FL5 Type R vs DE5 Integra Type S | Savagegeese

[Gansan]

I'm looking to either upgrade to an FL5 or DE5 at some point. Even though I'm positive I would actually be quite happy in a DE5, the FL5 tickles my track geek fancy in so many ways that I'm pretty sure it will always be "the one that got away" if I don't go for it. But I love the DE5's styling and sound too.

When the ITS was announced, I was so sure it would come with the ITR seats but upholstered in black or some other colors. Disappointed that it didn't happen--that would have been so great. The feeling of sinking into my FK8 driver's seat every single time I go for a drive is special.

First world problems.

Sponsored

 

[Clark_Kent]

@savagegeese YouTube reviewers and random people alike are weighing in that the shifter feel is different from the CTR. I think that's nonsense. Can you validate?

Would be interested to read the response to this inquiry. The shifter feel was the same to me. If there is a difference, I could not tell.

 

[TypeRD]

I can see how the different knob itself could affect shifter feel. Mechanically it should be identical, but the throw could feel a little different if the knob is taller or shorter than the FL5.

 

[VPMotors]

So I did a thing.

After looking at the Integra Type S (ITS) in person, I was excited to try it out and get an idea of how it felt from the inside and to drive in comparison to my FL5 Civic Type R (CTR). Thought that this might help anyone looking at either of these, so posting it here. Leaving any bias of being a CTR owner aside, here's my thoughts:

The exterior:

Looks are largely subjective, so let's get that out of the way first. The ITS looks slightly better to my eyes, especially from the rear. CTR tail lights not a big fan of; they look slightly like a Kia Stinger's taillights. Additionally the sportback style on the ITS is more pronounced so it looks sleeker from the back, CTR feeling bulkier in comparison. Prefer the front headlamps on the ITS too. On the question of the wing on the CTR: the CTR looks better with the wing and the ITS looks better without it, at least based on the few photoshopped images of the ITS with a wing. Like the small details in the Integra which harks back to the Integras of yesteryear, like the stamped Integra nameplate in the front and rear bumper, and the opening in the bumper below the hatch opening to allow to open the boot.

But for me, there's no real winner in this department. That's mostly because of the fender flares on the ITS. If you prefer stuck on fenders, the ITS wins the styling contest hands down. But if you're someone like me who appreciates the wide body look of the CTR because of the bespoke fenders, you might swing towards the CTR. In the process of creating bespoke fenders for the CTR, Honda had to create a wider rear door for it as well, and that costs a lot, so I appreciate the extra effort and costs put in on the Honda side. The Honda also has fender vents and side skirts to accentuate that wide body look, which is what I prefer. The front fender on the ITS is bespoke too, but Acura had to make it look like the rear one which is stuck on, so both the rear and the front end up looking stuck on. You're free to form on your opinion on this section: in my opinion though, give the ITS bespoke fenders and there's no contest, but without it, my heart goes towards the CTR overall.

The interior:

Again subjective, so totally upto what you prefer. I like that the ITS has a heads up display and much better looking speaker grills (sounding not so much; prefer the Bose on the CTR vs. the bass heavy ELS on the ITS). Like the leather padding on the passenger side of the dash on the ITS, and the fact that you get to choose interior colors, so more freedom there. More features on the ITS too, like front and rear parking sensors, heads up display, tire pressure monitors, leather trim, heated seats, etc.

On the CTR side, I prefer the dashboard design, mostly because of the honeycomb mesh which runs across the width of the dash and makes it stand out, while the ITS dash looks contemporary in comparison. Prefer the teardrop aluminum shift knob of the CTR (similar to the S2000) to the optional titanium one on the ITS (similar to the Integra Type R), mostly because I use my palm to shift and the CTR's feels better to the palm. Didn't get to sit in an ITS with the default shift knob, this car was all optioned out. You also don't get the R mode gauge cluster of the CTR (homage to the S2000) with the rev counter up top and all the telemetry you need (oil pressure, turbo boost pressure, oil temperature, coolant temperature, etc.) on the ITS, which is my default cluster even when daily driving.

Then there's the topic of seats. No subjective opinion here: ITS front seats are larger so the healthier folk would be more comfortable than the CTR which has snug front seats. However, me and the Acura salesperson were both surprised to find that the CTR has the softer seat. The cushioning on the CTR is softer. The ITS has a good driver's seat as well, with electric adjustment (which the CTR doesn't get), but the CTR is simply feels more comfortable to sit in. Mind you, the bolstering on the CTR is tight, so healthier folk won't fit properly, but for those who fit in either, would probably have similar findings. ITS gets lumbar adjustment as well but the lumbar support on the CTR doesn't need any adjustment, they're that good. Wish they gave the ITS the CTR seats.

As for the rear bench, they're identical: the Honda has slightly better headroom if that matters: I'm 5'9", and my head brushes in the ITS while I have two fingers worth of headroom in the CTR. Honda keeps suede as the material of choice for the front seats and door pads, while the ITS goes for leather and a little bit of suede on the central portion of the front seats. Rear seats leather in the ITS, while the CTR plays "it's just a Civic" card and gives cloth/fabric. Boot space is almost the same on either cars, although the CTR can probably fit an extra carry on bag because of the less aggressive sloping rear end, and larger and deeper opening.

The driving:

Most of you might be interested in this part, so saved the best for the last. Both cars share the same drive train, so I didn't expect much differences. However, Acura has done a great job tuning the drive train and suspension, and you can tell that the ITS is a better daily driver hands down. You get more torque lower down in the rev range, so you get more acceleration without as much revs as in the CTR. I never thought 5hp would be a difference I could feel in either cars, but the Acura with its better bottom end feels like it can pull on the CTR in the initial revs. Didn't really push the ITS too much because the salesperson told me it was going to be a customer car down the line, but for the couple of times gave it the beans, it felt like the ITS had a better initial launch but fizzled out in higher revs as compared to the CTR. While both are turbos, the CTR feels closer to that old Honda naturally aspirated K series feel than the ITS, mostly because of the better feeling top end. ITS though does better in daily traffic because of less gear shifting required because of the better low end torque.

The suspension on the ITS feels better as well. The Honda feels overdamped especially in +R mode which has me bouncing hilariously over even the smoothest of highways. Comfort mode is the way to go on that car for sure for daily driving. That's what got me in the ITS: it was in Sport + which is the most aggressive setting and the suspension felt like it was in Sport mode (the middle mode) on the CTR. In comfort mode, the ITS suspension is as compliant as any other new car with low profile tires: you can still feel the road surface, but the effect is dampened to not be a bother. CTR comfort mode on the other hand still makes you aware of the road surface, and expansion joints on bridges can be a bother in the CTR, not in the ITS.

The sound deadening on the ITS is better than the CTR as well, which is noticeable, especially because the CTR has a lot of tire noise while doing highway speeds. While I didn't take the ITS on the highway, I could sense the lower noise levels even when it came to outside traffic. It's ironic then when you notice that the ITS has a louder exhaust. Acura took out a resonator from the CTR exhaust because of less stricter US regulations while the CTR had to keep it to comply with stricter European and Japanese norms. My biggest complaint with the CTR is that it doesn't have the noise to match the looks and speed of the car, and that has been addressed in the ITS. In Sport +, the ITS even adds some pops and bangs to the mix. Not as aggressive sounding as an Elantra N, but definitely audible and in my opinion the sweet Goldilocks spot between the quiet CTR and the raucous Elantra N.

Can't comment on the handling much because I didn't push it that much, but they feel similar if not identical. CTR felt slightly more assuring while taking a turn enthusiastically, but it's hardly noticeable in daily driving and both feel great handlers for what are essentially front wheel drive cars.

Conclusion:

So, what do I think? Well, I am not lying when I say that I wanted to find fault with the ITS because I have a CTR, and wanted to prove that the CTR is better. However, I can't, because the ITS is a great product overall. It all boils down to what you prefer in a car. Acura took most of the complaints with the CTR, namely stiff ride on everyday roads, and a quiet exhaust, and rectified them. In isolation then, it stands out as being the only luxurious car with a sweet manual gearbox and with a premium badge in this price segment. It's definitely better for you if you're just using the car for daily driving. This is the car for anyone who wants the CTR but can't keep up with the stiff ride, wants something slightly under the radar (especially without the big wing), prefers the looks of the Integra, hates the quiet exhaust of the CTR, or can't get hold of one considering how low the production numbers for the CTR currently are. And that brings me to my next point.

No doubt Acura have done a stellar job with the ITS, so much so that I was contemplating trading in the CTR if not for the markup on the ITS. However, on the drive back home, when I drove the CTR, it struck me: the Type R seats, the R mode gauge cluster, the in-built Log R Honda telemetry app, the red carpets, the suede material, the better gear knob shape: the CTR felt more cohesive in the sum of its parts, and the ITS started to feel like a mish-mash of Acura and Honda parts together in comparison. Some might argue, most of the above stuff can be added to the ITS later on. However, the CTR comes with all the stuff which makes it special from the factory. The bespoke fenders, the fender vents, the wing, the better integrated rear diffuser, with the interior bits, it all comes together perfectly in the CTR. Then there's the place of production. A Japanese car made in Japan holds higher reverence in the car world than one made in the US, which is why fans go gaga over JDM versions of existing USDM cars. I don't really mind where the car is made, but then I remembered the misaligned hatch shut line on the ITS I saw a few days ago in a parking lot, and I checked the CTR for any misaligned panels or inconsistent panel gaps. None found.

Then I saw the serialized plate in the CTR. For some, it is just a plate with a number, and that's ok; the ITS is the car amongst these two for you. But for the others who value the low production numbers, and are appreciative of the efforts and costs behind a seemingly small thing as bespoke fenders, or a homage to the S2000 in the gear knob shape or the gauge cluster, the CTR is the car to pick. It feels bespoke enough to be special, something which the Acura lacks.

The markups trend for either cars tell a similar story as well. Forums indicate that quite a few people have been able to land an ITS at MSRP or a low markup, while with the CTR you had to know the dealership owner or general manager personally, or be on a list for long enough to get close to the MSRP. No doubt there are absurd markups on the ITS too, but they are not as many in number or value as the CTR saw initially. Acura makes about 1500 in a single batch (not per month numbers) for the North American market, while Honda makes 400 a month for the entire world. Think about it this way: the JDM Integra Type R from 25 years ago exists, as does the comparatively newer and more luxurious USDM Acura RSX Type S. Which one holds higher sentimental (as well as monetary) value in the car world?

I'm keeping my Civic Type R.

 

[CTR39322]

I'm looking to either upgrade to an FL5 or DE5 at some point. Even though I'm positive I would actually be quite happy in a DE5, the FL5 tickles my track geek fancy in so many ways that I'm pretty sure it will always be "the one that got away" if I don't go for it. But I love the DE5's styling and sound too.

When the ITS was announced, I was so sure it would come with the ITR seats but upholstered in black or some other colors. Disappointed that it didn't happen--that would have been so great. The feeling of sinking into my FK8 driver's seat every single time I go for a drive is special.

First world problems.

Also remember you probably didn’t pay 50k+ for your FK8, for me the performance difference is not worth the 55k+ plus price tag for either of these cars. I paid close to 41k for my 21 Fk8 and for me it’s a bargain compared to either of these.

 

[CTR]

Also remember you probably didn’t pay 50k+ for your FK8, for me the performance difference is not worth the 55k+ plus price tag for either of these cars. I paid close to 41k for my 21 Fk8 and for me it’s a bargain compared to either of these.

What many people don’t realize is that we’ve been in an inflationary period that many of us have never lived through before.

https://www.dollartimes.com/inflation/inflation.php?amount=41000&year=2020

Your 41K was actually higher than the current MSRP for an FL5.

 

[1971Camaro]

Correct me if im wrong but I believe in the type R video you mentioned the R was fantastic at its msrp but any additional markups made things complicated and that the R wasn't a great 50k+ car. Would you mirror that sentiment on the valuation of the integra at 53-55k? Have your thoughts on valuation evolved since?

Secondly, we need someone to explore hardware swaps between the two models for us common geesefolk. Exhaust, damper controller, accessory spoiler, wheels, steering wheel, etc

Appreciate the content, sir.

Remember that the Acura image has been different than the Honda image... so an Acura can usually justify a higher price tag automatically.

 

[sfedai0]

So I did a thing.

After looking at the Integra Type S (ITS) in person, I was excited to try it out and get an idea of how it felt from the inside and to drive in comparison to my FL5 Civic Type R (CTR). Thought that this might help anyone looking at either of these, so posting it here. Leaving any bias of being a CTR owner aside, here's my thoughts:

The exterior:

Looks are largely subjective, so let's get that out of the way first. The ITS looks slightly better to my eyes, especially from the rear. CTR tail lights not a big fan of; they look slightly like a Kia Stinger's taillights. Additionally the sportback style on the ITS is more pronounced so it looks sleeker from the back, CTR feeling bulkier in comparison. Prefer the front headlamps on the ITS too. On the question of the wing on the CTR: the CTR looks better with the wing and the ITS looks better without it, at least based on the few photoshopped images of the ITS with a wing. Like the small details in the Integra which harks back to the Integras of yesteryear, like the stamped Integra nameplate in the front and rear bumper, and the opening in the bumper below the hatch opening to allow to open the boot.

But for me, there's no real winner in this department. That's mostly because of the fender flares on the ITS. If you prefer stuck on fenders, the ITS wins the styling contest hands down. But if you're someone like me who appreciates the wide body look of the CTR because of the bespoke fenders, you might swing towards the CTR. In the process of creating bespoke fenders for the CTR, Honda had to create a wider rear door for it as well, and that costs a lot, so I appreciate the extra effort and costs put in on the Honda side. The Honda also has fender vents and side skirts to accentuate that wide body look, which is what I prefer. The front fender on the ITS is bespoke too, but Acura had to make it look like the rear one which is stuck on, so both the rear and the front end up looking stuck on. You're free to form on your opinion on this section: in my opinion though, give the ITS bespoke fenders and there's no contest, but without it, my heart goes towards the CTR overall.

The interior:

Again subjective, so totally upto what you prefer. I like that the ITS has a heads up display and much better looking speaker grills (sounding not so much; prefer the Bose on the CTR vs. the bass heavy ELS on the ITS). Like the leather padding on the passenger side of the dash on the ITS, and the fact that you get to choose interior colors, so more freedom there. More features on the ITS too, like front and rear parking sensors, heads up display, tire pressure monitors, leather trim, heated seats, etc.

On the CTR side, I prefer the dashboard design, mostly because of the honeycomb mesh which runs across the width of the dash and makes it stand out, while the ITS dash looks contemporary in comparison. Prefer the teardrop aluminum shift knob of the CTR (similar to the S2000) to the optional titanium one on the ITS (similar to the Integra Type R), mostly because I use my palm to shift and the CTR's feels better to the palm. Didn't get to sit in an ITS with the default shift knob, this car was all optioned out. You also don't get the R mode gauge cluster of the CTR (homage to the S2000) with the rev counter up top and all the telemetry you need (oil pressure, turbo boost pressure, oil temperature, coolant temperature, etc.) on the ITS, which is my default cluster even when daily driving.

Then there's the topic of seats. No subjective opinion here: ITS front seats are larger so the healthier folk would be more comfortable than the CTR which has snug front seats. However, me and the Acura salesperson were both surprised to find that the CTR has the softer seat. The cushioning on the CTR is softer. The ITS has a good driver's seat as well, with electric adjustment (which the CTR doesn't get), but the CTR is simply feels more comfortable to sit in. Mind you, the bolstering on the CTR is tight, so healthier folk won't fit properly, but for those who fit in either, would probably have similar findings. ITS gets lumbar adjustment as well but the lumbar support on the CTR doesn't need any adjustment, they're that good. Wish they gave the ITS the CTR seats.

As for the rear bench, they're identical: the Honda has slightly better headroom if that matters: I'm 5'9", and my head brushes in the ITS while I have two fingers worth of headroom in the CTR. Honda keeps suede as the material of choice for the front seats and door pads, while the ITS goes for leather and a little bit of suede on the central portion of the front seats. Rear seats leather in the ITS, while the CTR plays "it's just a Civic" card and gives cloth/fabric. Boot space is almost the same on either cars, although the CTR can probably fit an extra carry on bag because of the less aggressive sloping rear end, and larger and deeper opening.

The driving:

Most of you might be interested in this part, so saved the best for the last. Both cars share the same drive train, so I didn't expect much differences. However, Acura has done a great job tuning the drive train and suspension, and you can tell that the ITS is a better daily driver hands down. You get more torque lower down in the rev range, so you get more acceleration without as much revs as in the CTR. I never thought 5hp would be a difference I could feel in either cars, but the Acura with its better bottom end feels like it can pull on the CTR in the initial revs. Didn't really push the ITS too much because the salesperson told me it was going to be a customer car down the line, but for the couple of times gave it the beans, it felt like the ITS had a better initial launch but fizzled out in higher revs as compared to the CTR. While both are turbos, the CTR feels closer to that old Honda naturally aspirated K series feel than the ITS, mostly because of the better feeling top end. ITS though does better in daily traffic because of less gear shifting required because of the better low end torque.

The suspension on the ITS feels better as well. The Honda feels overdamped especially in +R mode which has me bouncing hilariously over even the smoothest of highways. Comfort mode is the way to go on that car for sure for daily driving. That's what got me in the ITS: it was in Sport + which is the most aggressive setting and the suspension felt like it was in Sport mode (the middle mode) on the CTR. In comfort mode, the ITS suspension is as compliant as any other new car with low profile tires: you can still feel the road surface, but the effect is dampened to not be a bother. CTR comfort mode on the other hand still makes you aware of the road surface, and expansion joints on bridges can be a bother in the CTR, not in the ITS.

The sound deadening on the ITS is better than the CTR as well, which is noticeable, especially because the CTR has a lot of tire noise while doing highway speeds. While I didn't take the ITS on the highway, I could sense the lower noise levels even when it came to outside traffic. It's ironic then when you notice that the ITS has a louder exhaust. Acura took out a resonator from the CTR exhaust because of less stricter US regulations while the CTR had to keep it to comply with stricter European and Japanese norms. My biggest complaint with the CTR is that it doesn't have the noise to match the looks and speed of the car, and that has been addressed in the ITS. In Sport +, the ITS even adds some pops and bangs to the mix. Not as aggressive sounding as an Elantra N, but definitely audible and in my opinion the sweet Goldilocks spot between the quiet CTR and the raucous Elantra N.

Can't comment on the handling much because I didn't push it that much, but they feel similar if not identical. CTR felt slightly more assuring while taking a turn enthusiastically, but it's hardly noticeable in daily driving and both feel great handlers for what are essentially front wheel drive cars.

Conclusion:

So, what do I think? Well, I am not lying when I say that I wanted to find fault with the ITS because I have a CTR, and wanted to prove that the CTR is better. However, I can't, because the ITS is a great product overall. It all boils down to what you prefer in a car. Acura took most of the complaints with the CTR, namely stiff ride on everyday roads, and a quiet exhaust, and rectified them. In isolation then, it stands out as being the only luxurious car with a sweet manual gearbox and with a premium badge in this price segment. It's definitely better for you if you're just using the car for daily driving. This is the car for anyone who wants the CTR but can't keep up with the stiff ride, wants something slightly under the radar (especially without the big wing), prefers the looks of the Integra, hates the quiet exhaust of the CTR, or can't get hold of one considering how low the production numbers for the CTR currently are. And that brings me to my next point.

No doubt Acura have done a stellar job with the ITS, so much so that I was contemplating trading in the CTR if not for the markup on the ITS. However, on the drive back home, when I drove the CTR, it struck me: the Type R seats, the R mode gauge cluster, the in-built Log R Honda telemetry app, the red carpets, the suede material, the better gear knob shape: the CTR felt more cohesive in the sum of its parts, and the ITS started to feel like a mish-mash of Acura and Honda parts together in comparison. Some might argue, most of the above stuff can be added to the ITS later on. However, the CTR comes with all the stuff which makes it special from the factory. The bespoke fenders, the fender vents, the wing, the better integrated rear diffuser, with the interior bits, it all comes together perfectly in the CTR. Then there's the place of production. A Japanese car made in Japan holds higher reverence in the car world than one made in the US, which is why fans go gaga over JDM versions of existing USDM cars. I don't really mind where the car is made, but then I remembered the misaligned hatch shut line on the ITS I saw a few days ago in a parking lot, and I checked the CTR for any misaligned panels or inconsistent panel gaps. None found.

Then I saw the serialized plate in the CTR. For some, it is just a plate with a number, and that's ok; the ITS is the car amongst these two for you. But for the others who value the low production numbers, and are appreciative of the efforts and costs behind a seemingly small thing as bespoke fenders, or a homage to the S2000 in the gear knob shape or the gauge cluster, the CTR is the car to pick. It feels bespoke enough to be special, something which the Acura lacks.

The markups trend for either cars tell a similar story as well. Forums indicate that quite a few people have been able to land an ITS at MSRP or a low markup, while with the CTR you had to know the dealership owner or general manager personally, or be on a list for long enough to get close to the MSRP. No doubt there are absurd markups on the ITS too, but they are not as many in number or value as the CTR saw initially. Acura makes about 1500 in a single batch (not per month numbers) for the North American market, while Honda makes 400 a month for the entire world. Think about it this way: the JDM Integra Type R from 25 years ago exists, as does the comparatively newer and more luxurious USDM Acura RSX Type S. Which one holds higher sentimental (as well as monetary) value in the car world?

I'm keeping my Civic Type R.

Thanks for the comparison. I had a ITR and S2k and would have had no issues DD them. I dont care about comfort or amenities. Hell, I still feel weird using my back up cam. But teh CTR as a daily would have me worrying about theft (jsut like the ITR), bolsters on the seat getting destroyed, red carpet needing constant cleaning. If the CTR ends up being cheaper, then I'll YOLO and abuse it as a DD/track. But the ITS makes me feel less uptight overall so secretly, Im leaning that way.

 

[1971Camaro]

I just wanted to comment on how the difference between the CW color vs. the ITS white is very pronounced here. Interesting comparison.

 

[CTR39322]

While out on a bike ride, I stopped to check out the new ITS (dealer was closed). The sticker price was 63k with dealer installed accessories, Whoever pays 63k for this car is insane in my opinion. There was mis alignment between the hood and the front fascia, also since the car was white, you can see gaps at the rear fender extensions which are tacked on. Though my FK8’s (41k car OTD) rear fenders are also tacked on, my car is black so you can’t really see the gaps. Not interested at all of letting go of my FK8 for this ITS, maybe I’ll let it go for a FL5 if a decent deal (close to MSRP) in the future comes up.

 

[Clark_Kent]

While out on a bike ride, I stopped to check out the new ITS (dealer was closed). The sticker price was 63k with dealer installed accessories, Whoever pays 63k for this car is insane in my opinion. There was mis alignment between the hood and the front fascia, also since the car was white, you can see gaps at the rear fender extensions which are tacked on. Though my FK8’s (41k car OTD) rear fenders are also tacked on, my car is black so you can’t really see the gaps. Not interested at all of letting go of my FK8 for this ITS, maybe I’ll let it go for a FL5 if a decent deal (close to MSRP) in the future comes up.

You can see the misalignment of the panels from distance in your photo. Looks awful. The vehicle I test drove didn't have that issue. I posted photos in the thread I started a couple weeks back.

 

[Integra23]

While out on a bike ride, I stopped to check out the new ITS (dealer was closed). The sticker price was 63k with dealer installed accessories, Whoever pays 63k for this car is insane in my opinion. There was mis alignment between the hood and the front fascia, also since the car was white, you can see gaps at the rear fender extensions which are tacked on. Though my FK8’s (41k car OTD) rear fenders are also tacked on, my car is black so you can’t really see the gaps. Not interested at all of letting go of my FK8 for this ITS, maybe I’ll let it go for a FL5 if a decent deal (close to MSRP) in the future comes up.

I wonder if some of this is caused by dealer installed accessories? Either way it shows the lack of care for the vehicle.

 

[VPMotors]

Yep, also misaligned rear hatch shutline. Doesn't merge well with the roofline. Might not be a manufacturing defect but cannot unsee that.

 

[Integra23]

Yep, also misaligned rear hatch shutline. Doesn't merge well with the roofline. Might not be a manufacturing defect but cannot unsee that.

That has to be lighting or something. I have not seen that before nor I don't know how it could happen

 

[VPMotors]

That has to be lighting or something. I have not seen that before nor I don't know how it could happen

Civics didn't have that issue under the same lighting. Also, felt it just to make sure; it definitely didn't merge perfectly with the roofline.

Sponsored