Integra coming back

ASAP wrote

52k for a fwd turbo 4 banger Honda... what has this world come to lol?

an m340i is 56k... these are cars not in the same stratosphere lol... what am i missing here?

The ITS will be a slower car than the 340, but you will struggle to find a 340 for $56k as most are optioned into the upper 60s and lower 70s now. I do agree that the ITS is pricey at $52k but there isn't much in the way of options. Plus it can be had with a 6MT and from all the glowing reviews, is one of the better and more enjoyable sports sedans out there now. I thought I was done with FWD and was dead set on replacing my M235 with a used OG M2. Now I'm not quite so sure. I have a feeling that ITS may go quite well with my 2011 Cayman.

ASAP wrote

52k for a fwd turbo 4 banger Honda... what has this world come to lol?

an m340i is 56k... these are cars not in the same stratosphere lol... what am i missing here?

It's a tough sell to me and I owned a '95 Integra and '02 RSX-S. I posted this earlier elsewhere but when comparing MSRP's here's what I came up with for similar $. Obviously the configurations of some of these cars don't work for everyone or you'd have a hard time getting them without options/markup:

$42,900 - GR Corolla CE - 300 hp, MT only
$43,795 - Civic Type R - 315 hp, MT only
$48,900 - M240i RWD - 382 hp, AT only
$50,800 - Integra Type S - 320 hp, MT only
$50,900 - M240i AWD - 382 hp, AT only
$50,990 - Z Performance - 400 hp, MT or AT
$53,600 - Supra 3.0 - 382 hp, MT or AT
$56,400 - M340i RWD - 382 hp, AT only

Performance for $ the ITS just slots into a really weird spot. I never thought I'd own a Hyundai after 6 Japanese, a Ford, and 2 Euro cars but picked up one of the last brand new 6MT Veloster N's last September for $32,500. On paper I have a hard time believing the ITS provides $20k more car but I'll have to go drive one. The interior is a massive upgrade and it's a Honda but it's hard to wrap my head around a $51k Integra.

I posted this on another forum so thought I'd drop it in here for those interested:

I didn't want to muddy up @savagegeese 's thread with thoughts from my personal, although limited, interaction with the DE5 Integra Type S so thought it best to start a new one. This could also be a space for others to share their thoughts after personal experiences with the car via test drives, walkarounds, or ride alongs.

I was able to spend about 90 minutes yesterday morning with the ITS at a local dealership. I've been in contact with the General Sales Manager over the last several months and true to his word, he sent me an e-mail last week when the car arrived. I was able to drive it, perform the interior/exterior walkaround, and chatted with the General Sales Manager for a bit. The car was Platinum Pearl White with the Red/Dark Metal Trim interior. The car also had about $6,500 in dealership add-ons some of which included the following Genuine Acura Accessories:
19" Copper-Finish Alloy Wheels
Valve Stem Caps
Gloss Black Emblems
Carbon Fiber Tailgate Spoiler
Carbon Fiber Door Mirror Cover
Black Wheel Locks
Titanium Shift Knob; and
Alcantara Steering Wheel
I obviously didn't have the opportunity to live with the car for days or get to take it to the track but I have a few observations I'd like to share.

What I Liked
-Interior orientation and ergonomics are similar to the 11th gen Civic
-Factory wheels look good and are especially nice in the copper finish
-Power delivery felt smoother and more refined than the FL5 CTR. It's clear there is slightly more power in the ITS and it's noticeable on the street
-NVH is better when compared to the FL5 CTR
-Exhaust is still relatively quiet but an upgrade over the CTR exhaust system
-ELS STUDIO 3D Premium Audio system sounds good! It's more bass forward but it offers a more immersive audio experience. I'm certain with ample configuration, it will serve the likes of most.
-Suspension tuning is more livable for daily driving across all Drive Modes
-Transmission - no further explanation needed.

What I Didn't Like
-Seats. This was a big miss. I expected a more supportive and aesthetically pleasing seat for this type of car.
-Throttle overrun in Sport+ Drive Mode is something I could do without. It's interesting the "Civic Type R for Adults" has an exhaust that crackles and pops.
-Gloss black trim on the interior console.
-Styling. The exterior styling is decent and works for 2023 but I don't expect it to age well.
-Very light clutch pedal. I like a little resistance for clutch feel
-Rev hang. It's still there and very annoying
-No LogR or equivalent
-It doesn't feel "special". It's difficult to articulate that feeling but you know it when you see it/feel it.
-Sticker price. $52K is still a very difficult number to get comfortable with relative to what you're getting.

Bottom Line
The ITS was about what I expected it to be. Some wins, some misses, and a few surprises. It's a solid offering, good for the Honda/Acura brand and great for enthusiasts. While enjoyable enough, I didn't walk away thinking, "I would buy that car!" or "I prefer this over my FL5 CTR." The challenge for me is still the price point of $52K which will undoubtedly rise throughout the production cycle. The other side of that is it appears this car can be had for MSRP, and quite frankly, below if you're a savvy buyer and/or willing to wait. Early indications are that anyone who wants an ITS should be able to get one at a fair price.

I'll end with the following: the reviews from Car and Driver, Motor Trend, and the YouTubers are fantastic, but there's no better opinion than your own. Go out and drive the car yourself. Take advantage of dealers allowing people to demo this thing and drive the wheels off it. Unfortunately, that's not something you can do with the CTR at this juncture. Anyhow, I look forward to hearing from others who have had the opportunity to drive the ITS.

The CTR looks so much better with integrated rear hips and cleaner design. The plastic tacked on rear arches look kind of messy as they are separated into four pieces making it look a little aftermarket. Also I've never warmed up to any of the Acura beak front end designs. It seems like to consolation prize for someone that couldn't get a CTR and it's priced way too close to a Supra that can now be had with a manual transmission.

Clark_Kent wrote

Ha, I remember I paid $23,500 for my RSX Type S almost 18 years ago. Now that I think about it, that was bargain for what you got! Gone are the days I suppose.

I paid $29K for my 2007 350Z. 6 Speed manual, 306 hp, RWD V6. In today's dollars, according to the https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ is $42,536.89. I would say that's a bargain in today's money as well. Is the ITS worth about $10K more? That's the question.

Bumpinjeep wrote

I paid $29K for my 2007 350Z. 6 Speed manual, 306 hp, RWD V6. In today's dollars, according to the https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ is $42,536.89. I would say that's a bargain in today's money as well. Is the ITS worth about $10K more? That's the question.

I should've never traded my '07 6MT for a 370Z. Bought it in 2010 for $24k with 3,500 miles on it

XutvJet wrote

The ITS will be a slower car than the 340, but you will struggle to find a 340 for $56k as most are optioned into the upper 60s and lower 70s now. I do agree that the ITS is pricey at $52k but there isn't much in the way of options. Plus it can be had with a 6MT and from all the glowing reviews, is one of the better and more enjoyable sports sedans out there now. I thought I was done with FWD and was dead set on replacing my M235 with a used OG M2. Now I'm not quite so sure. I have a feeling that ITS may go quite well with my 2011 Cayman.

AlpineBoost wrote

It's a tough sell to me and I owned a '95 Integra and '02 RSX-S. I posted this earlier elsewhere but when comparing MSRP's here's what I came up with for similar $. Obviously the configurations of some of these cars don't work for everyone or you'd have a hard time getting them without options/markup:

$42,900 - GR Corolla CE - 300 hp, MT only
$43,795 - Civic Type R - 315 hp, MT only
$48,900 - M240i RWD - 382 hp, AT only
$50,800 - Integra Type S - 320 hp, MT only
$50,900 - M240i AWD - 382 hp, AT only
$50,990 - Z Performance - 400 hp, MT or AT
$53,600 - Supra 3.0 - 382 hp, MT or AT
$56,400 - M340i RWD - 382 hp, AT only

Performance for $ the ITS just slots into a really weird spot. I never thought I'd own a Hyundai after 6 Japanese, a Ford, and 2 Euro cars but picked up one of the last brand new 6MT Veloster N's last September for $32,500. On paper I have a hard time believing the ITS provides $20k more car but I'll have to go drive one. The interior is a massive upgrade and it's a Honda but it's hard to wrap my head around a $51k Integra.

The M340i, M240i and Supra can all be ordered and had for MSRP... they are all RWD and are immense value for what you are buying.

There are a few cars in the market right now that don't make any sense to me are built around some devout fanbase that just must have the car-

1) Civic Type - Yea let me go ahead and pay 48K plus markups for a FWD Civic

2) ITS - Even more than the above for the same thing

3) Nissan 400Z - About 10 years late and is a rehashed 370z that rides on a 20 year old platform and gets completely man handled by a Supra

4) Subraru BRZ / Toyota 86- the price is a very good and it makes sense with RWD / lightweight... but do we really want a sports car that is slower to 60 than a Camry in 2023?

5) GR Corolla - i've seen most for 50K... so we are paying 50k for a 3 cylinder turbo Toyota Corolla? Well at least it's AWD but dealers think they have gold on their hands.

I personally think BMW as a whole once you go into mid market has the market covered in any of the B58 powered cars.

ASAP wrote

The M340i, M240i and Supra can all be ordered and had for MSRP... they are all RWD and are immense value for what you are buying.

There are a few cars in the market right now that don't make any sense to me are built around some devout fanbase that just must have the car-

1) Civic Type - Yea let me go ahead and pay 48K plus markups for a FWD Civic

2) ITS - Even more than the above for the same thing

3) Nissan 400Z - About 10 years late and is a rehashed 370z that rides on a 20 year old platform and gets completely man handled by a Supra

4) Subraru BRZ / Toyota 86- the price is a very good and it makes sense with RWD / lightweight... but do we really want a sports car that is slower to 60 than a Camry in 2023?

5) GR Corolla - i've seen most for 50K... so we are paying 50k for a 3 cylinder turbo Toyota Corolla? Well at least it's AWD but dealers think they have gold on their hands.

I personally think BMW as a whole once you go into mid market has the market covered in any of the B58 powered cars.

Yup, I can see the GRC or CTR if someone gets them at MSRP. Otherwise get a bimmer.

I've been offered multiple GRC's at MSRP.

If you are paying over $50K for a FWD Turbo 4, it better shit rainbows and butterflies.

ASAP wrote

The M340i, M240i and Supra can all be ordered and had for MSRP... they are all RWD and are immense value for what you are buying.

There are a few cars in the market right now that don't make any sense to me are built around some devout fanbase that just must have the car-

1) Civic Type - Yea let me go ahead and pay 48K plus markups for a FWD Civic

2) ITS - Even more than the above for the same thing

3) Nissan 400Z - About 10 years late and is a rehashed 370z that rides on a 20 year old platform and gets completely man handled by a Supra

4) Subraru BRZ / Toyota 86- the price is a very good and it makes sense with RWD / lightweight... but do we really want a sports car that is slower to 60 than a Camry in 2023?

5) GR Corolla - i've seen most for 50K... so we are paying 50k for a 3 cylinder turbo Toyota Corolla? Well at least it's AWD but dealers think they have gold on their hands.

I personally think BMW as a whole once you go into mid market has the market covered in any of the B58 powered cars.

I wouldn't call many of those cars "fanboy" cars. Also, you seem to be very hung up on all out acceleration. For some of us, it's more than just straight line acceleration.

The CTR has always commanded a premium since intro decades (whether getting ADM or MSRP) and the CTR has always been a class-leading performer.

After a few months, the ITS will be available at MSRP and possibly below.

No one gets base model BMWs. A M240 RWD will set you back at least $53K with the common options and a 340 in the low to mid 60s. An ITS will likely outrun the 340 and 240 on a road course. In a drag race? The BMWs will easily take the win. Road course? Likely not and they'll be far more less engaging and muted.

The Zs will be selling for below MSRP soon. The excitement is over and the demand is LOW. I have yet to see one in Kansas City.

The BRZ/86 are entry level sports cars that are bargains for what they offer.

I have a 2011 Cayman 6MT base model with 265hp. That car is good for low 5 second 0-60s and maybe mid 13s@102mph. I also have a tuned 2016 M235 6MT with suspension and tires/wheels that can run mid 12s@112mph+. You know which car is FAR MORE FUN to drive and I'll take 90%+ of the time? The slower Cayman.

MmmmmM2 wrote

If you are paying over $50K for a FWD Turbo 4, it better shit rainbows and butterflies.

The ITR sold for $25K back in late 1990s and that's assuming you could find one. $25000 in 1998 is around $46K today and present day CTR money. That ITR had 190hp and run the 1/4 mile in the mid-14s@97mph. The new CTR (and ITS) are upper to mid-13 second @ 105-107mph cars that would run circles around a ITR on a track. Plus those cars have TON more equipment. The ITR had minimal options and creature comforts.

The BRZ/86 are today's ITRs and they're FAR cheaper too plus better performing, safer, and a ton more standard equipment.

Ricochet48 wrote

This. I already did a lot of mental gymnastics to force myself into thinking $48K made sense at $52K I'm in fully B58 zone, even with pricy options.

I also have a top tier 06 VBP DC5 with 50K miles (single owner). It's been great, but I've had it half my life, so in a few years a CPO G42 is my move.

Has your position softened on the ITS now that it's available and the reviews are out?

XutvJet wrote

I wouldn't call many of those cars "fanboy" cars. Also, you seem to be very hung up on all out acceleration. For some of us, it's more than just straight line acceleration.

The CTR has always commanded a premium since intro decades (whether getting ADM or MSRP) and the CTR has always been a class-leading performer.

After a few months, the ITS will be available at MSRP and possibly below.

No one gets base model BMWs. A M240 RWD will set you back at least $53K with the common options and a 340 in the low to mid 60s. An ITS will likely outrun the 340 and 240 on a road course. In a drag race? The BMWs will easily take the win. Road course? Likely not and they'll be far more less engaging and muted.

The Zs will be selling for below MSRP soon. The excitement is over and the demand is LOW. I have yet to see one in Kansas City.

The BRZ/86 are entry level sports cars that are bargains for what they offer.

I have a 2011 Cayman 6MT base model with 265hp. That car is good for low 5 second 0-60s and maybe mid 13s@102mph. I also have a tuned 2016 M235 6MT with suspension and tires/wheels that can run mid 12s@112mph+. You know which car is FAR MORE FUN to drive and I'll take 90%+ of the time? The slower Cayman.

I agree with your Cayman comment 100%... that's why I think the G80 M3 sucks and I dont' want one anymore.

For the CTR and ITS... do you think they handle or frankly do ANYTHING better than the BMW cars I called out? Sure they are lighter... it kind of ends there.

XutvJet wrote

I wouldn't call many of those cars "fanboy" cars. Also, you seem to be very hung up on all out acceleration. For some of us, it's more than just straight line acceleration.

The CTR has always commanded a premium since intro decades (whether getting ADM or MSRP) and the CTR has always been a class-leading performer.

After a few months, the ITS will be available at MSRP and possibly below.

No one gets base model BMWs. A M240 RWD will set you back at least $53K with the common options and a 340 in the low to mid 60s. An ITS will likely outrun the 340 and 240 on a road course. In a drag race? The BMWs will easily take the win. Road course? Likely not and they'll be far more less engaging and muted.

The Zs will be selling for below MSRP soon. The excitement is over and the demand is LOW. I have yet to see one in Kansas City.

The BRZ/86 are entry level sports cars that are bargains for what they offer.

I have a 2011 Cayman 6MT base model with 265hp. That car is good for low 5 second 0-60s and maybe mid 13s@102mph. I also have a tuned 2016 M235 6MT with suspension and tires/wheels that can run mid 12s@112mph+. You know which car is FAR MORE FUN to drive and I'll take 90%+ of the time? The slower Cayman.

This line of thinking is standard. It's not all about 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Those figures tell you very little about true performance of an automobile which is the genesis of these discussions. Performance and capability in a fulsome context anyway can only be measured on a proper race track. There's also another element that is often overlooked and that's driver engagement, or the way the car makes you feel. What I mean by that is: What type of steering feedback do you get from the car when you drive at 7/10ths, 8/10ths? What about flat out? How does the car perform when not on track? How is the seat positioned? Is the clutch travel appropriate? Is the pedal box spaced in a way that's conducive to spirited driving? How does the transmission feel? Is the car fun? And on and on...

Ask yourself this, is the fastest car you've ever owned (1/4 and 0-60) the best car you've ever owned? In many cases, the answer is "No".

XutvJet wrote

The ITR sold for $25K back in late 1990s and that's assuming you could find one. $25000 in 1998 is around $46K today and present day CTR money. That ITR had 190hp and run the 1/4 mile in the mid-14s@97mph. The new CTR (and ITS) are upper to mid-13 second @ 105-107mph cars that would run circles around a ITR on a track. Plus those cars have TON more equipment. The ITR had minimal options and creature comforts.

The BRZ/86 are today's ITRs and they're FAR cheaper too plus better performing, safer, and a ton more standard equipment.

I actually had a 1995 Acura Integra GS-R. It was a great car for a college student (which I was). Loved every minute of it. MSRP was around $20,500 which translates today to $41K. That's still $10K less that what the ITS is going for (and let's not mention the ADM these cars will get). So you are looking at paying over $60K for a FWD platform car. No thanks.

Clark_Kent wrote

This line of thinking is standard. It's not all about 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Those figures tell you very little about true performance of an automobile which is the genesis of these discussions. Performance and capability in a fulsome context anyway can only be measured on a proper race track. There's also another element that is often overlooked and that's driver engagement, or the way the car makes you feel. What I mean by that is: What type of steering feedback do you get from the car when you drive at 7/10ths, 8/10ths? What about flat out? How does the car perform when not on track? How is the seat positioned? Is the clutch travel appropriate? Is the pedal box spaced in a way that's conducive to spirited driving? How does the transmission feel? Is the car fun? And on and on...

Ask yourself this, is the fastest car you've ever owned (1/4 and 0-60) the best car you've ever owned? In many cases, the answer "No".

I agree w this.. there are a TON of cars that i've read about in the papers and then actually drove them and they didn't align... I personally think I would really like the CTR even if its FWD... BUT at a $50K price point, it becomes hard for me to fathom... when a 1 year old M340i comes into play and fundamentally has everything that is better... it has the penalty of weight and steering feel but I'll take that given what else the car is offering.

Now at $90k w the G80x... BMW can keep that tank and I'll stick to a C8 Vette or a Cayman of some sort.

ASAP wrote

I agree w this.. there are a TON of cars that i've read about in the papers and then actually drove them and they didn't align... I personally think I would really like the CTR even if its FWD... BUT at a $50K price point, it becomes hard for me to fathom... when a 1 year old M340i comes into play and fundamentally has everything that is better... it has the penalty of weight and steering feel but I'll take that given what else the car is offering.

Now at $90k w the G80x... BMW can keep that tank and I'll stick to a C8 Vette or a Cayman of some sort.

It also has the penalty of not being offered in a manual, something that most CTR/ITS buyers are exclusively looking for.

Burrcold wrote

It also has the penalty of not being offered in a manual, something that most CTR/ITS buyers are exclusively looking for.

that's a deep personal preference... if you are looking for that in a $50k FWD platform... more power to you.... the only car that I would even remotely consider a MT in today would be in a lightweight RWD Porsche

ASAP wrote

that's a deep personal preference... if you are looking for that in a $50k FWD platform... more power to you.... the only car that I would even remotely consider a MT in today would be in a lightweight RWD Porsche

It's all personal preference. That's why every buyer of a CTR didn't run out and buy an M340i/240i. There's no right or wrong, it's completely subjective.

ASAP wrote

that's a deep personal preference... if you are looking for that in a $50k FWD platform... more power to you.... the only car that I would even remotely consider a MT in today would be in a lightweight RWD Porsche

I've owned a host of vehicles over the years with varying engine and transmission layouts. Front engine, mid-engine, no engine (EV), FWD, RWD, AWD and what's most curious to me is this strong aversion to FWD cars. What I've gathered is people are put off by the idea of a FWD car. Assuming the primary use case is a daily driver, in most cases you can't tell a FWD car from an AWD car from a RWD car. It's primarily on a race track, when the car is being driven at the limit, can you tell the difference. Torque steer won't ruin your jaunt to Whole Foods. Wheel hop won't kill the mood for date night with your significant other. Uneven weight distribution won't prevent you from hitting 90 mph on an interstate entrance ramp. It's all a little foolish and a bit of a reach to try to overlay the inherent weaknesses of a FWD car on every day driving, because let's be honest, most of these cars we're discussing rarely if ever see material track time.

But you're right. It's all personal preference. There are some cars I absolutely will not buy, for one reason or another and because of that, it's personal.

Clark_Kent wrote

I've owned a host of vehicles over the years with varying engine and transmission layouts. Front engine, mid-engine, no engine (EV), FWD, RWD, AWD and what's most curious to me is this strong aversion to FWD cars. What I've gathered is people are put off by the idea of a FWD car. Assuming the primary use case is a daily driver, in most cases you can't tell a FWD car from an AWD car from a RWD car. It's primarily on a race track, when the car is being driven at the limit, can you tell the difference. Torque steer won't ruin your jaunt to Whole Foods. Wheel hop won't kill the mood for date night with your significant other. Uneven weight distribution won't prevent you from hitting 90 mph on an interstate entrance ramp. It's all a little foolish and a bit of a reach to try to overlay the inherent weaknesses of a FWD car on every day driving, because let's be honest, most of these cars we're discussing rarely if ever see material track time.

But you're right. It's all personal preference. There are some cars I absolutely will not buy, for one reason or another and because of that, it's personal.

I disagree in every way possible... and interestingly you've named them all.

Both RWD and AWD platforms provide for more fun at lower speeds to the driver and especially in daily driving. Having owned a Mazda Speed3, both the Torque steer and major lack of traction at any speed below 40 mph made the car near undriveable, the GTI that I drove was far better but still exhibited major traction issues.

Any stop light launch (light or hard) is more fun in a RWD / AWD car... a little low speed slide, same story - RWD only there... if you plan to add any more power mods to your car, FWD also becomes useless... take a harder turn, well make sure you don't understeer and with cars like the GTi, this is EASY to overpower.

Where does the FWD car excel? Well by default it will be lighter and at times the steering may feel a bit more connected... all other situations will necessitate a higher speed to have fun... and there RWD and AWD won't matter unless you are pushing to the max limit... in all other scenarios FWD is just a loser by default.

I would arguably agree if you weren't talking about the FWD cars that have made FWD cars cool again. The speeds and agility the CTR (and assumingly the acura) have proven at the track, along with Hyundai's offerings have kind of proven that a lot of those issues can and have been overcome.

Everything you mentioned (besides launching, which yeah, have to give you that one) is not "fast" it's just fun. Hooning around will get you a pretty lousy lap time and on the street probably lands you in a Mustang leaving a car show video.