Honda: Civic News
05-11-2011, 12:41 PM
#2321
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.
In any case, the modding potential is much greater on forced induction cars compared to an N/A engine like in the Si. I'm sure you know this, but as an example APR offers several affordable reflashes for GTIs and basically any turbocharged VW/Audi. The gains are incredible for what they are.
Can't speak for other F/I cars but my friend has an Evo X and he made some huge gains with just intake, exhaust and a tune. Stock, Evo Xs dyno at around 220 whp.... after I/E/tune he made 310/310 to the wheels on 91 octane. After a bigger fuel pump and injectors to support E85 and the subsequent tune, he made 360/360 with no other changes. A bigger turbo and he ended up with 450/380.
I'm sure other F/I cars can see similar gains. I was there to help him and witness all of the changes so I know it doesn't take much.... by far the biggest pain was changing the clutch. To do the same with an Si will result in much more time and money spent. Many people have been calling for Honda to use more F/I... hopefully it will come in due time, but it looks like it won't happen for the Si for at least another 3 years, possibly 5 (MMC/FMC)
05-11-2011, 01:05 PM
#2322
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
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.
The aftermarket support for the GTIs is HUGE.
You can't just say the Si has so much potential and aftermarket support because the cars that we are talking about, which are the direct competitors of the Si all pretty much have sufficient support from multiple brands.
It is clear that the Si is behind its competitors, there's no doubt about it.
05-11-2011, 02:14 PM
#2323
8th Gear
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the new si is wack and im not even sure if you can swap different heads on to the block. like putting a a2 or z1 head on the new si k24 block. honda imo is trying to cut down on the tuning possibilities while other car companies make it easier and easier for you to mod their cars. like you guys mentioned the ms3 and gti. gti is slow as balls even with a lot of mods and stg 2 setup compared to a full bolt on rsx though. i have much more respect for mazda than VW for sure.
05-11-2011, 02:23 PM
#2324
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
what you smoking?GTI is super fking fast when modded.
Just check out the APR website for different stage kits for GTI.
05-11-2011, 02:41 PM
#2325
8th Gear
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05-11-2011, 02:48 PM
#2326
8th Gear
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.vwvortex.com/artman/publi...cle_2507.shtml
ok i like this one
but after you have done all that stuff you have a almost 35k-40k fwd car.
ok i like this one
but after you have done all that stuff you have a almost 35k-40k fwd car.
05-11-2011, 02:57 PM
#2327
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Please, let's stay on topic here. I got into aftermarket talk because iforyou brought it up. That's all.
05-11-2011, 03:08 PM
#2328
8th Gear
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ppl have been talking about aftermarket..
but ya lets stay on topic towards the k24 civic.
i hope someone finds out soon if the head can be swapped on the k24z3. i don't think it can
that would suck for anyone that wants to tune the new civics..
but ya lets stay on topic towards the k24 civic.
i hope someone finds out soon if the head can be swapped on the k24z3. i don't think it can
that would suck for anyone that wants to tune the new civics..
05-11-2011, 03:16 PM
#2329
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Take this and make a thread on Car Talk, I'm sure someone can give you some sound advice.
05-11-2011, 04:04 PM
#2331
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Good idea.
05-11-2011, 05:07 PM
#2332
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,492
Received 834 Likes
on
518 Posts
I wouldn't be surprised if the Si engine isn't as mod-friendly as the engine in the RSX-S.
I agree that the modding potential for F/I is much greater than N/A, that's why I said that if you want serious power on the Si, you can get a turbo kit. Obviously, if you just get bolt-on's for your Si, it won't match the power of a reflashed GTI/MS3.
Costco, I read an Edmunds Inside Line article about 2 years ago where they tested an Evo with a reflash and exhaust. It got an extra 100hp (not sure if thats whp or crank hp) just from that. So yea, I know the potential of FI. That's why those people who want high power from the K20 go for F/I.
JS+MS3, I never said the GTI and MS3 don't have great after market potential. I was just saying that the K series has a lot of aftermarket support. I don't think we have to worry too much about which car has the most potential, I'm sure the potential for each car is large enough for us.
Okay, my bad, I think I have gotten way too off topic. Anyways, my point is that, the previous Si offers something that its competitors don't have. The same cannot be said about the 9th gen. The main reason to buy a 8th gen Si is its high redline. It also comes with a great shifter and the car in general is very fun to drive. And for those who worry that it might be slow, a few bolt-on's will get you well over 200whp. 200+whp is not a lot these days, but the Si is also somewhat lighter than most cars in the segment. That makes up its rather low power. And if 200+whp in a 2800lb car is still not enough, you can go F/I.
I agree that the modding potential for F/I is much greater than N/A, that's why I said that if you want serious power on the Si, you can get a turbo kit. Obviously, if you just get bolt-on's for your Si, it won't match the power of a reflashed GTI/MS3.
Costco, I read an Edmunds Inside Line article about 2 years ago where they tested an Evo with a reflash and exhaust. It got an extra 100hp (not sure if thats whp or crank hp) just from that. So yea, I know the potential of FI. That's why those people who want high power from the K20 go for F/I.
JS+MS3, I never said the GTI and MS3 don't have great after market potential. I was just saying that the K series has a lot of aftermarket support. I don't think we have to worry too much about which car has the most potential, I'm sure the potential for each car is large enough for us.
Okay, my bad, I think I have gotten way too off topic. Anyways, my point is that, the previous Si offers something that its competitors don't have. The same cannot be said about the 9th gen. The main reason to buy a 8th gen Si is its high redline. It also comes with a great shifter and the car in general is very fun to drive. And for those who worry that it might be slow, a few bolt-on's will get you well over 200whp. 200+whp is not a lot these days, but the Si is also somewhat lighter than most cars in the segment. That makes up its rather low power. And if 200+whp in a 2800lb car is still not enough, you can go F/I.
05-11-2011, 07:04 PM
#2333
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
^ Agreed.
And don't get me wrong, like I said before, I'm a Honda fanboy. I just wish Honda would revamp its Si well enough to the point where I would pull the trigger on one. Right now, it's not going to happen. And they need to bring back the S2k........ because I'm leaning toward MX-5 as my next car for sure...
And don't get me wrong, like I said before, I'm a Honda fanboy. I just wish Honda would revamp its Si well enough to the point where I would pull the trigger on one. Right now, it's not going to happen. And they need to bring back the S2k........ because I'm leaning toward MX-5 as my next car for sure...
05-12-2011, 04:32 PM
#2334
05-16-2011, 07:01 AM
#2335
Safety Car
Test
2012 Honda Civic vs 2011 Toyota Prius:
Hybrid Mileage Test
We pitted the all-new 2012 Civic Hybrid against the reining mpg champ, the Toyota Prius, in our own mileage test. Can a Honda hybrid finally beat Toyota?
Hybrid Mileage Test
We pitted the all-new 2012 Civic Hybrid against the reining mpg champ, the Toyota Prius, in our own mileage test. Can a Honda hybrid finally beat Toyota?
Over most of the last decade, there has been one benchmark when it comes to automotive fuel efficiency: the Toyota Prius. Its reputation is so strong, in fact, that Toyota decided to create an entire family of Prius vehicles, beginning this year with the Prius V.
Since 1999, Honda has been producing its own line of hybrids. Its 1st, the Insight, was a fuel economy champ itself. But no Honda hybrid since has been able to match the Prius. That may change with the new 2012 Civic Hybrid, which is closer than ever to becoming "Honda's Prius."
To find out how Honda's latest stacks up against Toyota, we devised a 2-day, 2-route, 550-mile test to challenge the 2 fuel economy all-stars. 1 route covered the city streets to approximate a week's worth of commuting; the other was an all-highway blast to replicate a road trip. We filled up both cars for each route at the same pump, at the same gas station. Can the Prius hold onto its top spot as the reining fuel economy champ?
The Specs
Toyota uses a pair of electric motors, and a continuously variable transmission (CVT) to join them, mounted to the 1.8-liter 4-cylinder engine. This system allows the Prius to use several combinations of electric and/or gasoline power—including an all-electric mode. There's even an EV switch that locks the Prius in battery mode until the range of the 6.5 amp hour nickel-metal hydride pack is used up. Toyota delivers a total system horsepower of 134.
Honda's system, meanwhile, is very similar to the last Civic Hybrid and the current Insight. The electric motor sits in between the CVT and the gasoline engine. So, unlike the Prius, the gas engine in the Civic must always turn—when in electric cruise mode, the gas engine essentially freewheels. The Civic's 4 cylinder has grown to 1.5-liters from 1.3-liters. And when combined with the new, more powerful 23 hp electric motor, it delivers 110 system horsepower. But the big news is the lighter and more powerful 4.5 amp hour lithium-ion battery pack (still mounted behind the rear seats).
The Prius can become expensive quickly as you add options like the self-parking system. It's not uncommon to see a fully loaded Prius sticker for close to $35,000. The new Civic Hybrid doesn't offer these options, so it is generally much less expensive. We opted to test a $24,369 Toyota Prius 2 model against a $27,500 Civic Hybrid Nav model.
The EPA rates the Prius at 51mpg city and 48 mpg on the highway, while the 2012 Civic Hybrid is rated at 44 mpg for both city and highway. But how do they handle real world testing?
The Highway Drive
Beginning in Santa Monica, we cruised up the California coast to U.S. Route 101 and pressed onward, north of Santa Maria. To even out any differences in driving style between PM's testers, we switched cars often and locked the cruise control at or below 70 mph whenever possible.
The Civic may have an all-new, more aerodynamic skin, but beneath it the chassis tuning feels quite similar to the last Civic Hybrid we tested. Actually, of any hybrid we've tested, this new Honda comes the closest to the ride quality of the Prius—partly because they ride on the same 196/65R15 Bridgestone Ecopia tires.
The Civic's new dash and display look much like the Prius's, except they are located in front of the driver's sight line and easier to read. The Prius's futuristic dash lets everyone know that you've got plenty of advanced tech onboard. But the fresh, modern dash and center console of the Civic is more inviting if you prefer a conventional car, which we do. Both cars are far from luxurious, however. Hard plastic covers most of the interior.
Slide into the backseats, and the 2 cars appear to have equal headroom. But there's a bit less legroom in the Honda, and its roofline requires that taller passengers duck as they exit the rear doors. In terms of cargo, the Civic's trunk holds 10.7 cubic feet—an increase from the previous model, but just half the capacity of the Prius.
After 354 highway miles, we decided that the Civic was the more comfortable of the 2 —the Prius feels a bit more susceptible to crosswind and generally produces more freeway noise. But when we filled both cars up at the end of the day, the Prius was the highway fuel economy champ, returning 51.4 mpg. The Civic delivered a very respectable 47.1 mpg.
The City Drive
The next day, we headed east and hit the streets. For this test, we'd drive an all-city route from Santa Monica to San Bernardino, and back. We never put a tire on a freeway and never exceeded 45 mph—a true test of city fuel economy.
On these roads, the Prius was nearly silent most of the time, creeping along in electric-only mode. The Civic always needed its gas motor to idle, but the smart and aggressive engine stop-start system would often cut power when we were coasting up to a light under light loads. As soon as the light turned green and our foot released the brake, the engine started quickly. And once under way, the Civic stays in electric mode longer than before.
On a few of the backroads near Glendora, the Civic was the more engaging partner. Neither car will be mistaken for a sport sedan, but spirited driving just feels more natural in the Honda.
After 198 miles and ten hours of traffic congestion, the Prius once again came out on top when we refueled back in Santa Monica. This time, the Toyota delivered 50.2 mpg to Honda's 43.7 mpg.
The Bottom Line
In out test, both hybrids exceeded their EPA ratings. Averaging our two loops, the Prius delivered 50.8 mpg while the Civic returned 45.4 mpg. The Prius remains the unequivocal hybrid fuel economy king, but the Civic is closing the gap.
If gasoline prices continue to rise much beyond today's $4 per gallon national average, both Toyota and Honda should see sales of these 2 hybrids skyrocket. But if we could have just one of these cars to drive every day, our pick would be the slightly-more-fun Honda.
05-16-2011, 07:38 AM
#2336
Race Director
If gasoline prices continue to rise much beyond today's $4 per gallon national average, both Toyota and Honda should see sales of these 2 hybrids skyrocket
05-16-2011, 10:52 AM
#2337
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,492
Received 834 Likes
on
518 Posts
For other compact cars, I have seen a few that have gotten 30mpg or so, but usually they are getting 25-30mpg only.
I guess my point is that, I haven't seen a compact car running on regular gas that can get 35mpg in mixed driving CONSISTENTLY. I know some folks can get 35mpg consistently in a regular gas powered car, but I also know some people got 70+mpg in the Insight.
05-16-2011, 11:42 AM
#2338
Race Director
^ Even at 30MPG compared to say 50MPG at the average ownership of 7 years and 80K miles at $5/gal the savings is ~$5K. The math works if you only pay $1-2K premium for a big MPG increase (like less than 1K for the E320CDi vs E350) - any bigger premium or smaller MPG increase does not make sense financially.
05-16-2011, 11:48 AM
#2339
Race Director
^ And that only looks at the mileage equation and doesn't factor in things like resale - which for hybrids could be much worse than regular cars as they approach the battery replacement age.
05-16-2011, 01:40 PM
#2340
But there aren't that many out there....from what I've seen The 8th gen Civic and Corolla are the closest to 35mpg in the real world (33mpg is the best I've seen for them in a comparison test in Car and Driver, and of course that's for combined).
For other compact cars, I have seen a few that have gotten 30mpg or so, but usually they are getting 25-30mpg only.
I guess my point is that, I haven't seen a compact car running on regular gas that can get 35mpg in mixed driving CONSISTENTLY. I know some folks can get 35mpg consistently in a regular gas powered car, but I also know some people got 70+mpg in the Insight.
For other compact cars, I have seen a few that have gotten 30mpg or so, but usually they are getting 25-30mpg only.
I guess my point is that, I haven't seen a compact car running on regular gas that can get 35mpg in mixed driving CONSISTENTLY. I know some folks can get 35mpg consistently in a regular gas powered car, but I also know some people got 70+mpg in the Insight.
05-16-2011, 02:38 PM
#2341
Banned
Do you understand why? In the city hybrids use more electric motor that gas power and the engines cut off at a stop so they dont burn gas there either. On the highway it's a gasoline ingen at 70mph but an effecient motor compared to the R18. The very 1st Insight saw 70mpg easily on the highway which was well over what the epa rated it. That said I wouldnt be surprised if we see owners of the new Civic Hybrid getting 50+mpg. My buddies CR-Z EX Navi is seeing 10mpg over what the epa rates it at. This shouldn't shock us Honda Guys. Hondas if using the correct gas and oil wil always yield a big differnce from the EPA ratings. The only Honda that I owned that was dead on was my S2000 20/26mpg. My 5th gen Prelude did a tad better than the 22/28mpg (I saw 30mpg on the highway). I will say this though... If someone drives highway only, they'll never make the money back they spent buying a hybrid over a non-hybrid of the same car. If they drive in the city ONLY, the difference can be 20mpg better with the hybrid with a light foot. That light foot will allow the driver to stay in electric power up to 25-30mph in Honda's Hybrids.
05-16-2011, 03:46 PM
#2342
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,492
Received 834 Likes
on
518 Posts
^ Even at 30MPG compared to say 50MPG at the average ownership of 7 years and 80K miles at $5/gal the savings is ~$5K. The math works if you only pay $1-2K premium for a big MPG increase (like less than 1K for the E320CDi vs E350) - any bigger premium or smaller MPG increase does not make sense financially.
I'm not sure about the States, but here in Canada, most provinces offer some sort of rebates/incentives if you buy a hybrid vehicle. Ontario for example gives you $2000 back. Some auto insurance companies also give you discount if you drive a hybrid. These discounts/rebates/incentives quickly add up for some significant savings.
I'm not sure if this is true for all hybrid cars, but for the Prius, its battery has been tested to last for 180,000 miles according to Toyota. There are 1st gen Prius taxis that have reached over 200,000 miles without any battery issue. If you travel 80000 miles in 7 years (average ownership according to you), you'd need over 15 years to get to 180,000 miles. By that time and/or mileage, I don't think the average owner would worry too much about the resale value - it's going to be low either way, hybrid or not.
Then obviously there are other factors that make people buy hybrids such as the green image. As you know, a lot of people who buy hybrids because they want to be able to say, "hey I drive a hybrid." That, to some people, is worth a little bit of $$.
05-16-2011, 06:37 PM
#2343
Race Director
I'm not sure if this is true for all hybrid cars, but for the Prius, its battery has been tested to last for 180,000 miles according to Toyota. There are 1st gen Prius taxis that have reached over 200,000 miles without any battery issue. If you travel 80000 miles in 7 years (average ownership according to you), you'd need over 15 years to get to 180,000 miles. By that time and/or mileage, I don't think the average owner would worry too much about the resale value - it's going to be low either way, hybrid or not.
Then obviously there are other factors that make people buy hybrids such as the green image. As you know, a lot of people who buy hybrids because they want to be able to say, "hey I drive a hybrid." That, to some people, is worth a little bit of $$.
Then obviously there are other factors that make people buy hybrids such as the green image. As you know, a lot of people who buy hybrids because they want to be able to say, "hey I drive a hybrid." That, to some people, is worth a little bit of $$.
The green image is certainly high on the priority list for many hybrid car buyers
05-16-2011, 07:52 PM
#2344
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,492
Received 834 Likes
on
518 Posts
Normally, that would be true - battery life depends on charge cycles. However, the batteries used in a hybrid vehicle are a bit different.
For the Prius, the optimal charge level is at 60%. In normal operation, the system lets the charge level vary only 10-15%. Therefore, the battery is rarely more than 75% charged, or less than 45% charged. So when the indicator shows full charge, the battery is actually around 75% charged, and when the indicator shows low/no charge, the battery is at around 45%.
This is why Toyota can claim that the battery will last for the life of the vehicle. And like I was saying Toyota tested the battery to be good for 180,000 miles. Some taxis even have 200,000 miles on them and are still running without any battery issue.
I agree that when a regular Civic reaches $3k in value, it still has quite some usable time left. However, if you drive a hybrid until it becomes a junkyard car (after 180,000 miles), you'd have saved well over $10k of fuel already using the numbers you provided above.
For the Prius, the optimal charge level is at 60%. In normal operation, the system lets the charge level vary only 10-15%. Therefore, the battery is rarely more than 75% charged, or less than 45% charged. So when the indicator shows full charge, the battery is actually around 75% charged, and when the indicator shows low/no charge, the battery is at around 45%.
This is why Toyota can claim that the battery will last for the life of the vehicle. And like I was saying Toyota tested the battery to be good for 180,000 miles. Some taxis even have 200,000 miles on them and are still running without any battery issue.
I agree that when a regular Civic reaches $3k in value, it still has quite some usable time left. However, if you drive a hybrid until it becomes a junkyard car (after 180,000 miles), you'd have saved well over $10k of fuel already using the numbers you provided above.
05-16-2011, 08:24 PM
#2345
Safety Car
This Seems Relevant to the Current Discussion
Are EVs the best deal of all? Yes, but only thanks to tax credits -- without them, they're the worst
Thinking about buying that Prius? You might want to think twice.
A recent study released by the automotive analysis site TrueCar.com confirms what many already suspected -- that the benefits of hybrid vehicles still fail to justify their inflated premiums versus fuel-efficient budget vehicles.
I. Hybrids v. Gas Vehicles -- Hybrids Lose
A report examines the 2011 Toyota Prius from Toyota Motor Comp. (7203) -- the most popular hybrid vehicle in America -- which gets about 49.6 miles per gallon combined gas mileage and retails starting at $22,120 USD + fees. It compares this to the 2011 Hyundai Elantra by Hyundai Motor Comp. (005380), a fuel efficient budget "traditional" gas vehicle which gets 33.1 mpg combined gas mileage and retails for $14,830 USD + fees.
At a gas price of $3.52 USD/gallon (the average price at the time of the report's publication) the Prius owner would pay approximately $1,063 USD to travel 15,000 miles over the year, while an Elantra owner would pay $1,594 USD to travel the same distance. At $5 USD gas -- an extreme not yet reached, the difference would grow to $1,510 USD (Prius) vs. $2,250 (Elantra).
Thus under the current price scenario, it would almost 14 years to recoup the cost distance between the Prius and Elantra. However, Prius batteries are only under warranty for 10 years and may die or experience significant performance degradation as the vehicle gets up in the years. In other words, buyers will have to wait years and may even then have trouble breaking even.
Of course if gas reached $5/gallon then it would only take 10 years to recoup the difference, in which case the Prius might seem slightly more attractive.
Jesse Toprak, Vice President of Industry Trends and Insights at TrueCar.com, concludes, "If you’re looking for the most fuel-efficient car, the Toyota Prius wins. If you’re looking for the most cost-effective and fuel-efficient car, the Hyundai Elantra is the clear winner."
While intriguing the study has 1 serious flaw... read the update at the end of the study for that point and our conclusions.
II. Battery Electric Vehicles -- the Best Option of All?
What the report fails to mention is that the battery electric 2011 Nissan LEAF EV from Nissan Motor Company, Ltd. (7201) might be the most attractive option of all, given the initial comparison. Here's our take.
The LEAF retails for $25,280 USD + fees, post $7,500 tax credit. (Note, the Mitsubishi i EV retails for even less --approximately $20,500 after federal tax credit -- but is a significantly smaller compact and has limited availability).
The LEAF, comparable to the Prius in size, is approximately $3,150 USD more expensive than the Prius and almost $10,500 more expensive than the Elantra.
But in theory that same driver could travel the 15,000 miles using only the electric drive (even if you only consider driving on weekdays, this would work out to an average of about 58 miles per day -- within the LEAF's range). Over the year the driver would save approximately $1,600 at present gas prices, minus the additional cost of electricity.
Assuming about $400 of the electricity based on $0.11 per kWh [source], this would work out to $1,200 saved a year. Thus it would take nearly 9 years to recoup the cost of investment -- and lo and behold, you might even come out ahead.
Of course this only is thanks to the $7,500 tax credit.
III. The Future -- Hope for the Hybrid?
Toyota is producing a lot of Prii, currently (or was pre-tsunami). But it still has a way to go before it sells as many as its best-selling models like the Camry. Once this volume is reached, costs should drop, which should help to justify the payback.
The real question is how to convince buyers to purchase enough hybrid vehicles to get to that point at a time when the vehicles don't necessarily make sense financially.
One answer may lie in smaller hybrids. Toyota is contemplating releasing a mini-Prius, dubbed the Prius-C. Ford Motor Comp.'s (F) plug-in C-Max Energi, due out in 2012 will fill a similar niche. These smaller hybrids will likely be more affordable, and are expected to get even better gas mileage.
Of course they will be competing against smaller cars that are themselves far cheaper and more fuel efficient, so this strategy may not be as easy as one might think.
At the end of the day the pricing is predictable -- EVs are most expensive, then hybrids, then traditional gas vehicles. EVs are the best deal price-wise with tax credits, but without them they're the worst.
As the technology advances hybrids and electric vehicles may become the best buy. But for now expect diesel vehicles and efficient gas-only sedans to remain the most financially advantageous non-subsidized option.
Updated: May 16, 2011 5:03 p.m.--
As one reader points out, the base Elantra does not include air conditioning or an automatic transmission. The A/C upgrade costs an extra $1,250, while automatic trans. bumps the price $2,200.
This would skew the figures slightly in favor of the Prius, but it's still very close. The return would be reduced to 7.5 years at current gas prices.
This would still leave the EV even farther in the lead, so this conclusion is correct regardless of the comparison point.
1 thing to consider is that you'd only see returns on the Prius after 7.5 years, and would likely only see savings for ~ 2.5 years on average, as your battery would begin to deteriorate. Thus you'd be saving about $1,250 over a 10 year lifetime. That's less than an investment with 3 percent annual return over inflation, so it means even if you do save, it's not that "great" an investment for the amount of money you have to put in, up front.
05-16-2011, 08:56 PM
#2346
that's very respectable #'s for the Civic hybrid vs the Prius
05-17-2011, 06:30 AM
#2347
Race Director
The one other thing that skews the numbers is the actual sales price of the cars - currently the Prius is going for over sticker in some palces while almost all regular cars have discounts. It is also unfair to compare a Prius vs. some other unrelated car. The more resonable comparison would be that of a hybrid version of some car compared to the gas equivalent (Civic hybrid vs. a Civic LX). If one simply shops by mileage alone (or greeness) the Prius wins everytime. But most people narrow their choices to a couple of models and then see the options with that model.
05-17-2011, 06:35 AM
#2348
Race Director
The EV comparison is meangingless since a lot people just can't have an EV due to the logistics of charging it (lack of a garage/ place to charge it)
05-17-2011, 06:36 AM
#2349
Race Director
It will be interesting to see the May sales numbers for the Civic since there's a big marketing push for it (I've seen a lot of Civic commercials recently).
05-17-2011, 10:55 AM
#2350
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,492
Received 834 Likes
on
518 Posts
I agree, it's better to compare a Civic Hybrid against a Civic LX (or EX). That way you can see the actual premium of the hybrid, and then determine if it's worth it.
05-18-2011, 10:02 AM
#2352
Safety Car
InsideLine
We like the 2012 Honda Civic Si Coupe. We really do, but we just don't love it the way we want to — or the way we used to.
Since the 4th-generation (1999-2000) Civic Si, we've had a hard time believing Honda's heart was in it anymore. Sure the zinging, high-revving VTEC engines have been inspiring and entertaining, but far from top-in-class. On the other hand, the snickity-snick shifters (with the exception of that "bent-nail" shifter jutting from the 5th-gen Civic Si's dash) have been the benchmark of "how to do it right."
Offering various body styles (coupe, hatch and sedan) over the years has kept our attention. And the limited-slip differential finally came back on the 6th-gen (2006-'11) Si and remains part of the 2012 Civic Si's exclusive, performance-oriented equipment.
"Sí" or "No?"
This time around, in the Si's 7th generation (and the Civic's ninth) the sum total of all that is "Civic Si" adds up to a shoulder-shrugging "meh" for us. What happened? Did the water line rise or did the 2012 Honda Civic Si sink to the bottom, dragged down by a risk-averse Honda? Indeed, a handful of other sporty coupes — all better-looking, some with lower prices, others with turbocharged 4-cylinder or V6 engines, and even a couple with rear-wheel drive — prove the Honda Civic Si has grown old, soft and irrelevant.
Here's why.
K24Z7
We like the Civic Si's "new" 2.4-liter i-VTEC engine, which is rated at 201 horsepower and 170 pound-feet of torque. If its bore/stroke, compression ratio and output sound familiar, you'll find this engine belongs to the K24 engine family. In this state of tune, it is essentially the same power plant found in our long-term Acura TSX Sport Wagon, which has proven that a good 4-cylinder engine can, indeed, take the place of a mediocre V6. This one also earns ultralow-emissions vehicle (ULEV-2) status.
To Honda's credit, the 2012 Si's new mill offers about 20% more torque than the 2.0-liter 197-hp K20 inline-4 and it arrives 1,700 rpm lower on the tachometer. It's true that it's a whole lot easier to build speed below 5,000 rpm and with the light-action clutch, you'd have to be a total newbie to stall the 2012 Honda Civic Si from a stop. And despite ever-so-slightly different gears ratios on 2nd through 6th (a six-speed manual is the only tranny option), 3rd gear doesn't feel like overdrive like it once did, and was a generally good choice for everyday driving through a neighborhood and on the twisting road we used for the photo shoot.
In fact, imploring actual acceleration with the throttle at 20 mph and 2,000 rpm resulted in, well, actual forward motion accompanied by a now lower, more authoritative exhaust note. The 2012 Si is slightly quieter at idle, louder at wide-open throttle, and despite spinning at 3,000 rpm, quieter at a 70-mph cruise. We call these improvements, but not the kind we expected of an all-new Civic Si that's been significantly upgraded for 2012.
The K24 also produces peak output at 7,000 rpm (rather than 7,800), and is incrementally more fuel-efficient compared to the outgoing, higher-revving K20. The car's fuel economy improved slightly (by 1 mpg in the EPA's realistic combined category to 25 mpg) and we validated that claim with our own identical average over 662 miles of mixed driving.
The thing is, we'd happily trade some of the K24's more accessible torque and negligible fuel efficiency for more power; 240 hp would seem about right and that 100 hp-per-liter output would actually make it competitive rather than merely competent.
On the other hand, your mom would not object to the 2012 Civic Si's highway ride.
Any Quicker?
To exactly nobody's surprise, we confirmed that the 2012 Honda Civic Si's 0-60-mph time and quarter-mile were nearly identical to the last 2006 Civic Si Coupe we tested. We recorded a 6.9-second best time to 60 mph (6.6 seconds with 1 foot of rollout as on a drag strip and a 15.1-second quarter-mile at 93.1 mph — just like we did 5 years ago. The shifter is still as we had hoped — well oiled, light and precise.
Civic Si stopping distances have been notoriously inconsistent depending on tire selection, pad wear and surface conditions. In past tests, we've recorded between 116 and 125 feet from 60 mph. It seems our test car's optional Michelin Pilot Exalto PE2 tires ($200), properly bedded pads and fresh asphalt were in harmony. With some initial idle stroke in the brake pedal, this car's first stop was its best at 120 feet, and by the sixth and final attempt, that distance grew by only 5 feet. We experienced none of the notorious brake fade so common in other Hondas, and "jump-in" (sensitive initial response) actually improved with the added stops.
Nimbler or Softer?
Compared to last year's car, the 2012 Honda Civic Si's wheelbase decreased by 1.1 inch, the rear track width grew by 0.2 inch and official curb weight dropped by 18 pounds. One would hope these changes would yield improved handling. Once more, hit the rewind and play buttons. This car's best skid pad performance again exactly matched our 2006 Si Coupe's at 0.86g and essentially tied the slalom speed with 67.3 mph versus 67.5 mph.
In the past, we've paid well-deserved compliments for the Civic Si's electric-assist power steering, but this time it feels less alert; more "gooey" as 1 editor described it. Perhaps to compensate for (rather than take advantage of) the 2012 car's shorter wheelbase, the steering ratio was changed from 13.62:1 to 16.08:1. It's a small change, and while the steering responds as precisely as it did, it also seems to have lost some of the feel in the process. Seeing a pattern develop yet?
On the other hand, your mom would not object to the 2012 Honda Civic Si's highway ride. There were very few surfaces or impacts that upset the car's smooth ride or cornering attitude. If you think about it like this, "improved ride with no loss in handling," then we concede another overall improvement, but not a performance improvement, per se.
Better Interior?
We like all the added standard features: Bluetooth (phone and audio), a crisp 5-inch LCD infotainment display and a 360-watt audio system with USB and auxiliary jacks. We tested it all, and it all worked flawlessly and intuitively. Acoustically, this is an excellent "base" stereo by the way. We just wish the interior that surrounds the upgraded electronics had been upgraded as well. There is not one soft-touch surface to be found, only hollow plastics in various shades of gray/black and with at least 3 different manmade textures. Although covered in fabric, even the armrests are not what we'd call padded.
The front seats are still high-tech cloth-covered, well-bolstered and easily adjusted manually. They even seem more substantial, though no more comfortable or supportive. A tilting-and-telescoping steering column ensures a good driving position and the new leather-wrapped steering wheel with excellent satellite controls is outstanding. The brake and throttle pedals are properly placed for heel-toe downshifting, and the electronic throttle response allows this to happen without pause.
Outward visibility is challenging with the combination of a giant A-pillar, rising beltline and obscuring C-pillar. As with most coupes, second-row ingress/egress is problematic, and repositioning either front seat so a normal human may sit in it could be improved with a "mechanical memory" of where the front seat was previously set. Legroom in the rear seats is passable, but headroom may not be for some. These are all small-coupe compromises not particular to the Civic Si.
Finally, the controversial split instrument panel drew predictably divergent reviews. Some like it and say that the steering wheel would block anything between the 2 displays anyway, and others say it's too distracting having two displays in two different planes. Either way, the addition of a VTEC power meter (available in 2 different I.P. locations) seems like a "jump-the-shark" moment to us — as if to say, "Hey guys, you might not be able to feel the cam come on, but we can show you when it does with this neat-o bar graph."
On the other hand, that new LCD multi-information display is a good addition. It cycles through various screens for audio, trip, maintenance, fuel economy, and when equipped with navigation, also provides turn-by-turn instructions. It's crisp, well shaded and very useful, especially since many of the functions can be controlled with the steering wheel's backlit buttons.
Conclusion
When the last overhaul occurred for the 2006 model year, the Civic Si initially won its debut comparison test against a VW GTI. Only 8 months later, it promptly fell to 3rd place behind a Subaru WRX TR and a Mazdaspeed 3.
Today, the turbocharged 263-hp Mazdaspeed 3 is still kicking ass and taking names, while the rear-wheel-drive Hyundai Genesis Coupe (turbo-4 or V6) has appeared on scene, and the Mini Cooper and Scion tC soldier on with fans of their own. Even the highly anticipated Ford Focus shows promise if SVT can get involved. All those cars are priced at or below the 2012 Honda Civic Si. But most recently and perhaps most significantly, the 2012 Ford Mustang V6 impressed the hell out of us at the racetrack with its 305-hp engine.
You can buy a 2012 Mustang V6 for $22,995 (before incentives and/or discounts), or this 2012 Honda Civic Si (with summer tires) at $23,155 — a mere $160 difference. We know they might seem like cars for two completely different drivers, but the performance-coupe bang-for-your-buck case in favor of the Mustang cannot be denied.
For 2012, it appears all the improvements bestowed upon the high-performance Civic Si were to drivability, functionality and fuel economy (sort of), and not one of them did a thing to enhance performance where it counts. The reason for the Civic Si's existence is to carve out a place in the sport compact world. Yet the 2012 Honda Civic Si shows no measurable performance gains over its 6-year-old predecessor. And given that this is the performance-focused trim level, it's hard to make a case for this being a change that matters.
In our book that means Honda isn't trying. And it's hard to love a Civic Si that Honda itself seemingly ignores.
Vehicle
Year Make Model 2012 Honda Civic Si 2dr Coupe with summer tires (2.4L 4cyl 6M)
Vehicle Type FWD 2dr 5-passenger Coupe
Base MSRP $22,995
Options on test vehicle Sunburst Orange Pearl
As-tested MSRP $23,155
Assembly location Alliston, Ontario, Canada
North American parts content (%) 65
Drivetrain
Configuration Transverse, front-engine, front-wheel drive
Engine type Naturally aspirated, port-injected inline-4, gasoline
Displacement (cc/cu-in) 2,354/144
Block/head material Aluminum/aluminum
Valvetrain DOHC, four valves per cylinder, variable intake-valve timing and lift
Compression ratio (x:1) 11.0
Redline, indicated (rpm) 7,100
Fuel cutoff/rev limiter (rpm) 7,200
Horsepower (hp @ rpm) 201 @ 7,000
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) 170 @ 4,400
Fuel type Premium unleaded (required)
Transmission type Six-speed manual
Transmission ratios (x:1) 1st = 3.267; 2nd = 2.040; 3rd = 1.429; 4th = 1.073; 5th = 0.830; 6th = 0.647
Final-drive ratio (x:1) 4.760
Differential(s) Helical limited-slip
Chassis
Suspension, front Independent MacPherson struts, coil springs, stabilizer bar
Suspension, rear Independent multilink, coil springs, stabilizer bar
Steering type Electric-assist, speed-proportional rack-and-pinion power steering
Steering ratio (x:1) 16.08
Turning circle (ft.) 35.4
Tire make and model Michelin Pilot Exalto PE2
Tire type Asymmetrical summer, performance (32 psi cold front; 32 psi cold rear)
Tire size 215/45R17 91W
Wheel size 17-by-7 inches front and rear
Wheel material Aluminum alloy
Brakes, front 11.8-inch one-piece ventilated cast-iron discs with single-piston sliding calipers
Brakes, rear 10.2-inch one-piece solid cast-iron discs with single-piston sliding calipers
Track Test Results
Acceleration, 0-30 mph (sec.) 2.6
0-45 mph (sec.) 4.6
0-60 mph (sec.) 6.9
0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 6.6
0-75 mph (sec.) 10.1
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 15.1 @ 93.1
0-30 mph, trac ON (sec.) 2.9
0-45 mph, trac ON (sec.) 4.8
0-60 mph, trac ON (sec.) 7.2
0-60, trac ON with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 6.9
0-75 mph, trac ON (sec.) 10.2
1/4-mile, trac ON (sec. @ mph) 15.3 @ 93.1
Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) 29
60-0 mph (ft.) 120
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 67.3
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) ESC ON 62.8
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) 0.86
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) ESC ON 0.84
Sound level @ idle (dB) 43.1
@ Full throttle (dB) 80.4
@ 70 mph cruise (dB) 67.4
Engine speed @ 70 mph (rpm) 3,000
Test Driver Ratings & Comments
Acceleration comments Power delivery is far more linear than previous 2.0-liter Si engine, but i-VTEC is still evident -- more audible than palpable, though. With trac off, it's tricky to launch with just-right wheelspin, but it can be done and subtracts about a half-second from time. It's difficult to hang revs at a desired rpm because the throttle is so sensitive and revs climb and drop with a millimeter of throttle travel. Shifter is still very good, but feels ike it has a longer throw than previous Sis.
Braking comments Some initial pedal travel, then very firm thereafter. Not much initial bite. Zero ABS buzz, little tire squeal, but rear end gets light and wiggles side-to-side.
Handling comments Skid pad: With ESC off, gently understeers all the way around the circle. "Steering" with the throttle doesn't work -- no rotation possible. With ESC on, the system grabs a brake and keeps it just inside understeer. Steering weight is good -- not too heavy or light or electric-feeling. Slalom: With ESC off, the car is sensitive to entry speed and likes to rotate off-throttle. Best run was entry at just barely sub-limit, then barely adjust throttle for a tiny bit of rotation at each cone, then MASH the throttle at exit and use the LSD. It's a delicate technique, and there's probably 1 mph left (I had one 69-mph pass, but nicked a cone, damnit), but this would be a "perfect" run. With ESC on, the slightest bit of tire howl or sliding is severly punished. And slow.
Testing Conditions
Test date 5/3/2011
Test location California Speedway
Elevation (ft.) 1,121
Temperature (°F) 77.1
Relative humidity (%) 13.3
Barometric pressure (in. Hg) 28.9
Wind (mph, direction) 1.0 tailwind
Odometer (mi.) 832
Fuel used for test 91-octane gasoline
As-tested tire pressures, f/r (psi) 32/32
Fuel Consumption
EPA fuel economy (mpg) 22 city/31 highway/25 combined
Edmunds observed (mpg) 21 worst/28 best/25 average (over 662 miles)
Fuel tank capacity (U.S. gal.) 13.2
Driving range (mi.) 409.2
Audio and Advanced Technology
Stereo description 300-watt, AM/FM/CD with 7 speakers, AAC/MP3/WMA playback, aux jack, USB port
iPod/digital media compatibility Standard iPod via USB jack, USB stick, aux jack
Satellite radio Optional XM
Hard-drive music storage capacity (Gb) Not available
Rear seat video and entertainment Not available
Bluetooth phone connectivity Standard (phone and audio streaming)
Navigation system Optional 16GB flash memory with FM traffic, 6.5-inch high-definition VGA display screen
Telematics (OnStar, etc.) Not available
Smart entry/Start Not available
Parking aids Not available
Blind-spot detection Not available
Adaptive cruise control Not available
Lane-departure monitoring Not available
Collision warning/avoidance Not available
Night Vision Not available
Driver coaching display Standard
Dimensions & Capacities
Curb weight, mfr. claim (lbs.) 2,877
Curb weight, as tested (lbs.) 2,845
Weight distribution, as tested, f/r (%) 62/38
Length (in.) 176.1
Width (in.) 69.0
Height (in.) 55.0
Wheelbase (in.) 103.1
Track, front (in.) 59.0
Track, rear (in.) 59.9
Legroom, front (in.) 42.2
Legroom, rear (in.) 30.8
Headroom, front (in.) 37.7
Headroom, rear (in.) 34.3
Shoulder room, front (in.) 55.1
Shoulder room, rear (in.) 52.2
Seating capacity 5
Trunk volume (cu-ft) 11.7
Max cargo volume behind 1st row (cu-ft) Standard 60/40 split-fold rear seats (no volume given)
Warranty
Bumper-to-bumper 3 years/36,000 miles
Powertrain 5 years/60,000 miles
Corrosion 5 years/Unlimited miles
Roadside assistance Not available
Free scheduled maintenance Not available
Year Make Model 2012 Honda Civic Si 2dr Coupe with summer tires (2.4L 4cyl 6M)
Vehicle Type FWD 2dr 5-passenger Coupe
Base MSRP $22,995
Options on test vehicle Sunburst Orange Pearl
As-tested MSRP $23,155
Assembly location Alliston, Ontario, Canada
North American parts content (%) 65
Drivetrain
Configuration Transverse, front-engine, front-wheel drive
Engine type Naturally aspirated, port-injected inline-4, gasoline
Displacement (cc/cu-in) 2,354/144
Block/head material Aluminum/aluminum
Valvetrain DOHC, four valves per cylinder, variable intake-valve timing and lift
Compression ratio (x:1) 11.0
Redline, indicated (rpm) 7,100
Fuel cutoff/rev limiter (rpm) 7,200
Horsepower (hp @ rpm) 201 @ 7,000
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) 170 @ 4,400
Fuel type Premium unleaded (required)
Transmission type Six-speed manual
Transmission ratios (x:1) 1st = 3.267; 2nd = 2.040; 3rd = 1.429; 4th = 1.073; 5th = 0.830; 6th = 0.647
Final-drive ratio (x:1) 4.760
Differential(s) Helical limited-slip
Chassis
Suspension, front Independent MacPherson struts, coil springs, stabilizer bar
Suspension, rear Independent multilink, coil springs, stabilizer bar
Steering type Electric-assist, speed-proportional rack-and-pinion power steering
Steering ratio (x:1) 16.08
Turning circle (ft.) 35.4
Tire make and model Michelin Pilot Exalto PE2
Tire type Asymmetrical summer, performance (32 psi cold front; 32 psi cold rear)
Tire size 215/45R17 91W
Wheel size 17-by-7 inches front and rear
Wheel material Aluminum alloy
Brakes, front 11.8-inch one-piece ventilated cast-iron discs with single-piston sliding calipers
Brakes, rear 10.2-inch one-piece solid cast-iron discs with single-piston sliding calipers
Track Test Results
Acceleration, 0-30 mph (sec.) 2.6
0-45 mph (sec.) 4.6
0-60 mph (sec.) 6.9
0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 6.6
0-75 mph (sec.) 10.1
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 15.1 @ 93.1
0-30 mph, trac ON (sec.) 2.9
0-45 mph, trac ON (sec.) 4.8
0-60 mph, trac ON (sec.) 7.2
0-60, trac ON with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 6.9
0-75 mph, trac ON (sec.) 10.2
1/4-mile, trac ON (sec. @ mph) 15.3 @ 93.1
Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) 29
60-0 mph (ft.) 120
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 67.3
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) ESC ON 62.8
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) 0.86
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) ESC ON 0.84
Sound level @ idle (dB) 43.1
@ Full throttle (dB) 80.4
@ 70 mph cruise (dB) 67.4
Engine speed @ 70 mph (rpm) 3,000
Test Driver Ratings & Comments
Acceleration comments Power delivery is far more linear than previous 2.0-liter Si engine, but i-VTEC is still evident -- more audible than palpable, though. With trac off, it's tricky to launch with just-right wheelspin, but it can be done and subtracts about a half-second from time. It's difficult to hang revs at a desired rpm because the throttle is so sensitive and revs climb and drop with a millimeter of throttle travel. Shifter is still very good, but feels ike it has a longer throw than previous Sis.
Braking comments Some initial pedal travel, then very firm thereafter. Not much initial bite. Zero ABS buzz, little tire squeal, but rear end gets light and wiggles side-to-side.
Handling comments Skid pad: With ESC off, gently understeers all the way around the circle. "Steering" with the throttle doesn't work -- no rotation possible. With ESC on, the system grabs a brake and keeps it just inside understeer. Steering weight is good -- not too heavy or light or electric-feeling. Slalom: With ESC off, the car is sensitive to entry speed and likes to rotate off-throttle. Best run was entry at just barely sub-limit, then barely adjust throttle for a tiny bit of rotation at each cone, then MASH the throttle at exit and use the LSD. It's a delicate technique, and there's probably 1 mph left (I had one 69-mph pass, but nicked a cone, damnit), but this would be a "perfect" run. With ESC on, the slightest bit of tire howl or sliding is severly punished. And slow.
Testing Conditions
Test date 5/3/2011
Test location California Speedway
Elevation (ft.) 1,121
Temperature (°F) 77.1
Relative humidity (%) 13.3
Barometric pressure (in. Hg) 28.9
Wind (mph, direction) 1.0 tailwind
Odometer (mi.) 832
Fuel used for test 91-octane gasoline
As-tested tire pressures, f/r (psi) 32/32
Fuel Consumption
EPA fuel economy (mpg) 22 city/31 highway/25 combined
Edmunds observed (mpg) 21 worst/28 best/25 average (over 662 miles)
Fuel tank capacity (U.S. gal.) 13.2
Driving range (mi.) 409.2
Audio and Advanced Technology
Stereo description 300-watt, AM/FM/CD with 7 speakers, AAC/MP3/WMA playback, aux jack, USB port
iPod/digital media compatibility Standard iPod via USB jack, USB stick, aux jack
Satellite radio Optional XM
Hard-drive music storage capacity (Gb) Not available
Rear seat video and entertainment Not available
Bluetooth phone connectivity Standard (phone and audio streaming)
Navigation system Optional 16GB flash memory with FM traffic, 6.5-inch high-definition VGA display screen
Telematics (OnStar, etc.) Not available
Smart entry/Start Not available
Parking aids Not available
Blind-spot detection Not available
Adaptive cruise control Not available
Lane-departure monitoring Not available
Collision warning/avoidance Not available
Night Vision Not available
Driver coaching display Standard
Dimensions & Capacities
Curb weight, mfr. claim (lbs.) 2,877
Curb weight, as tested (lbs.) 2,845
Weight distribution, as tested, f/r (%) 62/38
Length (in.) 176.1
Width (in.) 69.0
Height (in.) 55.0
Wheelbase (in.) 103.1
Track, front (in.) 59.0
Track, rear (in.) 59.9
Legroom, front (in.) 42.2
Legroom, rear (in.) 30.8
Headroom, front (in.) 37.7
Headroom, rear (in.) 34.3
Shoulder room, front (in.) 55.1
Shoulder room, rear (in.) 52.2
Seating capacity 5
Trunk volume (cu-ft) 11.7
Max cargo volume behind 1st row (cu-ft) Standard 60/40 split-fold rear seats (no volume given)
Warranty
Bumper-to-bumper 3 years/36,000 miles
Powertrain 5 years/60,000 miles
Corrosion 5 years/Unlimited miles
Roadside assistance Not available
Free scheduled maintenance Not available
05-18-2011, 04:41 PM
#2353
Senior Moderator
This time around, in the Si's 7th generation (and the Civic's ninth) the sum total of all that is "Civic Si" adds up to a shoulder-shrugging "meh" for us. What happened?
Seems everything we predicted about theis new Si has come to pass. Honda should be ashamed of themselves. But at least it will sell.
05-18-2011, 04:43 PM
#2354
Senior Moderator
Honestly, I'm sure it is a fun, fun car...but, it is just more of the same from before and well, I was hoping for more...
Dammit, Honda!
Dammit, Honda!
05-18-2011, 05:23 PM
#2355
That conclusion sums it up very well. Many people have been screaming for more turbocharged 4-cylinders in the Honda/Acura lineup, as a V6 would be too impractical in a car like the Si, and as seen in the TSX, changes the car's handling characteristics for the worse.
I wouldn't cross shop a V6 Mustang with a Civic Si but nonetheless it is stiff competition. I think Honda shit the bed here, unless they've got another engine in the works at the moment. I mentioned it earlier in this thread, and TTAC just highlighted it, the Si just doesn't stand a chance against the 260+ BHP MS3 and WRX. It doesn't matter how much torque the new K24 has compared to the K20, turbocharged 4s will always have more compared to their N/A counterparts.
I wouldn't cross shop a V6 Mustang with a Civic Si but nonetheless it is stiff competition. I think Honda shit the bed here, unless they've got another engine in the works at the moment. I mentioned it earlier in this thread, and TTAC just highlighted it, the Si just doesn't stand a chance against the 260+ BHP MS3 and WRX. It doesn't matter how much torque the new K24 has compared to the K20, turbocharged 4s will always have more compared to their N/A counterparts.
05-18-2011, 06:14 PM
#2357
Honda can work around that... otherwise APR wouldn't be so popular with the Veedub crowd. Same with Cobb and the MS3. Not sure about the GTI but IIRC the MS3 ECU dials back the power progressively in the first three gears to mitigate torque steer. Haven't driven one so I can't say.
Ford also has their Revo knuckle in the Focus RS
http://www.motorauthority.com/blog/1...r-the-focus-rs
The problem with AWD is the additional weight and cost. For a sporty compact car, AWD almost always needs to be coupled with F/I if it's a 4-cyl. I would like to see Honda take on Subaru (not so much Mitsubishi anymore considering their plans) in the AWD sport compact segment though
Ford also has their Revo knuckle in the Focus RS
http://www.motorauthority.com/blog/1...r-the-focus-rs
The problem with AWD is the additional weight and cost. For a sporty compact car, AWD almost always needs to be coupled with F/I if it's a 4-cyl. I would like to see Honda take on Subaru (not so much Mitsubishi anymore considering their plans) in the AWD sport compact segment though
05-18-2011, 06:14 PM
#2358
Team Owner
i have seen 2 or 3 of the 2012 Civics... they make 2006-2011 Civics coupe or sedan look like Miss Universe...
i think this gen civics are the worst in Civic history in terms of looks.. Especially the LX model.. OMG...
i think this gen civics are the worst in Civic history in terms of looks.. Especially the LX model.. OMG...
05-18-2011, 06:25 PM
#2359
The sizzle in the Steak
05-18-2011, 07:39 PM
#2360
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Honda can work around that... otherwise APR wouldn't be so popular with the Veedub crowd. Same with Cobb and the MS3. Not sure about the GTI but IIRC the MS3 ECU dials back the power progressively in the first three gears to mitigate torque steer. Haven't driven one so I can't say.
The problem with AWD is the additional weight and cost. For a sporty compact car, AWD almost always needs to be coupled with F/I if it's a 4-cyl. I would like to see Honda take on Subaru (not so much Mitsubishi anymore considering their plans) in the AWD sport compact segment though
The problem with AWD is the additional weight and cost. For a sporty compact car, AWD almost always needs to be coupled with F/I if it's a 4-cyl. I would like to see Honda take on Subaru (not so much Mitsubishi anymore considering their plans) in the AWD sport compact segment though
The 2nd Gen MS3 was projected to be AWD, but then when Mazda was developing it, they decided to stick with the same platform because of pricing and weight.
Mazda wanted to stick with the under $25k segment. They didn't want to go head to head against WRX. Think about it, it's an easy sell for MS3 to go head to head against the Si
