Honda: Civic News
05-04-2011, 05:18 AM
#2281
Your Friendly Canadian
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Age: 31
Posts: 17,431
Received 1,485 Likes
on
1,049 Posts
SSFTSX, do you have stock in Honda or something?
05-04-2011, 04:49 PM
#2283
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,511
Received 842 Likes
on
524 Posts
I had a little bit of seat time behind the wheel of the 1G Focus (non-SVT)... in any case it definitely felt sportier than many other similar econoboxes. Perhaps not so surprising considering at least some pedigree must have been inherited from the SVT Contour. I'm sure even the latest Civic is boring compared to it's 10-year old counterpart... the 99-00 Civic Si was a really fun car, probably the best in its class at the time. While the 06 is fun too, it just can't compare to a car that was hundreds of pounds lighter. I don't know what went wrong there, the 06 Si formula works on paper - 8k redline, handles great... I'm not sure if it is off the top of my head, but it just feels slower than the 99 Si.
Continually stricter safety regulations will ultimately lead to heavier, and thus less agile cars. I'm not surprised. Haven't driven the 2G Focus nor have I cared to though... it's one of the most boring, uninspired cars out there.
As far as the 2012 Focus interior goes, I think the Civic is outclassed in terms of interior quality and styling (subjective of course). The Civic definitely impresses with its ability to get 40 mpg in standard trim with a 5-speed auto..... but see for yourself, these are the highest resolution photos I could find
Focus Titanium
http://www.phillyautoshow.com/wp-con...s-interior.jpg
Civic EX-L
http://www.gotbroken.com/wp-content/...or-Picture.jpg
very high resolution, so I just linked them. The Titanium may have higher trim plastics, but the non-navi Civic looks terrible IMO:
http://www.arabamoto.com/var/albums/...c_interior.jpg
The base Focus (S) isn't much better, but IMO it's definitely better. I definitely see the Nokia influence though
http://hopsandgears.com/wp-content/u...s_Interior.jpg
Continually stricter safety regulations will ultimately lead to heavier, and thus less agile cars. I'm not surprised. Haven't driven the 2G Focus nor have I cared to though... it's one of the most boring, uninspired cars out there.
As far as the 2012 Focus interior goes, I think the Civic is outclassed in terms of interior quality and styling (subjective of course). The Civic definitely impresses with its ability to get 40 mpg in standard trim with a 5-speed auto..... but see for yourself, these are the highest resolution photos I could find
Focus Titanium
http://www.phillyautoshow.com/wp-con...s-interior.jpg
Civic EX-L
http://www.gotbroken.com/wp-content/...or-Picture.jpg
very high resolution, so I just linked them. The Titanium may have higher trim plastics, but the non-navi Civic looks terrible IMO:
http://www.arabamoto.com/var/albums/...c_interior.jpg
The base Focus (S) isn't much better, but IMO it's definitely better. I definitely see the Nokia influence though
http://hopsandgears.com/wp-content/u...s_Interior.jpg
Yup, stricter regulations will lead to heavier cars in general. That's why I praise Honda for making the new Civic lighter than before while getting a stiffer chassis and a more roomy interior. Perhaps that's why the interior is not as good as before ( I still haven't sat in one yet by the way to feel/touch the interior). When you look at the competition, the Civic is pretty much the lightest one. The only one close to it is the Elantra. But the Elantra does not have the more expensive, more complicated, and HEAVIER multi-link rear suspension setup.
Anyways, from the photos...I'd say the Focus is more futuristic looking..but it's really hard to compare the material quality without actually touching it. Hopefully I will have time soon to go sit in one!
05-04-2011, 06:32 PM
#2284
The sizzle in the Steak
The Focus interior rips the Civic interior's head off with its bare hands and shits down its neck, then pisses on its corpse. Then the Focus interior sets that ugly heap on fire and lights up a cigar with the ashes.
I don't give a crap about how aerodynamic the Civic's buttons are or how well its towhook is designed, and I don't think anyone else does either.
Can you be more dramatic next time?
05-05-2011, 04:49 PM
#2285
Senior Moderator
2012 Si...
Righto...still 200HP. But, upped in a 2.4L engine...
http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...-si-coupe.html
This could be a new all time low for Honda. I've hit the refresh button on my browser about 30 times...
05-06-2011, 08:53 AM
#2287
Senior Moderator
Righto...still 200HP. But, upped in a 2.4L engine...
http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...-si-coupe.html
I think its pretty clear Honda took the easy way out with the Si and decided to dig into the parts pin and pull out the 2.4 rather than spend a cent on developing another engine more suited to this roll.
Sadly the majority of people won't care and it will sell great. Why not offer an AT as an option and maximize profits even more? Who cares at this point.
At least it looks pretty damn good.
05-06-2011, 09:48 AM
#2288
Back From The dead
Wow, what a dissapointment. Hard to imagine that for about $3000 more you can pick up an Optima SX turbo fully loaded.
05-06-2011, 10:53 AM
#2289
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,511
Received 842 Likes
on
524 Posts
Numbers appear identical to the 8th gen Si. This is supposed to be progress?
I think its pretty clear Honda took the easy way out with the Si and decided to dig into the parts pin and pull out the 2.4 rather than spend a cent on developing another engine more suited to this roll.
Sadly the majority of people won't care and it will sell great. Why not offer an AT as an option and maximize profits even more? Who cares at this point.
At least it looks pretty damn good.
I think its pretty clear Honda took the easy way out with the Si and decided to dig into the parts pin and pull out the 2.4 rather than spend a cent on developing another engine more suited to this roll.
Sadly the majority of people won't care and it will sell great. Why not offer an AT as an option and maximize profits even more? Who cares at this point.
At least it looks pretty damn good.
0-60mph: 7.5s
1/4 mile: 15.4@92.5mph
Braking (60mph to 0): 124ft
SKidpad: 0.88g
Slalom: 69.7mph
So the new one is indeed faster.
05-06-2011, 11:00 AM
#2290
Your Friendly Canadian
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Age: 31
Posts: 17,431
Received 1,485 Likes
on
1,049 Posts
I'd bet good money the increase in low-end torque is much appreciated in day-to-day driving, and probably the primary reason Honda went with the 2.4.
05-06-2011, 11:00 AM
#2291
Senior Moderator
Other Edmunds tests of the 8th gen.
and
So no, not really faster. But lets keep in mind test conditions etc. Unless they're tested head to head it will be difficult to determine for certain. The other mags have also tested a 8th gen at sub 7 to 60 so lets see what they do. But its a safe bet that this Si is more of the same performance wise, but easier to live with on a daily basis. Personally, if I was in the market for this car I'd take the K20 every time.
Comparison with their 2006 Si Coupe Test Numbers
Acceleration
0-45 mph (sec.) 4.8
0-60 mph (sec.) 7.2
0-75 mph (sec.) 10.1
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 15.1 @ 93.8
Braking
30-0 mph (ft.) 31.4
60-0 mph (ft.) 122.7
Handling
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 67.80
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) .84
Acceleration
0-45 mph (sec.) 4.8
0-60 mph (sec.) 7.2
0-75 mph (sec.) 10.1
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 15.1 @ 93.8
Braking
30-0 mph (ft.) 31.4
60-0 mph (ft.) 122.7
Handling
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 67.80
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) .84
Here's an 09 Sedan from Edmunds:
0 - 30 (sec): 3.0
0 - 45 (sec): 4.8
0 - 60 (sec): 7.0
0 - 75 (sec): 10.1
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 15.3 @ 93.0
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 6.7
30 - 0 (ft): 32
60 - 0 (ft): 123
Braking Rating: Good
Slalom (mph): 68.8
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.89
Handling Rating: Excellent
Db @ Idle: 45.1
Db @ Full Throttle: 85
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 69.4
0 - 30 (sec): 3.0
0 - 45 (sec): 4.8
0 - 60 (sec): 7.0
0 - 75 (sec): 10.1
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 15.3 @ 93.0
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 6.7
30 - 0 (ft): 32
60 - 0 (ft): 123
Braking Rating: Good
Slalom (mph): 68.8
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.89
Handling Rating: Excellent
Db @ Idle: 45.1
Db @ Full Throttle: 85
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 69.4
05-06-2011, 11:02 AM
#2292
The sizzle in the Steak
Why would anybody buy the Si when there are so many other great cars that meet or exceed in its class?
05-06-2011, 11:03 AM
#2293
Your Friendly Canadian
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Age: 31
Posts: 17,431
Received 1,485 Likes
on
1,049 Posts
Because it's a Honda Civic. Their aunt had one in 1996 and it was fantastic, so this 2011 one should be the same.
05-06-2011, 11:04 AM
#2294
אני עומד עם ישראל
But bros the 2.4L has way more potential lol. There is no replacement for displacement.
05-06-2011, 11:06 AM
#2295
Senior Moderator
At least it is up here. Those cars will easily run you into the mid 30's while an Si can be had for well under 30K. Then again they're performance is considerably more so
05-06-2011, 11:07 AM
#2296
Senior Moderator
Just going by what I'm reading over at TOV, no it doesn't. This verison of the 2.4 has been neutered by the lack of exhaust VTEC. It doesn't respond to mods nearly as well as the 2.4 that was in the 04-08 TSX.
05-06-2011, 11:10 AM
#2297
Your Friendly Canadian
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Age: 31
Posts: 17,431
Received 1,485 Likes
on
1,049 Posts
I imagine head swaps will be a popular mod for the moderately hardcore guys.
05-06-2011, 11:13 AM
#2298
Senior Moderator
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/201...onda-civic-ex/
Safe to say he didn't like it.
Safe to say he didn't like it.
It’s hard to see how the 2012 car could have inspired any of this passion. It’s a little roomier, and its fuel economy is the best yet for a run-of-the-mill Civic (if not quite best-in-class). But the design is clunky, the materials are cut-rate, and the driving experience is so dreadfully dull that even a Toyota Prius is a blast in comparison. Over the past few years Honda has repeatedly claimed to have remembered what made it great, and to be returning to those roots. While they’re at it, they might want to pay closer attention to what GM, Ford, and Hyundai have been up to. Perhaps this has happened, just not quite soon enough to help the new Civic. If so, we’ll be able to look back on the 2012 model year as a low point, after which the cars got better.
05-06-2011, 11:14 AM
#2299
Seems like deja vu... Honda introduced the 2002 Civic Si with a K20, albeit it wasn't the same high-revving K20 in the RSX-S. Still, it was a relatively huge jump in displacement compared to the 1.6L B16 in the 1999 Si. The extra low end torque was welcome but people who were used to the high revving nature of the B16 were disappointed.
The K24 isn't going to make everyone happy, but some people will like it more than the K20.
The K24 isn't going to make everyone happy, but some people will like it more than the K20.
05-06-2011, 11:17 AM
#2300
05-06-2011, 11:19 AM
#2301
why pay that much for a civic that clearly doesnt have its heart in the game 
I would not drop that much money for that kind of interior as well.
the k24z3 is VERY unfriendly to sw33t m0dz. Id go more in detail but there have been alotta threads in 2g tsx section where car gurus have discussed why it is a shitty engine to mod and really gimped performance wise.
I would not drop that much money for that kind of interior as well.
the k24z3 is VERY unfriendly to sw33t m0dz. Id go more in detail but there have been alotta threads in 2g tsx section where car gurus have discussed why it is a shitty engine to mod and really gimped performance wise.
05-06-2011, 12:48 PM
#2302
The sizzle in the Steak
While they’re at it, they might want to pay closer attention to what GM, Ford, and Hyundai have been up to. Perhaps this has happened, just not quite soon enough to help the new Civic. If so, we’ll be able to look back on the 2012 model year as a low point, after which the cars got better.
05-06-2011, 01:36 PM
#2303
Suzuka Master
yes, and whoever said the civic is much cheaper which is partly true, but dealers dont sell si's under msrp. At least the honda delaer i went to thats what the guy told me. The other cars base already come with a lot of stuff so options really arent necessary. But they can hit 30s optioned up fully. At least the GTI
05-06-2011, 05:42 PM
#2304
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,511
Received 842 Likes
on
524 Posts
Other Edmunds tests of the 8th gen.
and
So no, not really faster. But lets keep in mind test conditions etc. Unless they're tested head to head it will be difficult to determine for certain. The other mags have also tested a 8th gen at sub 7 to 60 so lets see what they do. But its a safe bet that this Si is more of the same performance wise, but easier to live with on a daily basis. Personally, if I was in the market for this car I'd take the K20 every time.
and
So no, not really faster. But lets keep in mind test conditions etc. Unless they're tested head to head it will be difficult to determine for certain. The other mags have also tested a 8th gen at sub 7 to 60 so lets see what they do. But its a safe bet that this Si is more of the same performance wise, but easier to live with on a daily basis. Personally, if I was in the market for this car I'd take the K20 every time.
05-08-2011, 11:40 PM
#2305
All else being equal it would have to be. The torque curve of the bigger engine would see to that.
05-08-2011, 11:47 PM
#2306
Seems like deja vu... Honda introduced the 2002 Civic Si with a K20, albeit it wasn't the same high-revving K20 in the RSX-S. Still, it was a relatively huge jump in displacement compared to the 1.6L B16 in the 1999 Si. The extra low end torque was welcome but people who were used to the high revving nature of the B16 were disappointed.
The K24 isn't going to make everyone happy, but some people will like it more than the K20.
The K24 isn't going to make everyone happy, but some people will like it more than the K20.
05-09-2011, 12:20 AM
#2307
I don't want to hear that crap. MAKE IT HAPPEN!For not much more cash you can get your hands on a GTI, MS3, WRX or a Ralliart (all of which will easily blow the doors off of a Civic Si) and, matter-of-factly all have much more discernible torque. A common denominator is that they're all turbocharged and I'd probably take any of them before the Si.
I'd put money on more people being happier with the B16 in the EM1 than the K20 in the EP3
I don't think an engine like the B16 has a place in contemporary cars, but that doesn't mean Honda can't make cars like the S2000 with its F20C.
05-09-2011, 12:29 AM
#2308
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,277
Received 2,793 Likes
on
1,988 Posts
never was a fan of the 07 or so civic si and certainly not a fan of the 2012.
05-09-2011, 01:38 AM
#2309
Team Owner
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Fontana, California
Age: 47
Posts: 30,991
Received 582 Likes
on
346 Posts
when it comes to buying a car, especially when it comes to seeing the name Honda. You'd think if they were that after eating so many brains they'd get the hint. 
05-09-2011, 10:31 AM
#2310
Safety Car
Gx
Honda’s plan to sell its Civic Natural Gas in all 50 states this fall positions the Japanese carmaker to take advantage of a market that American industry has been hesitant to enter.
But it’s a market that may blossom if Congress passes T. Boone Pickens’ Nat Gas Act.
The problem with compressed natural gas vehicles has been a lack of filling stations in the U.S. to keep them on the road. The problem with stations has been a lack of vehicles to keep them in business.
For this reason, American government and industry have settled on a strategy of converting fleets to natural gas, including public transit and government fleets, heavy-duty freight fleets that currently rely on diesel, and light-vehicle fleets like taxis that can refuel at a single location.
It takes a fleet to support a station, according to the Department of Energy, which offers this advice to people thinking of opening a compressed natural gas filling station:
"The 1st task is to identify customers who will use the station. How many vehicles will use it, and what type? Are there alternative fuel fleets in the area? [“In the past some people believed ‘if we build it they will come,’ but many speculative CNG stations have failed,”[/I] says Rob Adams, vice president of Marathon, which specializes in CNG station design. “If you don’t know who’s going to use the station, you shouldn’t build it.” There should be a base number of quantifiable customers, such as a local fleet of alternative fuel taxis, to get the station started, says Adams.
The U.S. approach has changed little since DOE published that best-practices brochure in 2003, even though the U.S. is much closer to tapping vast domestic sources of natural gas.
In testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee on Thursday, natural-gas-vehicle industry spokesman Richard Kolodziej emphasized the potential of natural gas to displace diesel fuel in heavy-duty trucking:
“While there are many options to displace gasoline in light duty vehicles, there are very few options to displace diesel,” he said. “If the role of the federal government is to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and diesel is one of the problems, natural gas has to be one of the alternatives.”
Kolodziej testified in support of House Resolution 1380 — the New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions, or NAT GAS Act — which would provide tax credits for companies to buy and manufacture natural gas vehicles and build refueling stations. The bi-partisan bill, part of the Pickens Plan, has broad support, including 180 co-signers.
In testimony, Kolodziej said the bill would help convert fleets to natural gas:
"The market tells us that vehicles are the highest value application of all natural-gas uses. Natural gas is the fastest growing alternative fuel globally…. Most of those are smaller sedans, but for a number of reasons, including the sheer geographic size of America, the strategy of the US NGV industry has been to focus on high fuel-use fleets: trash trucks, transit buses, short-haul 18-wheelers, school buses, urban delivery vehicles, shuttles of all kinds, and taxis.”
More stations for fleets will provide more stations for individual motorists—many stations perform double duty—and the bill should foster the market for natural gas vehicles across all sectors. There are about 112,000 NGVs on U.S. roads today compared to more than 12 million worldwide, according to NGVAmerica.org.
The Nat Gas Act will provide incentives for the production of natural gas vehicles in the U.S. Honda has been doing that since 1998, and the company believes now is the time to roll them out nationwide.
In September, a Honda executive told hybridcars.com the company planned to double sales. In April, it announced it will establish the Civic—long the only natural gas light-duty vehicle manufactured in the U.S.—as the 1st sold in all 50 states.
In a weekend story in The Nikkei [subscription], a Honda executive said, “the decision to go nationwide reflects the heightened interest in environmental cars in the U.S.” And this morning Platts quotes a Honda Motor spokeswoman saying the company believes there are enough stations: “American Honda Motor will expand sales of the model to all US states later this year as more stations now supply natural gas amid higher environmental concerns.”
Honda has offered the Civic GX to fleets since 1998, and to individual motorists in a few states since 2005. Honda’s answer to the station shortage has been the home gas compressor (see one in the photo), which sells for $4,500, with a $2,000 rebate, and reportedly takes 8 to 10 hours to refill the tank.
With the 2012 model—rebranded the “Honda Natural Gas”—there’s also a navigation system that displays refueling stations.
"For the 1st time ever, the Honda Satellite-Linked Navigation with voice recognition and FM Traffic is available in the Civic Natural Gas. The navigation system database uniquely includes retail fueling locations for CNG."
The Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price for the 2011 Civic GX is $25,490.
05-09-2011, 12:47 PM
#2311
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
I'm sure the new Si will sell pretty well since it's a Honda as well as other regular variants.
But I just wished Honda would put a little more effort into the Si models... I mean it's weird to say this since I drive a Mazda now, but I've always been a Honda fanboy from my high school days. I did consider getting the Si when I dumped my 3G TL 2 years ago, but the Si just wasn't any close to its competitors in every aspect of the performance measures. And the new one is basically the same shit.
I just wish Honda would step up its game for the next generation... so I can maybe think about driving a Honda car again someday.
But I just wished Honda would put a little more effort into the Si models... I mean it's weird to say this since I drive a Mazda now, but I've always been a Honda fanboy from my high school days. I did consider getting the Si when I dumped my 3G TL 2 years ago, but the Si just wasn't any close to its competitors in every aspect of the performance measures. And the new one is basically the same shit.
I just wish Honda would step up its game for the next generation... so I can maybe think about driving a Honda car again someday.
05-09-2011, 12:50 PM
#2312
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
To be fair, (although I'm not entirely up to speed on US pricing) the Si is considerably cheaper than a GTI, MazdaSpeed 3 and WRX.
At least it is up here. Those cars will easily run you into the mid 30's while an Si can be had for well under 30K. Then again they're performance is considerably more so
At least it is up here. Those cars will easily run you into the mid 30's while an Si can be had for well under 30K. Then again they're performance is considerably more so
Yes, you can load up the GTI with many goodies up to $30k, but you can definitely get one for pretty afforable price.
And I think getting a fully loaded GTI for like $30k is totally worth it in my opinion. It's just a great little car.
05-09-2011, 03:20 PM
#2313
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,511
Received 842 Likes
on
524 Posts
Put in a turbocharged K-series.... I don't think ANYONE will complain, I wouldn't. The K23 is too tall because of its top mount intercooler I don't want to hear that crap. MAKE IT HAPPEN!
For not much more cash you can get your hands on a GTI, MS3, WRX or a Ralliart (all of which will easily blow the doors off of a Civic Si) and, matter-of-factly all have much more discernible torque. A common denominator is that they're all turbocharged and I'd probably take any of them before the Si.
I'd put money on more people being happier with the B16 in the EM1 than the K20 in the EP3 I don't think an engine like the B16 has a place in contemporary cars, but that doesn't mean Honda can't make cars like the S2000 with its F20C.
I don't want to hear that crap. MAKE IT HAPPEN!For not much more cash you can get your hands on a GTI, MS3, WRX or a Ralliart (all of which will easily blow the doors off of a Civic Si) and, matter-of-factly all have much more discernible torque. A common denominator is that they're all turbocharged and I'd probably take any of them before the Si.
I'd put money on more people being happier with the B16 in the EM1 than the K20 in the EP3
I don't think an engine like the B16 has a place in contemporary cars, but that doesn't mean Honda can't make cars like the S2000 with its F20C.With that said, IMO, I'd take the 8th gen Si instead of the new one. 8000rpm is its character. It's a statement that says "hey I'm different, screw you turbocharged cars, high rpm for the win." But the new engine is too bread and butter. It's not faster than its competitor and it's also no longer unique.
Last edited by iforyou; 05-09-2011 at 03:22 PM.
05-09-2011, 03:48 PM
#2314
My opinion: the continuous comparison of the 9th gen to the EP3 hatchback is irrelevant. Solely on the basis that most people thought the hatch was ugly.
I don't think this new Civic Si or the complete lineup will be a huge hit, but I have a feeling that Honda has something significant in store for its MMC. They better...
I don't think this new Civic Si or the complete lineup will be a huge hit, but I have a feeling that Honda has something significant in store for its MMC. They better...
Last edited by TSX-Tuner; 05-09-2011 at 03:51 PM.
05-09-2011, 04:02 PM
#2315
Not sure about the Si, but the 8th gen Civic Type R is about 2 seconds faster on Tsukuba Circuit than the GTI, MS3, WRX, etc on a consistent basis. That's a lot for a short track (1:07 for the CTR). And obviously the test drivers are all professional race cars drivers, not those car journalists found in C/D, Motortrend, etc. You'd need a STI to marginally beat the Civic Type R. The Si is definitely not as hardcore as the Type R, but I'd imagine it's enough to keep up with the above cars.
With that said, IMO, I'd take the 8th gen Si instead of the new one. 8000rpm is its character. It's a statement that says "hey I'm different, screw you turbocharged cars, high rpm for the win." But the new engine is too bread and butter. It's not faster than its competitor and it's also no longer unique.
With that said, IMO, I'd take the 8th gen Si instead of the new one. 8000rpm is its character. It's a statement that says "hey I'm different, screw you turbocharged cars, high rpm for the win." But the new engine is too bread and butter. It's not faster than its competitor and it's also no longer unique.
The CTR is impressive for a FWD sedan, but at what cost? Even if it somehow started at $30k, I have to assume that's without AC, navigation, possibly no radio/power 'ease of use' options and undoubtedly less daily drivability. I can only speculate, but assuming it's built in Japan and must be imported, I suspect it will not be priced close enough to be worth it.
I also would take the 8G Si over the new one... as you mentioned, it no longer has the high-revving charm of the K20. The 9G does have much more torque, but I suspect it will still fall behind in the comparison tests, though one major thing it does have going for it is that it comes in at around $1k less than its closest competitor, the MS3 (IIRC)
05-09-2011, 04:12 PM
#2316
I wish natural gas could succeed... I really do.But there are hardly enough refueling stations, as that article highlights... and I hardly ever see NG vehicles around, for good reason. It seems more inconvenient than conventional fuel, it adds a lot of weight and cost to an existing car, as well as taking up additional cargo space, as well as having decreased range.
It makes sense for fleet vehicles... but I hardly see any Civic GXs around, let alone enough to be considered part of a fleet.
05-09-2011, 04:14 PM
#2317
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Not sure about the Si, but the 8th gen Civic Type R is about 2 seconds faster on Tsukuba Circuit than the GTI, MS3, WRX, etc on a consistent basis. That's a lot for a short track (1:07 for the CTR). And obviously the test drivers are all professional race cars drivers, not those car journalists found in C/D, Motortrend, etc. You'd need a STI to marginally beat the Civic Type R. The Si is definitely not as hardcore as the Type R, but I'd imagine it's enough to keep up with the above cars.
With that said, IMO, I'd take the 8th gen Si instead of the new one. 8000rpm is its character. It's a statement that says "hey I'm different, screw you turbocharged cars, high rpm for the win." But the new engine is too bread and butter. It's not faster than its competitor and it's also no longer unique.
With that said, IMO, I'd take the 8th gen Si instead of the new one. 8000rpm is its character. It's a statement that says "hey I'm different, screw you turbocharged cars, high rpm for the win." But the new engine is too bread and butter. It's not faster than its competitor and it's also no longer unique.
If the CTR gets released here in the states, I would buy it just because its the Type-R.
On a serious note, I have no idea how much the CTR is in the Japan, but I'm pretty sure it's substantially more than the Si, correct? Let's just make it $30k even for the CTR in the States. That's almost $7k more than the MS3 and probably about $5k more than the GTI and WRX. I'm guessing if you mod these cars with that leftover money, the CTR won't be able to keep up.
So, what I'm trying to say is, the Si is not much of value in comparison to its direct competitors such as MS3, GTI, and others.
Last edited by JS + XES; 05-09-2011 at 04:20 PM.
05-09-2011, 05:18 PM
#2318
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,511
Received 842 Likes
on
524 Posts
I guess in the US we have a unique situation, but I don't think the CTR would be competitive - thus Honda's omission of it from their NA lineup. Considering the Mugen Civic Si's MSRP scratched right at $30k, well above what the GTI, MS3 and WRX sticker at (the WRX is the most expensive of the bunch, starting at $25k).... it sounds elitist, but I doubt many people would put down close to mid $30k for a 'Civic' other than Honda diehards.
The CTR is impressive for a FWD sedan, but at what cost? Even if it somehow started at $30k, I have to assume that's without AC, navigation, possibly no radio/power 'ease of use' options and undoubtedly less daily drivability. I can only speculate, but assuming it's built in Japan and must be imported, I suspect it will not be priced close enough to be worth it.
I also would take the 8G Si over the new one... as you mentioned, it no longer has the high-revving charm of the K20. The 9G does have much more torque, but I suspect it will still fall behind in the comparison tests, though one major thing it does have going for it is that it comes in at around $1k less than its closest competitor, the MS3 (IIRC)
The CTR is impressive for a FWD sedan, but at what cost? Even if it somehow started at $30k, I have to assume that's without AC, navigation, possibly no radio/power 'ease of use' options and undoubtedly less daily drivability. I can only speculate, but assuming it's built in Japan and must be imported, I suspect it will not be priced close enough to be worth it.
I also would take the 8G Si over the new one... as you mentioned, it no longer has the high-revving charm of the K20. The 9G does have much more torque, but I suspect it will still fall behind in the comparison tests, though one major thing it does have going for it is that it comes in at around $1k less than its closest competitor, the MS3 (IIRC)
This is the exact reason why some of the idiot Si drivers always try to race me.. They think their cars are the Type-R.
If the CTR gets released here in the states, I would buy it just because its the Type-R.
On a serious note, I have no idea how much the CTR is in the Japan, but I'm pretty sure it's substantially more than the Si, correct? Let's just make it $30k even for the CTR in the States. That's almost $7k more than the MS3 and probably about $5k more than the GTI and WRX. I'm guessing if you mod these cars with that leftover money, the CTR won't be able to keep up.
So, what I'm trying to say is, the Si is not much of value in comparison to its direct competitors such as MS3, GTI, and others.
If the CTR gets released here in the states, I would buy it just because its the Type-R.
On a serious note, I have no idea how much the CTR is in the Japan, but I'm pretty sure it's substantially more than the Si, correct? Let's just make it $30k even for the CTR in the States. That's almost $7k more than the MS3 and probably about $5k more than the GTI and WRX. I'm guessing if you mod these cars with that leftover money, the CTR won't be able to keep up.
So, what I'm trying to say is, the Si is not much of value in comparison to its direct competitors such as MS3, GTI, and others.
In Japan, the CTR was priced at USD$25,000. Perhaps if they DID sell it here, it would be about $30k. That's more expensive than most competitors. On the other hand, Honda was only making 400 of them per month. And you know you are getting a very well designed and engineered car. It does have A/C and navi (in Japan at least, as options, I believe) too.
Value wise, it depends on how you see it. If value means straightline performance vs price, then no, the CTR won't be your best choice. It's designed like a race car instead. It's designed so that you can hit the track and have a lot of fun with it. I guess what I am getting at is that the CTR (or any Type R) is not designed to win in anything that can be quantified (ie, 0-60, 1/4 mile, hp/weight ratio, etc). Instead, it's designed to be the best FWD driver's car, it's designed to engage the driver as much as possible (heck, honda even got rid of the electric steering and replaced it with a conventional hydraulic steering wheel for better feel).
05-09-2011, 06:53 PM
#2319
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
The FD2 CTR is similar to the DC2 Integra - it's too hardcore for most people.
In Japan, the CTR was priced at USD$25,000. Perhaps if they DID sell it here, it would be about $30k. That's more expensive than most competitors. On the other hand, Honda was only making 400 of them per month. And you know you are getting a very well designed and engineered car. It does have A/C and navi (in Japan at least, as options, I believe) too.
Value wise, it depends on how you see it. If value means straightline performance vs price, then no, the CTR won't be your best choice. It's designed like a race car instead. It's designed so that you can hit the track and have a lot of fun with it. I guess what I am getting at is that the CTR (or any Type R) is not designed to win in anything that can be quantified (ie, 0-60, 1/4 mile, hp/weight ratio, etc). Instead, it's designed to be the best FWD driver's car, it's designed to engage the driver as much as possible (heck, honda even got rid of the electric steering and replaced it with a conventional hydraulic steering wheel for better feel).
In Japan, the CTR was priced at USD$25,000. Perhaps if they DID sell it here, it would be about $30k. That's more expensive than most competitors. On the other hand, Honda was only making 400 of them per month. And you know you are getting a very well designed and engineered car. It does have A/C and navi (in Japan at least, as options, I believe) too.
Value wise, it depends on how you see it. If value means straightline performance vs price, then no, the CTR won't be your best choice. It's designed like a race car instead. It's designed so that you can hit the track and have a lot of fun with it. I guess what I am getting at is that the CTR (or any Type R) is not designed to win in anything that can be quantified (ie, 0-60, 1/4 mile, hp/weight ratio, etc). Instead, it's designed to be the best FWD driver's car, it's designed to engage the driver as much as possible (heck, honda even got rid of the electric steering and replaced it with a conventional hydraulic steering wheel for better feel).
Even over at Mazdaspeed forum, surprisingly a lot more people are focused on tracking their cars than running at the drag strips.
When I was cross shopping the Si, MS3, GTI, and MiniS 2 years ago, I didn't think the Si had ANY advantage over other cars. And the new generation still doesn't sound very appealing in terms of overall value.
05-11-2011, 12:06 PM
#2320
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,511
Received 842 Likes
on
524 Posts
I think some of these cars are designed to get the best numbers (most hp, most torque, best acceleration, high g's, etc) given a price level. That doesn't mean they are not fun.
I understand what you are saying. On paper, the Si doesn't have much advantage. Least power, extremely low on torque, no DSG, no turbo, slow 0-60mph and 1/4 mile. However, what I like about the Si is its gearbox and its 8000rpm redline. Its shifter isn't the best from Honda, but it's still one of the best, if the the best in class. And as we all know, the K20A has great potential, for a true enthusiast, he/she always has the options to modify. A few inexpensive bolt-on's will get you a lot of whp. If you still want power, you can get yourself a turbo kit and heck the potential is pretty much limitless. Obviously that wouldn't be as easy but then a serious enthusiast who's looking for a lot of power wouldn't mind.
On the other hand, at this moment, I don't think the aftermarket potential of the K24 is as big. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I understand what you are saying. On paper, the Si doesn't have much advantage. Least power, extremely low on torque, no DSG, no turbo, slow 0-60mph and 1/4 mile. However, what I like about the Si is its gearbox and its 8000rpm redline. Its shifter isn't the best from Honda, but it's still one of the best, if the the best in class. And as we all know, the K20A has great potential, for a true enthusiast, he/she always has the options to modify. A few inexpensive bolt-on's will get you a lot of whp. If you still want power, you can get yourself a turbo kit and heck the potential is pretty much limitless. Obviously that wouldn't be as easy but then a serious enthusiast who's looking for a lot of power wouldn't mind.
On the other hand, at this moment, I don't think the aftermarket potential of the K24 is as big. Correct me if I'm wrong.