Sly Raskal

iTrader: (1)

The sedan does look like the TSX, no arguing there, but the Forte coupe has similarities to the civic as well.

speedemon90

All you said was the civic beats those in mpg. Ohh wait, you claimed the powertrain is better in the civic. But I'd happily disagree with that.

speedemon90

honestly I wouldnt want the si making 250+ hp, its to much for a fwd imo. With that honda will have to do something about torque steer, which is more cost going into the car, which then has to be cheapened somewhere else. 200 hp is good enough, but if they dont have that 8k redline, they definitely need the turbo. The 2.4 should add some hp and finally some torque to the vehicle. There's still a chance honda can get a high revving monster out of the 2.4. We'll see soon enough the engine options for this car.

VTEC Racer

Seriously, Dude. You REALLY need to learn to actually read the posts here. I never, ever, claimed that the Civic had a better powertrain than any car. Please, take a moment to go back and read the posts again.

speedemon90

VTEC Racer

And please explain to me how that is saying the Civic has a more advanced powertrain? I asked what car has a more advanced powertrain than the Civic that also outperforms it. Where on Earth did you get the idea that I said the Civic has a better powertrain? I take it reading comprehension wasn't your best subject in school.

speedemon90

It was my assumption that a car with a more advanced powertrain is a better powertrain

majin ssj eric

THose aren't LED's next to the fogs are they? You know the LED trend has gone too far when a Civic now has them....

phile

this is why I stopped responding to you cause you seriously need to read over your own posts and stop cherry picking.

this is how it pretty much went, in a nutshell: you asked for 2 competitors, 2 were given, you bring in mpg into the argument, then you jump back to it being about performance.

and aren't you just arguing semantics at this point? you want us to give you a car that has a more advanced powertrain than the Civic, but you don't mean to say the Civic has a better powertrain if none is to be given. You read that over and talk about reading comprehension.

dom

What I find pretty interesting is all the positive comments towards this car here and all over the web. There's been a lot of talk about how nothing Honda does can please the 'haters'. Yet even the haters seem pretty happy with this design so far.

Its pretty simple IMO. If its ugly the majority of comments will be negative. If its not, they won't.

Legend2TL

I will agree that most of the time it's true, though there are some exceptions.

1) Chevy pushrod V8 is not as advanced as it's competition but it's in many ways it's a better powertrain

2) The opposite case is the Chevy Vega, great case where advanced didn't equal better

Hapa DC5

Definitely. Reliability, safety, fuel economy should be a given since it's a Honda. Enthusiasts want Honda to make them easy on the eyes and perform well too.

Colin

Yes, it was called refinement and balance. It was 8000 RPM goodness. Something that others couldn't match, so (as you say) the others went with the easy route and put in a bigger engine (or turbo).

This is why I said I'm of two minds on the dilemma. Interestingly, do you know who set the Mazda 3 on it's current path? John Mendel.

Colin

Aww, c'mon, the Cosworth Vega was pumping out a whopping 110 Hp (old, old rating) at 5600 rpm in 1976! (of course around that time, the 'mightiest' Trans Am was making 200 hp from it's 6.6 liter engine)

VTEC Racer

You stopped responding, yet here we are again.

I take it you are in the same boat as demon.

Here is the ESL version:

I said that Honda is very good at doing more with less (referring to the Civic's powertrain). Moog disagreed. I asked him to provide me two cars that have a more advanced powertrain than the Civic AND also outperform it in the real world. Do you understand the question here? The car I am looking for is one that has a more advanced powertrain than the Civic that ALSO outperforms it in the real world(ما يملك سيارتين بوويرتراين أكثر تقدما من سيفيك أيضا أن تتفوق عليه في العالم الحقيقي؟, 两辆车有什么比公民更为先进的传动，也优于在现实世界吗?, Wat twee auto's een meer geavanceerde aandrijflijn dan de Civic hebben die ook beter presteert dan in de echte wereld?, Ano ang dalawang cars magkaroon ng isang mas advanced powertrain kaysa sa Civic na DIN outperforms ito sa tunay na mundo?, Quels sont les deux voitures ont une motorisation plus avancée que la Civic qui a également des performances bien supérieures dans le monde réel?, Was zwei Autos eine erweiterte Antriebsstrang als der Civic haben, dass auch übertrifft es in der realen Welt?, Ποια δύο αυτοκίνητα έχουν ένα πιο προηγμένο συστήματα μετάδοσης κίνησης, από το Civic που επίσης ξεπεράσει στον πραγματικό κόσμο?, दो कारों क्या सिविक की तुलना में एक और अधिक उन्नत powertrain है कि यह भी वास्तविक दुनिया में बेहतर साबित होती?, Quali sono le due vetture hanno un propulsore più avanzate rispetto al Civico che anche sorpassa nel mondo reale?, 2台の車はシビックよりも高度なパワートレインを持っているものでも、現実の世界で、それを上回 るか？, 이 자동차는 시빅보다 더 고급 파워 트레인을 가지고 무엇 살펴 현실 세계에서 그것을 능가하는 성능을 건가요?, Какие две машины имеют более продвинутый, чем трансмиссии Гражданская, что также превосходит его в реальном мире?, ¿Qué dos coches tienen un sistema de propulsión más avanzado que el Civic que también lo supera en el mundo real?, Iki araba Civic daha gelişmiş güç aktarım var ne AYRICA gerçek dünyada onu geride mi?, Những gì hai chiếc xe có một hệ thống động tiên tiến hơn so với Civic mà CŨNG tốt hơn nó trong thế giới thực?). Do you see where the question comes from now? My point was to prove that Honda always does more with less while the competition is usually doing less with more. Hence why I asked for cars that have "better" powertrains that can outperform the Civic in the real world. I REALLY can't explain it in any other way to be more understanding to you.

I'm not cherry picking anything. I asked for a couple cars, two were given, but they were both cars that DO NOT outperform the Civic. This is almost like but not quite a two-part question. More advanced powertrain and outperforming the Civic are supposed to be considered AS ONE when thinking of an answer to the question (to which NOBODY has responded to yet!).

I brought MPG into the topic? When you talk about the performance of a POWERTRAIN, what else can I include in the topic other than acceleration and MPG??? You wan't me to discuss how good the Golf handles because of its 6sp transmission or how good of a stopping distance the Mazda3 has because of its turbo? When discussing POWERTRAIN performance, especially that of compact economy cars, what else could I have been referring to other than MPG?

Again, the car that I am looking for is a car that has a more advanced powertrain than the Civic that ALSO (<--- Big word here, probably the most important one in the sentence) outperforms the Civic in the real world. I can name a bunch of cars that have a more "advanced" powertrain than the Civic. But of those cars that do have a more advanced powertrain, which ones outperform the Civic in the real world also. Do you understand the question? I am in no way at all trying to imply that the Civic has a better powertrain. Don't know how many times I can repeat it...

biker

Let's see what it looks like in production trim before making any final judgements.

Colin

I think its safe to say that none of the sheetmetal will change, only the plastic parts. So we'll see 'regular' bumper caps and possibly modded head and tail lights and obviously, smaller rims. With so little time before production, none of the 'hard' points will change. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't built with production tooling.

dom

When I was motoring @ 7K+ RPM in my GS-R I can assure you the last thing going through my mind was refinement and balance.

The others never really had anything comparable to a high revving Honda (Celica excluded) so I'm not sure its fair to suggest the took the easy way out. They were always headed down a different path.

I'm not suggesting Honda's making a mistake for going with the 2.4. How can we judge a vapor car? This is all just banter. Like I said, I don't think I'll ever be buying an Si (regular Civic maybe) so my opinion matters little. But I think we'd probably all be a little more excited with a 2.0L 225HP screamer or a smaller turbo with 225/220 lb-ft. I guess we'll see what the 2.4 brings to the Si.

And you can't tell me that the fact Honda no longer has anything that red lines at 8K or above saddens you some?

Colin

It only saddens me because they're listening to 'others' that want more torque vs. following their own path. There's the catch right? For all the bitching and moaning that "Honda doesn't listen to its consumers", the evidence is that they do. Americans (as a whole) don't like shifting, don't like small high revving engines and don't like small cars. IMO, this is why we have so many automatics, ever larger engines and larger Civics and Accords.

dom

Agreed. Reality can be a bitch.

But, does it sadden you or not?

dom

And I really hope we'll see a Civic hatch at some point. Not a wagon but a hatch ala Mazda 3, WRX or Golf. Something like what they had in Europe for the previous gen.

Colin

LOL, I'm of two minds....

biker

That's what had me - why even bother with a "concept" or "prototype" when production is right around the corner?

I guess then we won't have the "look how they watered it down for production" bitch session.

Colin

It's funny, my wants and needs have changed over time. After 18 years of two seat sports cars, I have my first (ever) 4 door. When I had the AP1, I couldn't imagine NOT having 9000 RPM to play with. When I had the AP2, we weren't tracking the car and I loved the added torque of the 2.2. With the TSX, I appreciate the quietness and the ability to actually talk on the phone while in the car. Having said that, I don't really care for the TSX that much. As I said, I'm of two minds

Colin

They still have 6 months of selling to do on the current car. Why does anyone 'mask' a car (or any consumer product) when they want to show it without really 'showing it'?

Aman

I dunno, one of the main complaints with the 8th gen Si was that you had to rev it pretty high to get any power/torque. I'm guessing this larger displacement engine will put low-end grunt ahead of high-end screaming. The car's still a Civic, and 99% of its time will be below 3500 rpm, so that's where horsepower/torque will be more useful.

I'd love to see a hard-core Type-R in a couple of years with a screamer though. And either a 3 or 5 door hatch. Could compete with the Cooper or Mazda3.

Anybody know if this will be sold in Japan? They discontinued the 8th gen there due to slow sales.

biker

6 months? I thought it'll start selling by April

phile

Good question, maybe they will as this new one is supposed to be smaller. I think smaller cars sell better over in Japan for obvious reasons.

NJ SHAWD

I had an 07SI. It was a great car and really seemed to pull when vtec kicked in. Yes you had to rev highish to get any power but that's why it's only available in a stick, no?

Colin

Whatever, I was only saying that they still need to sell the current car for a while

Colin

But that's the 'philosophical' question we're talking about. This is true to Honda's nature, it is a classic virtue of Honda's engines. The S600 made almost 100 hp/liter in 1964 by revving to 8500 rpm.

The question at hand is "is this something to complain about?" or is this what Honda is all about? Some might argue that the "complainers" are the reason that Honda has been changing and are partially responsible for the 'boring' state of affairs with the brand.

Aman

Let's hope so. But I think the Civic's almost done in Japan, smaller cars are in, but we're talking seriously small cars (kei-cars), not just a few inches shaved here and there, you know what I mean?

It must've been fun when you did rev high. Did you think the lack of low-end grunt was a big problem for daily commuting?

phile

I want to see a Civic wagon with a hatchback too.

dom

Exactly. Many of us grew up with the high revving Honda. Whether it was an Integra, Si, RSX etc... Honda's always been know for their high revving engines. But Aman is proving the point we touched on earlier that customers today don't care or want an 8K redline. So Honda is simply giving them what they want.

I doubt the TSX was to blame but the 2.4 IMO was nowhere near as fun as my 98 GS-R or any other high strung Honda I've ever driven was.

dom

Not at all.

speedemon90

I've never had the chance to drive a Honda that revs to 8k and I'm probably missing out but like aman said I hear a lot of complaints about the torque. As a daily driver which most people use the si as, having little torque I can see as a slight issue. But if Honda brings a bigger displacement won't they be able to solve that problem? The bigger displacement would solve that problem. And I'm sure Honda can pull 8k rpm out of a 2.4L 4cylinder. I know having 8k redline means less torque bit it will be better than before right? Torque is a measure of engine speed and horseper right?

dom

Its definitely not for everyone. But low end torque was never an issue for me. Then again the car I had only weighed about 2650 so....

From what I've read and I hope Colin can fill in the details, its not possible to get 8K out of the K24. Not reliably anyway.

ParaSurfer1979

Um wagons always have hatches. Have you seen a station wagon with a trunk?

Aman

I dunno. I think high-revvers definetely have a place in Honda. I think of it as more of a lateral movement than downgrading. It won't be that bad. My car has a K-series engine with a 6500 rpm redline, and I think they have a long stroke, they're known for being able to make more torque than horsepower, especially when modified. These motors still have a huge following, and are a popular swap. So I don't think it's something to complain about.

BUT like I said, high-revvers should have a place in Hondas. And if this new motor isn't that, then what do we have left? The Fit? Pretty much all Honda motors now aren't what they used to be. I don't even remember any other motor being praised like the Civic Si's for it's high revs.

On the flip side, it's also been docked for its lack of torque. It seems to be a coin-toss on what should be the priority: Low-end torque, or high-end fun. Nothing wrong with either. That's why I think there should be a Type-R version sometime in the future with the high-revver.


You'd think that, but IIRC the TSX's 2.4 didn't have much torque either, did it?

phile

meh I understood it, but I can see where you didn't. I meant to say and a hatchback version.