2024 Acura Integra Type S Observations

[sfedai0]

I will take whichever ends up being cheaper. If I get the CTR, I'll feel slightly more content because of my past ownership of a ITR, but more stress because it will be a DD. If I end up with a ITS, I might be overrall happier because it might not stand out as much and itsnt as "limited" or "exclusive" as the CTR, but still has all the performance and looks that I want.

Sponsored

 

[Cosmo]

From your drive test, how was the shifter action compare to the FL5 ? TheTopher described it as different than the FL5 but did not elaborate .... How about the difference in the steering wheel precision/feeling ?

 

[Clark_Kent]

From your drive test, how was the shifter action compare to the FL5 ? TheTopher described it as different than the FL5 but did not elaborate .... How about the difference in the steering wheel precision/feeling ?

The transmission felt like the FL5 CTR. It's fantastic. There's an appropriate amount of heft from the knob, throws are short and precise, the gearbox had the right amount of mechanical feel to it, and the rev matching system is good (not great). If there's a difference from the FL5, it was imperceptible to me.

Overall, the steering felt about as sharp and focused as the FL5 CTR. I didn't take it through it's paces in every Drive Mode and under several scenarios due to time. I did notice there wasn't as much weight to the steering wheel in the Comfort Drive Mode when compared to the FL5 CTR in the same drive setting. I would need more seat time to provide a more insightful response on steering feel, input, and feedback.

 

[urbo73]

So after reading you post this morning, I decided to go to the closest Acura dealer and take a look for myself at the ITS. I got there to find two of them out front - one blue and one white. I went inside and spoke with one of the salespeople, and told them I had a CTR and was curious to take a look at the ITS as a possible "upgrade". He was very nice and enthusiastic about letting me see the car and even going for a test drive, something I didn't think I would be able to do. The white one was fully loaded, and this was the car designated for test drives.

My first impression was that it looked much better in person than in any video or photo I've seen. It's pretty low and wide and has a very nice stance. It has some nice lines and the rear is not as bad as I thought it would be, with the diffuser coming up into the bumper. It works. I can't say the same for the tacked on fender bits in the rear. They just look bad to me and don't work at all. The interior had the Alcantara steering wheel, the CTR-like shift knob, and the read leather/black suede seats. I felt it was too busy compared to the more spartan, clean, and cohesive CTR interior, which I much prefer.

On to the drive. I took it relatively easy, as the car only had 46 miles on it, and I didn't want to be a jerk and drive it hard knowing someone would buy it. I adjusted my set and set the drive mode to INDIVIDUAL, so I could quickly change settings while driving - namely the suspension and engine settings. I started with the engine in SPORT+ and the suspension in SPORT. The exhaust note was evident from the get go, but only in SPORT+ really. Pops and crackles when off the gas, etc. In SPORT it was pretty quiet, and I didn't even try COMFORT. The suspension I found to be very compliant, and I would stay almost two steps softer compared to the R, not one, meaning SPORT+ on the ITS was almost like COMFORT in the R. So quite a big difference in how it absorbed road imperfections and bumps. Power felt smoother and there was of course less noise too. Everything was smooth - that's a good word to describe the car. Fast and smooth. But for me, ultimately not all that special. I've had this experience in other cars I've owned - namely BMWs and Audis. More power, faster, smooth, quiet, compliant, but ultimately less engaging.

Which brings me to my main point - engagement. The reason I got the CTR was because it's so engaging. It's very special. It's raw, noisy, edgy, and that's important to me. It has character. It feels faster than you're going, and not the opposite like the ITS. This is huge for me and for driving engagement. I prefer a car that feels faster vs. the other way around. The CTR vibrates and you feel and hear more, and I love that. The suspension is harsher for sure, but I like it. The ITS is smooth and you feel and hear less. I don't want more NVH deadening in the CTR. I don't want less rattles. I don't want power seats or auto-dimming mirrors. I like it basic as it is. I'm actually glad in the US we don't get parking sensors or auto-folding mirrors. There's something about its simplicity and rawness that I find very appealing. And the ITS trends in the opposite direction. And I can see why some would totally love that for daily driving or for driving in general. It all depends on individual preferences and where you're coming from car-wise.

When I was done, I got in my CTR and everything just felt better - the seats of course are a huge part of that. The ITS seats are good, but they don't feel different to the many car seats I've been in over the years. Good, but nothing unique or special. The CTR seats are something else, and you know it when you sit in them. But I also realize the CTR seats are not for everyone either.

As I was driving out of the lot, I looked back at the ITS and the other cars there. And they kind of all looked similar - that same front. It's not a bad front, not at all. But I felt like the ITS looked so close to the regular Integra and the TLX, etc. The CTR stands out more from the other Civics. It's really a special car, and I made the right decision. And yes, it's my daily.

 

[RickyJeezus]

I've been saying this since the pricing for the ITS was announced...

The ITS is going to be a great USED buy....if you want to buy NEW, Type R is the way to go...

 

[Clark_Kent]

So after reading you post this morning, I decided to go to the closest Acura dealer and take a look for myself at the ITS. I got there to find two of them out front - one blue and one white. I went inside and spoke with one of the salespeople, and told them I had a CTR and was curious to take a look at the ITS as a possible "upgrade". He was very nice and enthusiastic about letting me see the car and even going for a test drive, something I didn't think I would be able to do. The white one was fully loaded, and this was the car designated for test drives.

My first impression was that it looked much better in person than in any video or photo I've seen. It's pretty low and wide and has a very nice stance. It has some nice lines and the rear is not as bad as I thought it would be, with the diffuser coming up into the bumper. It works. I can't say the same for the tacked on fender bits in the rear. They just look bad to me and don't work at all. The interior had the Alcantara steering wheel, the CTR-like shift knob, and the read leather/black suede seats. I felt it was too busy compared to the more spartan, clean, and cohesive CTR interior, which I much prefer.

On to the drive. I took it relatively easy, as the car only had 46 miles on it, and I didn't want to be a jerk and drive it hard knowing someone would buy it. I adjusted my set and set the drive mode to INDIVIDUAL, so I could quickly change settings while driving - namely the suspension and engine settings. I started with the engine in SPORT+ and the suspension in SPORT. The exhaust note was evident from the get go, but only in SPORT+ really. Pops and crackles when off the gas, etc. In SPORT it was pretty quiet, and I didn't even try COMFORT. The suspension I found to be very compliant, and I would stay almost two steps softer compared to the R, not one, meaning SPORT+ on the ITS was almost like COMFORT in the R. So quite a big difference in how it absorbed road imperfections and bumps. Power felt smoother and there was of course less noise too. Everything was smooth - that's a good word to describe the car. Fast and smooth. But for me, ultimately not all that special. I've had this experience in other cars I've owned - namely BMWs and Audis. More power, faster, smooth, quiet, compliant, but ultimately less engaging.

Which brings me to my main point - engagement. The reason I got the CTR was because it's so engaging. It's very special. It's raw, noisy, edgy, and that's important to me. It has character. It feels faster than you're going, and not the opposite like the ITS. This is huge for me and for driving engagement. I prefer a car that feels faster vs. the other way around. The CTR vibrates and you feel and hear more, and I love that. The suspension is harsher for sure, but I like it. The ITS is smooth and you feel and hear less. I don't want more NHV in the CTR. I don't want less rattles. I don't want power seats or auto-dimming mirrors. I like it basic as it is. I'm actually glad in the US we don't get parking sensors or auto-folding mirrors. There's something about its simplicity and rawness that I find very appealing. And the ITS trends in the opposite direction. And I can see why some would totally love that for daily driving or for driving in general. It all depends on individual preferences and where you're coming from car-wise.

When I was done, I got in my CTR and everything just felt better - the seats of course are a huge part of that. The ITS seats are good, but they don't feel different to the many car seats I've been in over the years. Good, but nothing unique or special. The CTR seats are something else, and you know it when you sit in them. But I also realize the CTR seats are not for everyone either.

As I was driving out of the lot, I looked back at the ITS and the other cars there. And they kind of all looked similar - that same front. It's not a bad front, not at all. But I felt like the ITS looked so close to the regular Integra and the TLX, etc. The CTR stands out more from the other Civics. It's really a special car, and I made the right decision. And yes, it's my daily.

I appreciate your observations and I'm glad you went to drive it. These demos are at dealerships for this very reason, so take advantage. It may not always be like this.

I realize everyone has their own take on this stuff, and I have great appreciation for that, but it's good to see there's some alignment. A couple points you raise really resonate with me and I was actually nodding while reading your post.

1. The "it" Factor - The CTR really is a special car and while many of us who own one already know that, it becomes more evident when you drive the ITS. This isn't a shot at the ITS at all. The ITS is a good car and Acura did well enough putting it all together, but it's no CTR. From the unique interior of the CTR, to the numbered badges, to the noise, razor sharp steering feel, untamed power delivery, etc. ...there's nothing like it on the road at this time. That's an important distinction to make because I don't think most of the reputable reviewers will take it there. There's this prevailing thought by many that, the CTR and ITS are a 1:1 or are homogenous. In other words, if I can't get a CTR, I'll just get an ITS. There's no equivalency there IMHO. They're different tools for the same task and one will be better than the other depending on the use case. If you were team CTR all along and decided to shift to the ITS due to limited availability, I don't believe the car will ultimately satisfy you. I believe many will figure that out soon enough.

2. Exterior Styling - "As I was driving out of the lot, I looked back at the ITS and the other cars there. And they kind of all looked similar - that same front. It's not a bad front, not at all. But I felt like the ITS looked so close to the regular Integra and the TLX, etc."

This is right on and exactly why I didn't notice the ITS immediately driving into the dealership. It largely looked like all the other Acuras around it. It just, blended in. After hearing / reading so much about the car over the months I expected this sort of larger than life presence and I didn't get that. That was a bit of a disappointment because I expected the ITS to immediately "announce" itself visually, if that makes sense.

 

[VT Skier]

Great review, and I agree with almost all of it. Particularly the seats, which I found surprisingly bad.

 

[Cornercarver]

Excellent breakdown - actually a better analysis than the reviews I have seen.

Overall, sounds like a great car but a mixed bag as far as an opportunity missed to do even better.

Also sounds like Honda couldn't quite make up its mind. '

'Do we want edgy and hard core, or a refined sleeper?'

Let's go for refined sleeper:
So no wing, no red, no datalogger, clutch you can blow on to get it to work, and softer suspension setup. Check.'

'But it is a Type S, right?
So let's add crackles and pops, more speed, FK8 light styling, and a really good manual shifter. And lets add more bass to the audio.
Check.

And since the seats in the FL5 and FK8 before it were already the best around, let's change those and possibly screw them up.'

'Is everyone completely satisfied? No? Then we're done here.'

We will still sell every one.

 

[SKINNIE]

Neither car is better than the other. If you're in the market or waiting for a FL5. Go test drive the ITS and base your experience off that.

 

[Samurai1225]

Both very good observations and thoughts on the ITS. I've not yet seen one in person, but I think I will go to my local Acura dealership and try and drive one this weekend. For me there is definitely one miss on the exterior styling and that is the tacked on rear fender flares especially that little section attached to the rear door itself.

 

[TypeRD]

I’m with @urbo73. I knew the ITS was coming (eventually) and knew it would very likely be a GT version FL5…and that’s pretty much exactly what it is.

I made up my mind from the jump that I wanted the FL5. I wanted a more “raw,” minimalist, driver-oriented, vehicle and could 100% care less about heated seats, power folding mirrors, and all that extra creature comfort crap that is really unnecessary for this kind of car. It would’ve only jacked up the price further while not adding anything meaningful to what the car is meant for, nor the ownership experience.

 

[menikmati]

Which brings me to my main point - engagement. The reason I got the CTR was because it's so engaging. It's very special. It's raw, noisy, edgy, and that's important to me. It has character. It feels faster than you're going, and not the opposite like the ITS. This is huge for me and for driving engagement. I prefer a car that feels faster vs. the other way around. The CTR vibrates and you feel and hear more, and I love that. The suspension is harsher for sure, but I like it. The ITS is smooth and you feel and hear less. I don't want more NHV in the CTR. I don't want less rattles. I don't want power seats or auto-dimming mirrors. I like it basic as it is. I'm actually glad in the US we don't get parking sensors or auto-folding mirrors. There's something about its simplicity and rawness that I find very appealing. And the ITS trends in the opposite direction. And I can see why some would totally love that for daily driving or for driving in general. It all depends on individual preferences and where you're coming from car-wise.

Did you mean you don't want less NVH in the CTR as compared to the increased sound deadening/insulation of the ITS?

 

[urbo73]

Did you mean you don't want less NVH in the CTR as compared to the increased sound deadening/insulation of the ITS?

Yes

 

[Integra23]

What's wrong with the ITS seats?
I have never sat in racing seats other than the Recaro Ford ST seats. I found them way too narrow in the sholder area and it pushed me forward. Then again I probably have 80lbs on Topher and others who rave about the FL5 seats.

 

[Clark_Kent]

What's wrong with the ITS seats?
I have never sat in racing seats other than the Recaro Ford ST seats. I found them way too narrow in the sholder area and it pushed me forward. Then again I probably have 80lbs on Topher and others who rave about the FL5 seats.

Have you sat in the ITS seats? They're simply inadequate for a sports sedan of this caliber. The seats in my RSX Type S nearly twenty years ago were better. My expectation is a well bolstered seat that keeps the driver in place during spirited driving whether you're in the canyons or on a track (i.e., HPDE, AutoX, etc.). The ITS seats miss the mark.

Sponsored