CTR Facelift Differences. Are they worth it?
Discussion
I'm currently researching my next car, which is going to be a Type R, however I'm really not sure if the facelift is going to be worth the extra folding.
So far as I know it the difference between the two were:
1) Front and rear lights
2) Side repeaters in the mirrors
3) Comically large H badge
4) Changes to steering
5) Lighter flywheel
6) More sound deadening
7) Red inserts on seats/doors
I have also heard rumours of upgraded speakers with components as standard in the facelift.
So far for me, I'm not that bothered about the lights and I actually prefer the early grille with the smaller H badge. So I guess the questions are:
1) Changes to the steering/flywheel/sound deadening really noticeable?
2) Are the red seats a real bitch to keep clean? (Currenly got a mk1 Octavia vRS with white seats, so I'm getting really bored of cleaning seats)
3) Was there any change to the speakers.
I have asked the question on the CTR Forum and got 'read the FAQ' as an answer, when I asked about keeping the seats clean, the response was 'buy some covers'... Thanks, your really helping to sell your choice of car.
TIA
Martin
So far as I know it the difference between the two were:
1) Front and rear lights
2) Side repeaters in the mirrors
3) Comically large H badge
4) Changes to steering
5) Lighter flywheel
6) More sound deadening
7) Red inserts on seats/doors
I have also heard rumours of upgraded speakers with components as standard in the facelift.
So far for me, I'm not that bothered about the lights and I actually prefer the early grille with the smaller H badge. So I guess the questions are:
1) Changes to the steering/flywheel/sound deadening really noticeable?
2) Are the red seats a real bitch to keep clean? (Currenly got a mk1 Octavia vRS with white seats, so I'm getting really bored of cleaning seats)
3) Was there any change to the speakers.
I have asked the question on the CTR Forum and got 'read the FAQ' as an answer, when I asked about keeping the seats clean, the response was 'buy some covers'... Thanks, your really helping to sell your choice of car.
TIA
Martin
The steering is no more communicative on the facelift, it's just been given more resistance. The headlights on the pre-facelift are rubbish on dipped beam, so it'd certainly be worth the money for the gas discharge lights on the later models.
I bought red recaros for my pre-facelift (from a Japanese spec CTR) and in the 60,000 miles or so I rin them they didn't get dirty and didn't need any more cleaning than the standard seats did. I would imagine the red inserts on the post facelift cars would be the same in that department.
The post facelift gives you the option of Cosmic Grey as an additional colour choice.
In terms of the driving experience, it's very, very slightly softer than the earlier cars. You really wouldn't notice any difference from the engine, to be honest.
Where I would seriously consider the facelift is the reliability and resale later on. Items like the steering rack on the pre-facelift cars could be a nightmare (in 125,000 miles in mine I went through 3 steering racks and 3 control units). As far as I'm aware there were no such problems with the facelift cars.
The stereo speakers are still rubbish, pre and post facelift.
The lacquer on the alloys is notoriouusly poor on the pre-facelifts, it was improved on later models.
If it was my money I'd buy what was called the 5.5 model, which were 05 and 55 registered cars, known as the 'Premier' edition. These came with aircon and the Recaro seats (which are well worth the difference) in all the colours. There is also an equivalent in the 2003 registered, 53 plated cars called the championship edition, which also has the seats and so on.
Aside from the differences between the two models, the usual things apply when buying a fairly high performance car; regular oil changes and servicing are important, even better if it's all been with Honda. Check the oil when you look at one, it shouldn't be too black and if the level is anywhere near low I'd avoid as the owner probably doesn't look too closely at what's going on. Ironically with VTEC engines, you probably don't want one that's been treated too gently, as lack of high cam action can eventually cause issues with the VTEC system.
Like most Hondas, they're typically reliable, but be careful as problems can be expensive to fix. In my 2 years doing lots of mileage I went through:
- 3 steering racks (circa. £1100 a time)
- 3 steering control units
- 4 alloy wheels replaced because of poor lacquer
- 1 new gearbox (dread to think how much that cost)
- 1 exhaust manifold
- new rear suspension arms (a large number of pre-facelift cars were manufactured with rear arms with too much rear camber, monstering the tyres after only a short time)
Remember there is PLENTY of choice with these cars so you can afford to be fussy.
I bought red recaros for my pre-facelift (from a Japanese spec CTR) and in the 60,000 miles or so I rin them they didn't get dirty and didn't need any more cleaning than the standard seats did. I would imagine the red inserts on the post facelift cars would be the same in that department.
The post facelift gives you the option of Cosmic Grey as an additional colour choice.
In terms of the driving experience, it's very, very slightly softer than the earlier cars. You really wouldn't notice any difference from the engine, to be honest.
Where I would seriously consider the facelift is the reliability and resale later on. Items like the steering rack on the pre-facelift cars could be a nightmare (in 125,000 miles in mine I went through 3 steering racks and 3 control units). As far as I'm aware there were no such problems with the facelift cars.
The stereo speakers are still rubbish, pre and post facelift.
The lacquer on the alloys is notoriouusly poor on the pre-facelifts, it was improved on later models.
If it was my money I'd buy what was called the 5.5 model, which were 05 and 55 registered cars, known as the 'Premier' edition. These came with aircon and the Recaro seats (which are well worth the difference) in all the colours. There is also an equivalent in the 2003 registered, 53 plated cars called the championship edition, which also has the seats and so on.
Aside from the differences between the two models, the usual things apply when buying a fairly high performance car; regular oil changes and servicing are important, even better if it's all been with Honda. Check the oil when you look at one, it shouldn't be too black and if the level is anywhere near low I'd avoid as the owner probably doesn't look too closely at what's going on. Ironically with VTEC engines, you probably don't want one that's been treated too gently, as lack of high cam action can eventually cause issues with the VTEC system.
Like most Hondas, they're typically reliable, but be careful as problems can be expensive to fix. In my 2 years doing lots of mileage I went through:
- 3 steering racks (circa. £1100 a time)
- 3 steering control units
- 4 alloy wheels replaced because of poor lacquer
- 1 new gearbox (dread to think how much that cost)
- 1 exhaust manifold
- new rear suspension arms (a large number of pre-facelift cars were manufactured with rear arms with too much rear camber, monstering the tyres after only a short time)
Remember there is PLENTY of choice with these cars so you can afford to be fussy.
Edited by 10 Pence Short on Sunday 10th February 12:36
Edited by 10 Pence Short on Sunday 10th February 12:37
No worry about the red Recaro seat facings - they are still looking pristine after 7 months. There's no motorway booming with the facelift although if you go with the 19" Rage alloys (why wouldn't you?) the ride on rough or undulating surface at speed can get a bit choppy. The steering is absolutely pin-sharp and feels great on any surface, wet or dry. It's a pleasure to drive around town in 3rd/4th but when you grab it by the neck and wring that VTEC it's sounds great and is pretty damn quick. Not stellar, but it gains on unbelievable brakes that make it way quicker from A to B than most.
The most annoying features are the stupid tilt and slide seat mechanism that screws up the perfect driving position you just figured out. The gearbox that can be a little baulky into 3rd. The battery that goes flat within 7 days. It also seems to attract a selection of tossers who just have to show off by overtaking/undertaking and generally doing anything possible to get in front.
The most annoying features are the stupid tilt and slide seat mechanism that screws up the perfect driving position you just figured out. The gearbox that can be a little baulky into 3rd. The battery that goes flat within 7 days. It also seems to attract a selection of tossers who just have to show off by overtaking/undertaking and generally doing anything possible to get in front.
Martin Keene said:
Nobody else got one?
I think 10p has summed it up really well....It's worth getting one of the end of the line 'Premier editions' with recaro seats and red carpets, if you're going for a face-lift, or one of the '30th anniversary edition' (basically the same as the premier, but for the pre face-lift cars - the 30th anniversary cars will all be on an 03 plate)...
Otherwise, the mechanical differences between a pre face-lift and a face-lift are minimal, and not worth worrying about. Buy the car you prefer / can afford.
PS - 10p said the face-lift have gas discharge lights, but they are not true HID / Xenon, they are projector style but don't offer much performance improvement over the old ones.
I agree with everything 10p said.
I owned a mk2 CTR and there is very little difference really. The indicator in the mirrors is a nice touch but not worth choosing between the two.
My mk2 was also considerably quicker than both of my buddies mk1's but I put that down to the fact my car was a particularly good one rather than anything else. Some people have also reported the mk2 as being a fair amount quicker than mk1's but I am skeptical about this.
My mk2 also drank oil like there was no tomorrow (3/4's of a small bottle of oil per month) and this was attributed to how mine was run in but again, no real facts just a whole lot of guessing.
Either model is a good choice. A worthwhile point to note is, drive a few of them to see the difference. The first two I drove didn't drive half as well as the one I bought. Very different cars in terms of feel.
I owned a mk2 CTR and there is very little difference really. The indicator in the mirrors is a nice touch but not worth choosing between the two.
My mk2 was also considerably quicker than both of my buddies mk1's but I put that down to the fact my car was a particularly good one rather than anything else. Some people have also reported the mk2 as being a fair amount quicker than mk1's but I am skeptical about this.
My mk2 also drank oil like there was no tomorrow (3/4's of a small bottle of oil per month) and this was attributed to how mine was run in but again, no real facts just a whole lot of guessing.
Either model is a good choice. A worthwhile point to note is, drive a few of them to see the difference. The first two I drove didn't drive half as well as the one I bought. Very different cars in terms of feel.
_Lee_ said:
My mk2 was also considerably quicker than both of my buddies mk1's but I put that down to the fact my car was a particularly good one rather than anything else. Some people have also reported the mk2 as being a fair amount quicker than mk1's but I am skeptical about this.
Well, the EK9 did "only" have 185 bhp... 
Or is that not what you meant by mk1?
pbirkett said:
Hut49 said:
although if you go with the 19" Rage alloys (why wouldn't you?)
I think that should read "why would you?"...Surely 19" wheels will look shit, ruin the ride and handling, and be mega expensive for tyres...
I have a facelift 05 CTR. Can't add much to what 10 pence short has except to say mine's due it's first MOT in April and it's been a great car so far.
Edited to correct typos ... not even had a drink yet!
Edited by Catz on Friday 15th February 19:38
Catz said:
I have a feeling Hut49 is talking about the new style FN2 model rather than the EP3.
Well, assuming he is... someone I work with has an FN2 with the aforementioned 19s on it. I dont like it. They dont suit the car, and they probably still ruin the ride and handling. I think the original wheels look far better 
pbirkett said:
_Lee_ said:
My mk2 was also considerably quicker than both of my buddies mk1's but I put that down to the fact my car was a particularly good one rather than anything else. Some people have also reported the mk2 as being a fair amount quicker than mk1's but I am skeptical about this.
Well, the EK9 did "only" have 185 bhp... Or is that not what you meant by mk1?
_Lee_ said:
pbirkett said:
_Lee_ said:
My mk2 was also considerably quicker than both of my buddies mk1's but I put that down to the fact my car was a particularly good one rather than anything else. Some people have also reported the mk2 as being a fair amount quicker than mk1's but I am skeptical about this.
Well, the EK9 did "only" have 185 bhp... Or is that not what you meant by mk1?
Own a 54 plate Mk2.
Had it about a month and its been a scream to drive but had a few issues -
1. Needed to replace the front tyre after hitting a pot hole. My car came with the goodyears on which are great tyre but need ordering thus car off can be off the road for a few days. Get trye insuance, £120 for two years from honda dealer and at £125 per tyre one goes your quids in.
2. Brought from a dealer and now need to take it back because front break pads are creamed. Not very impressive on a car i brought 3 weeks ago that had been through all the honda checks. The mechinic "forgot" to check them!
I would go for the Mk2 as having driven bother it felt more sorted and the grey is the best colour.
I agree with the 05 being the pic but the blacked out rear windows aren't to everyones taste.
Had it about a month and its been a scream to drive but had a few issues -
1. Needed to replace the front tyre after hitting a pot hole. My car came with the goodyears on which are great tyre but need ordering thus car off can be off the road for a few days. Get trye insuance, £120 for two years from honda dealer and at £125 per tyre one goes your quids in.
2. Brought from a dealer and now need to take it back because front break pads are creamed. Not very impressive on a car i brought 3 weeks ago that had been through all the honda checks. The mechinic "forgot" to check them!
I would go for the Mk2 as having driven bother it felt more sorted and the grey is the best colour.
I agree with the 05 being the pic but the blacked out rear windows aren't to everyones taste.
Gassing Station | Honda | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff