New Acura Integra Prototype Revealed! Priced ~$30,000, 1.5L VTEC Turbo

[bullitt]

The issue is in the styling. The new Integra is exceedingly clearly a Civic Hatch with different front and rear clips.

If they REALLY wanted to differentiate, then they would have come up with a hatchified version of the sedan (Meaning near the same body line as the sedan rather than the sportback of the hatch) and slapped a wing on the rear.

And I legit have no idea what to do to the front. And this is where I have to rage at some stupid in the thread regarding the look of the nose of the last Integra to now. You can't do those cars! It is actually illegal now! Pedestrian safety design elements have done more to force the change in front design than almost anything in over a century of automotive design.

Maybe the answer is more differences on the body skins or something but whatever it is, it is missing cause all I see is Civic. And again, I own a 22 Civic so there is nothing particularly wrong with this, I just hope the interior is that much better over my Touring trim to support that A badge.

And i can totally understand people having issue with that. What I don't get is people complaining it has the Si drivetrain and that its Civic based at all. It really feels like 90% of comments have 0 idea of what the Integras history is, even if they claim to own one.

Sponsored

 

[turbo lover]

And i can totally understand people having issue with that. What I don't get is people complaining it has the Si drivetrain and that its Civic based at all. It really feels like 90% of comments have 0 idea of what the Integras history is, even if they claim to own one.

So it sounds more like a revival of the Acura CSX instead of the Acura Integra. It might be a decent car but the name is wrong IMO.

With a name like the Integra, I was expecting a sporty lightweight competitor to the GT 86 or something similar.

 

[bullitt]

So it sounds more like a revival of the Acura CSX instead of the Acura Integra. It might be a decent car but the name is wrong IMO.

With a name like the Integra, I was expecting a sporty lightweight competitor to the GT 86 or something similar.

But that's not what it actually was. Thats like saying a new Ford Taurus is coming after 20yrs and expecting a new SHO when really the average Taurus sold was a v6 GL or LX. Enthusiasts may focus on the top end trim or the built version they did themselves, but that was a VERY small section of cars. The Integra was around like 12 yrs before the 3-4yrs that the ITR even existed in the US. Many don't even know a 4-door ITR was even made in Japan.

 

[turbo lover]

But that's not what it actually was. Thats like saying a new Ford Taurus is coming after 20yrs and expecting a new SHO when really the average Taurus sold was a v6 GL or LX. Enthusiasts may focus on the top end trim or the built version they did themselves, but that was a VERY small section of cars. The Integra was around like 12 yrs before the 3-4yrs that the ITR even existed in the US. Many don't even know a 4-door ITR was even made in Japan.

It's an Acura Civic. What does this car do differently to deserve the Integra name, compared to previous Acura Civics like the ILX, CSX, and EL? When somebody says the name Integra, an Acura Civic isn't the image that will come to the mind of most enthusiasts.

As a Civic and an Integra owner, I was hoping for something closer to the Integra coupe or RSX, and not a new ILX or CSX.

 

[bullitt]

It's an Acura Civic. What does this car do differently to deserve the Integra name, compared to previous Acura Civics like the ILX, CSX, and EL? When somebody says the name Integra, an Acura Civic isn't the image that will come to the mind of most enthusiasts.

As a Civic and an Integra owner, I was hoping for something closer to the Integra coupe or RSX, and not a new ILX or CSX.

When has the Integra EVER done anything different from the Civic but have a better interior? That was literally what the car was EVER intended to be going back to the 80's. Just because at one point it also had a great performance trim doesn't mean that's ALL the car was. How was the ILX different from any previous Integra? The fact Honda KILLED every coupe they have, and that Acura themselves showed an image that it was a 4door should have been two HUGE hints that it was going to be a 4 door. I'd have liked a Coupe too, but I also accept reality of todays markets.

 

[KIKUTWO]

What a joke. They take the Civic hatchback and call it an integra by putting their ugly front and rear facias on it?

 

[bullitt]

Does underlining my text make it better or more meaningful in someway? maybe I should do this all the time now.

 

[gtman]

As an old timer and an owner of one of the very first Integras imported into the US, at first I was disappointed with the new car. But, the reality is, this was never going to look like an '86 Integra no matter how much we would have liked to see more of an homage to that vehicle.

Overall, I like the new car and if Honda is smart they'll bump up power a bit over the Si and they might just attract not only buyers who wanted an Si hatch, but me too.

 

[RobbJK]

The integra was always just a dressed up civic... it may have existed with a different ethos than the civic... but just for fun I pulled up some pictures of the 95 civic coupe and a 95 integra coupe. Guess what? They're essentially the same cars with the exception of the front/rear fascias and the liftback on the integra. They were always just civic Si's with tweaked styling and nicer interior finishes, they were always the gateway into the Acura brand. And by those standards, this new Integra is exactly that. By hoping that it was somehow going to morph into something akin to the GR86 or Nissan Z goes completely against what the Integra always has been. Would it maybe have been closer to what enthusiasts really wanted? Closer in size and weight to the original? Sure, but it wouldn't have actually been anymore or less "Integra" than what they're coming out with. Compact cars have changed in the last 20 years.. they're not the super lightweight tin cans they were, and that's not Honda/Acura's fault. Also, sales and money matter. Acura is a company, one that has been on the brink for some time and needs something that will sell to more than just a handful of enthusiasts.

What people really want is for Honda/Acura to pull their heads out of their asses and introduce an actual dedicated sports coupe (prelude, S2000, CRX, etc). As a fan of Honda it's hard to look at Toyota that has 2 dedicated sports coupes (with a third MR2 replacement in the works) and wonder why Honda can't give us just ONE sports coupe in some form. Even if they made an Integra coupe, it would still be essentially exactly what we're getting minus 2 doors. But toyota developed those cars with other companies in order to cut costs... and people still complain (especially on the supra) that it isn't a worthy replacement for the models that existed previously. If Acura/Honda teamed up and decided to build a sports coupe with say... VW or Hyundai... people would still complain it wasn't a true replacement. And in a world where niche vehicles cost more than they can ever make up in sales... there's very few viable options brands can take without taking a huge loss.

The FWD coupe market is DEAD. Sad but true. The only remaining FWD "coupe" is the Veloster (of which 2 of its main trims just got the axe) and I honestly doubt they'll make a 3rd generation of it even in the N guise. Could they have made a RWD coupe instead to compete with the likes of the Z or 86? Sure, and sales would be further bottlenecked because RWD isn't DD friendly when you live in places with snowy icy winters. They could've also done a fully SH-AWD integra coupe... but say goodbye to that $30k starting price. At this point, we should appreciate that Honda and others still see smaller cars as profitable and they didn't just release a small crossover called the Integra-Cross. I'm not saying it's fair, or fun that we ended up in this Crossover obsessed situation... but companies have to adapt to current markets.

 

[bullitt]

The integra was always just a dressed up civic... it may have existed with a different ethos than the civic... but just for fun I pulled up some pictures of the 95 civic coupe and a 95 integra coupe. Guess what? They're essentially the same cars with the exception of the front/rear fascias and the liftback on the integra. They were always just civic Si's with tweaked styling and nicer interior finishes, they were always the gateway into the Acura brand. And by those standards, this new Integra is exactly that. By hoping that it was somehow going to morph into something akin to the GR86 or Nissan Z goes completely against what the Integra always has been. Would it maybe have been closer to what enthusiasts really wanted? Closer in size and weight to the original? Sure, but it wouldn't have actually been anymore or less "Integra" than what they're coming out with. Compact cars have changed in the last 20 years.. they're not the super lightweight tin cans they were, and that's not Honda/Acura's fault. Also, sales and money matter. Acura is a company, one that has been on the brink for some time and needs something that will sell to more than just a handful of enthusiasts.

What people really want is for Honda/Acura to pull their heads out of their asses and introduce an actual dedicated sports coupe (prelude, S2000, CRX, etc). As a fan of Honda it's hard to look at Toyota that has 2 dedicated sports coupes (with a third MR2 replacement in the works) and wonder why Honda can't give us just ONE sports coupe in some form. Even if they made an Integra coupe, it would still be essentially exactly what we're getting minus 2 doors. But toyota developed those cars with other companies in order to cut costs... and people still complain (especially on the supra) that it isn't a worthy replacement for the models that existed previously. If Acura/Honda teamed up and decided to build a sports coupe with say... VW or Hyundai... people would still complain it wasn't a true replacement. And in a world where niche vehicles cost more than they can ever make up in sales... there's very few viable options brands can take without taking a huge loss.

The FWD coupe market is DEAD. Sad but true. The only remaining FWD "coupe" is the Veloster (of which 2 of its main trims just got the axe) and I honestly doubt they'll make a 3rd generation of it even in the N guise. Could they have made a RWD coupe instead to compete with the likes of the Z or 86? Sure, and sales would be further bottlenecked because RWD isn't DD friendly when you live in places with snowy icy winters. They could've also done a fully SH-AWD integra coupe... but say goodbye to that $30k starting price. At this point, we should appreciate that Honda and others still see smaller cars as profitable and they didn't just release a small crossover called the Integra-Cross. I'm not saying it's fair, or fun that we ended up in this Crossover obsessed situation... but companies have to adapt to current markets.

I mean I'm not gonna like if they dropped the Type-S with the CTR engine and All Wheel Steering and SHAWD I'd be allll over it. It would be great to have a nice Prelude again, but Japan was BOOMING when those cars came out. Their economy was growing massively when all the amazing JDM cars came out in the 80's and 90's and after like the S2000/350Z I think the only 3 real sports cars to come out since then were the new GT-R, NSX, and the 86 twins. The WRX/STi just evolved, the EVO died, Si lost it's 2 door hatch and coupe, Prelude died, 2.5RS died, Eclipse and 3000GT died, Mitsu GTO died... since then things have just kind of stagnated or died.

 

[gtman]

Robb, good post but let me take you back to 1986. I was trading in my little CR-X for something a bit better. I looked at the Mazda RX7, Civic Si and the Acura Integra. As you said, the Integra was always based on the Civic platform but back then, the overall look was different.

The Si hatch was almost station wagon-like.

I fell in love with the Integra's sharper look.

 

[RobbJK]

I mean I'm not gonna like if they dropped the Type-S with the CTR engine and All Wheel Steering and SHAWD I'd be allll over it. It would be great to have a nice Prelude again, but Japan was BOOMING when those cars came out. Their economy was growing massively when all the amazing JDM cars came out in the 80's and 90's and after like the S2000/350Z I think the only 3 real sports cars to come out since then were the new GT-R, NSX, and the 86 twins. The WRX/STi just evolved, the EVO died, Si lost it's 2 door hatch and coupe, Prelude died, 2.5RS died, Eclipse and 3000GT died, Mitsu GTO died... since then things have just kind of stagnated or died.

Exactly... sadly a lot of those great cars were products of their time... and that time has passed. The new normal is a lot less fun and varied. But there are still great "small" DD worthy cars to be had... they're just not going to look exactly like what they did 20+ years ago. And with shifts towards EVs and greater use of Hybrids, things stand to change even more in the coming decade. Appreciate the old models for what they were, and adapt with the current reality and future.

 

[bullitt]

Robb, good post but let me take you back to 1986. I was trading in my little CR-X for something a bit better. I looked at the Mazda RX7, Civic Si and the Acura Integra. As you said, the Integra was always based on the Civic platform but back then, the look was totally different.

The Si hatch was almost station wagon-like.

I fell in love with the Integra's sharper look.

Liftback vs Hatch back aside really the issues are that popup headlights are no longer allowed on cars, and that sloping front ends do worse in crash tests so they really don't exist anymore. If a front end slopes down its usually because they went with a longer front bumper cover which on a smaller i4 car just makes it look oddly proportioned.

Also the 4 eye look was hated in so many places outside of the US Honda went back to regular headlights in some regions. I think their BEST chance to have tried a more retro front would have been to try to incorporate the RXS style light to the front, by way of having 2 small Bumps under them. Other than that I can't really think of anything else they could have done better. Maybe pinch up the grill a bit to make it LOOK more pointed from the front angle?

 

[RobbJK]

Robb, good post but let me take you back to 1986. I was trading in my little CR-X for something a bit better. I looked at the Mazda RX7, Civic Si and the Acura Integra. As you said, the Integra was always based on the Civic platform but back then, the look was totally different.

The Si hatch was almost station wagon-like.

I fell in love with the Integra's sharper look.

And yet my designer eye still sees more similarities than differences.... a different headlight treatment, and a different back end shape... the rest is VERY similar if not the same. I used the 90s versions as a point because those are the ones I remember (being born in 88).

Maybe they should've made the new Civic hatch a bit more "hatch" like so that the Integra could exist more with the coupe-like silhouette? They look the same at first glance, but the Integra prototype shares ZERO body panels with the civic hatch... they made more small changes than I think we've really been able to see from the very limited amount of images we have so far. Maybe the issue isn't the final form of the Integra, but that Honda didn't do more to differentiate the civic from it's cousin.

 

[gtman]

I used the 90s versions as a point because those are the ones I remember (being born in 88).

Man, I'm old. I have shoes older than you.

Sponsored