honda accord 2.2 type-r review

Have a picture of Honda Accord 2.2 Type-R?, please send it to us.
Picture courtesy of cleedeck.

Average Ratings

Performance	9.3/10
Practicality	9/10
Reliability	9.2/10
Value for Money	9.5/10
Reviewer Rating	9.3/10
Overall Rating	8.9/10

89% Recommended17 out of 19 Reviews

• Overview
• Reviews
  • JonDoe's review
  • 3 Comments
• Write your review
• Ask a Question

By JonDoe on 6th Aug 2005

JonDoe's Ratings

Year Manufactured	2001
Length of ownership	4+yrs
Doors	4
Performance	10/10
Practicality	10/10
Reliability	9/10
Value for money	10/10
Overall value	10/10
JonDoe's recommendation

Good Points

General ride. Handling. 5.7+k RPM. Understated looks. Brakes.

Bad Points

Ride Too high. Drink problem. Rubber diet problem.

General Comments

I bought mine brand new, with 10 miles on the clock, and I have been generally very pleased with it, 4+ years later. I owned a 1.8 LSS Auto prior to this, all the toys etc, and SSS gearbox - you lose all of these with the Type-r, but this isn't about toys.
I do not consider myself a 'boy racer' or 'mod-man' etc... as you may have picked up from my previous 'flatcap/grandad' car, however, I do do a lot of mileage, and spend a lot of time behind the wheel, of this, and many other cars.
It has bags of power, without being stupid, and backs it up with sharp handling, especially on country lanes, although, I think the suspension could have been a little lower. There is just too much gap between the bottom of the wing and top of the tyre. I didn't 'drop' it, as I figured the Honda lads knew what they were on about. I also did not want to compromise handling for already good looks.
The brakes are very good, and have to be if you are looking to get the best from this car, you need to 'release' it every now and then! The discs are huge, and the EBD on top of the ABS is warranted, and negates traction control.
The seats are very good, and do their job well round those bends.
Honda reliability goes without saying, and the paintwork (in Vesuvio Red - what else, but its launch colour)? still looks mint, apart from the stonechips from the motorway miles.
I have only had 1 major repair, and this was after 3yrs. Clutch failure.
Around town, it drives very well. Accommodating three children, or two adults comfortably in the rear, and contends easily with 12 to 15 shopping bags.
It is a car that looks good on the drive, the wing really sets it off. It is not as 'loud' as an Impreza or Evo, (great cars themselves, but I couldn't have either because of my customer facing job).

Bad points:
Fuel consumption, although not awful, can be bad, especially as it works at its best with 98+ RONS, and Optimax (unfortunately, with the prices these days), seems to fit the bill perfectly. If I had to pay for my fuel, I would be a little narked, to say the least.
I have had as little as 19mpg, (average over a full tank; long, straight and very fast journey - with both cams 'on' most of the time), and as much as 32mpg, over one tank on a few 'normal' journeys, occassionally having both cams 'on'.
Oil consumption - It goes through this stuff outside of normal service schedules, but this is normal for these sorts of cars. But once again, only the best will do - Helix Ultra - not cheap!
Power - It would have been nice if the 2nd cam kicked in at slightly lower revs. 5.7K is a long way to go before that rush kicks in, and how - It feels like being pushed from behind, from some imaginary huge hand! A six speed 'box would have been a great benefit, also.
Tyres - Hey, you all know how much rubber costs per corner, and it does go through the fronts quite aggressively, so I would advise the old 'rear to front' swap to balance the wear. I used the Potenzas for most of this cars life, but recently switched to Daton Sprints (same manufacturer, same price as the SO5 Pole Position). There is no loss in performance (wet or dry), from tyre to tyre, and the tread pattern is so much more aggressive looking. I will be sticking with these.
Overall, I have not looked back on this purchase, this car was purchased on finance, and I am glad I haven't felt as if it were a burden on the plastic, as service costs are reasonable, compared with stories I have heard from colleagues and customers, with similar (but different badged) classed cars.
It isn't a Subaru/Evo killer, but that shouldn't be a reason to buy this (or any) car, though I am sure that if those cars had no turbo, things would be very different, but that is probably something for a forum somewhere out there.
The only real problem I have had, is trying to find another car that will replace it. This has been the main reason for not switching. There is no car out there, that will give the same feeling and downright smugness, for the same money, and in their infinate wisdom, Honda have chosen to discontinue the model??
While we are on the subject of silly decisions. What was the idea behind going from those nice looking, double straight chrome pipes on the markI model, to these bent down double pipes, on the markII model that I own???

Total Respect: +1