old Integra LS?
The Type S will be arriving soon. That'll be the standard bearer.

Base models are essential to make the car financially viable. You can't be profitable by selling only a handful of Type S/Type Rs. The cost would be so high no one would buy them.
I've driven the base 2023 manual Integra and it's actually an excellent car. The flak is entirely undeserved.

I'm not the one complaining, the people bashing the Integra are the ones complaining. I just pointed out the source of their misunderstanding of the vehicle. I'd be interesting in hearing what y'all think Acura should've done instead and how it would be financially viable.

 

[rui]

Maybe because I owned a 90’s Integra but I find this new one really disappointing. Then again I think the new CTR is more like an Accord Type R. It’s probably more a criticism of Honda’s weight/size gain as a whole. They don’t make any compact sporty cars anymore, which is what I loved them for. If you’ve never owned a 90’s Honda, this might not make sense to you since objectively the new Hondas are fine/good. Plenty of space, nice interiors, turbocharged engines. But that’s not what classic Honda was to many people.

The Civic nameplate has had time to evolve over the years and get progressively fatter/heavier so people got acclimated to it slowly. But the Integra nameplate was suddenly revived and thrown on a now fatter/heavier Civic and of course it’s jarring for folks who owned the original 20+ years ago and think it’s nothing like it.

I'm not a fan of the larger size but it's reflective of the state of the car market these days...

I am a big 90s Honda guy. Have 4 of them! Besides the size, the latest Civic and Integra really do share the same DNA, just refined 10 times over.

 

[rui]

Nice you know what I’m talking about then. I remember my old Integra being small, light, high revving NA, and double wishbone front. What I really remember about the driving experience was how low slung it felt paired with an expansive view out the front, sort of like the NSX of that era.

The new Integra misses out on all of those things and it makes me wonder if modern Honda doesn’t understand what made the original so memorable and fun to customers. This new one feels like an attempt to cash in on the nameplate rather than recreate the experience.

I agree with you, this new Integra is a rebadged more luxurious Civic like the original was, but that’s about where the similarities end for me.

Unfortunately NA engines just aren't competitive in this market of larger, heavier cars and high performance and fuel economy expectations.

I can tell you however, that the Integra and CTR engines (the ones I've tried) feel smooth, responsive, and rev-happy like those of old. Even the traditional Honda engine note is there, just at a lower volume. So, although they don't have a B18C or an F20C, you can sense they are related. And the transmission, dear god, it is perfect. Better than any FWD 90s Honda ever was. Only the S2000 is better.

The driving position is not as low as that of a dedicated sports car but is the lowest in class. It's roughly two inches higher than that of the GR86, and two inches lower than a typical C-segment car. Visibility is excellent like in the old days, with a low cowl and door-mounted mirrors. It's better than on the 86, particularly because the mirrors are smaller.

It may seem like a cash grab at first glance, but if you actually give it a chance and dig deeper I think you'll find it is actually a great car that embodies the old Honda spirit very well, just adapted to current market conditions.

 

[rui]

Haha you make me want to believe! I’ll give it a shot. Honestly though I’ve been disappointed in Hondas I’ve tried from the past 10-15 years, just not the same for me.

Hehe! 😅 I think they lost their way from like 2008 to 2015, but now they got their mojo back!

 

[rui]

I have to partially disagree with you here. While smooth, the sound of the CTR's motor is nothing like the older Honda engines. More quiet? Yes, but tone is completely different. I owned one, many things about them are amazing but engine sound isn't one of them.

Sure, it's subjective. I personally found similarities between the Integra, FL5 CTR and older Hondas. I disabled the fake sound. They all "zing" on downshifts. The 86 does not, even though it is NA.

 

[rui]

Incidentally, some time ago I did a frequency analysis on the GR86, CTR FL5, and S2000 AP1 engine sounds.
All samples were taken from Zygrene's videos, so same microphone setup. Fake sound was turned off, where applicable, and all cars were stock.

These were the results. IMO the family resemblance comes through.

S2000:

CTR FL5:

GR86: