Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Ford Focus ZX3 / SVT vs. Honda Civic Si / RSX

124

Comments

  • tommyijrtommyijr Member Posts: 56
    noting that last year the Ford Focus became the most recalled car in history, passing the Chevy Citation for that honor.....That means the AMC Pacer was more reilable.......Fix Or Repair Daily.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    That is worth noting - what a turnaround!
  • 93civichybrid93civichybrid Member Posts: 7
    si takes the focus IMO and the integra errr rsx takes all. although we get nothing fun here in the US ( we need a friggin new type-r here especially a civic-R) even though i have never owned an si i still know the power of dohc v-tec sicne i got my gsr motor in my coupe. ahh the pure pleasure of dohc vtec. but i think im going to get either a del sol or new si depending on if i can find a del sol vtec with low miles on it for a decent price. but yea the ford focus will only be good if we get the new cosworth edition that should be coming out in europe soon but most likely wont be seen here for some time if ever.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    From what I understand, the handling of the Del Sol is pretty substandard, they crack their rear windows during hard cornerning on occasion. That car may look better than what you are driving (not that I've seen it), but I don't think it's really an upgrade.
  • the_manthe_man Member Posts: 15
    I've driven the SVT, The rsx and the civic si

    First let me start off by saying that i feel sorry for you if own a civic si. IMO i think the civic is a POS. The Seats are well bolstered and that's about all i can say that is good about the car.

    The Rsx is a better car than the civic. The version i drove was the type-s. It is a fast car,w/ a good suspension, ok handaling and great transmission. I like the amount of storage room in the back w/ the seats folded down.The one thing i don't like is the stero and the lack of driver feedback.

    My choice is the SVT. Sure it is a little slower than the rsx, however but it more than makes up for it in handaling driver feedback. I feel that is is the most fun to drive of the bunch. Plus you can get the european package which includes HID feadlamps, heated seats, a sunroof, 270 watt sound system and leather trimed recaro seats. You can get all of this below list price.

    Just please don't get a civic. They stink!
  • carlisimocarlisimo Member Posts: 1,280
    why?
  • dudkadudka Member Posts: 451
    I hate to burst your bubble, but the recarros in the SVT are the same as in the Si, except the leather. And some people don't like leather seats, like me.
    Si has more storage volume than RSX because it is a true hatchback and not a fast back. Try to fit a 32 inch TV in the RSX and close the hatch.
    I test drove RSX-S and yes it has some pick up, but the "sitting in the bucket" feeling due to high belt line or low seat position was not something I wanted to be driving for too long. Si has good torque down low that I don't have to gun it to keep with traffic. And at 6 feet tall I don't have to recline my seat to 45° "inner city style" (can't say the G word or host will delete) driving position

    Si is the best value overall. I got mine brand new with 8 miles on the odometer for $14,500.

    Good for you that you liked SVT, it is a nice package, but at the time SVTs were carrying a $20K asking price at the SVT dealer, which is not my local dealer. My closest SVT dealer is good 60 miles away. And you have to take your SVT there to enjoy the benefits of owning SVT, your local Ford may actually refuse to work on your SVT.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    a) The RSX-S does not compete with the Si and the SVT, it is significantly more expensive. That said, until 6000rpms, both the Si and the SVT have about the same power output
    B) the Si and RSX-S share a lot of suspension components, and the Si has significantly more storage room. And I prefer the Si transmission to the RSX-S.
    C) The RSX-S would cost about 6500 more than I paid for my Si, not worth it to me
    D) The SVT is a LOT slower than the RSX-S, and virtually the same speed as the Si (.1 in the 1/4 mile is insignificant)
    E) When I bought my Si in 2002, it was still too early to tell whether the SVT was going to suffer the same early maladies of the rest of the Focus line. It's a great car, but the seats are basically identical to the Si, except for the cheap leather which I didn't want. The HIDs are great, but I wasn't that impressed by the sound system (and I'm not impressed by the Si's system either, but it's good enough)
    F) Don't feel sorry for me, I'll be ok.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    The seats in the Honda Civic Si are not Recaro seats. (What is Recarro?) This is according to Honda and according to Recaro. I contacted both Honda and Recaro when I owned my 2002 Civic Si and Honda USA stated that the seats are not Recaro. Honda of Swindon England stated that only the R type Civic has Recaro seats installed at factory. Recaro of Germany firmly stated that seats in Honda Civic Si are NOT supplied by Recaro. If was difficult and took some time to verify this. I consider the belief that Si seats are Recaro to be an Urban Myth.

    Brand new 2003 Focus SVT are available for $15,500. Better value than Si.
  • ibudic1ibudic1 Member Posts: 30
    Better value?

    When you figure in resale, reliability and fuel economy Ford WILL cost you more, don't believe me? Read consumer reviews about focus.
  • silversolarasilversolara Member Posts: 113
    everybody...

    I am debating the need to trade in my current ride for something else. I've decided upon a 2-door hatch as my vehicle of choice; i work in the NorthEast section of Philadelphia, and need a car that can squeeze into a parking spot.
      
    Other needs: room for a carload of books & a computer monitor, sports-car-like handling, and comfort (it's a 45 minute commute).

    I've narrowed the field to:
    the Focus SVT ZX-3
    Honda Civic Si
    (and the dream) the Volkswagon R-32.

    If Subaru made a 2-door hatch, I'd be all over it.

    I've test-driven the SVT, and will test-drive an Si this weekend.

    Open-minded opinions about these cars would be welcome, altho the R-32 I would ONLY want off-lease and under $20K (hence, it's a dream) ...
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    If the R32 is the dream, why not include a regular VR6 or 1.8T Golf on the list? (besides the high price and reliability issues)

    The SVT is probably the better overall package than the Si, but I bet you can get a better deal on an Si. See what kind of negotiating you can do.

    If it makes you feel better, the R32 is not really competitive, performance-wise, with other cars in its price range. It would be tough for me to pick that car over a 350Z, RX-8, GTO, STI, Evo, etc. True, they aren't exactly 2-door hatchbacks, but still, the R32 is way too expensive for what you get, I think.
  • mcap56mcap56 Member Posts: 48
    The focus did indeed improve it's reliability and it is the top ranked car in the segment according to CR. However, it must be noted that the top ranking is based on many things other than reliability. The reliability of the focus has been upgraded to average from much worse than average. The Civic remains much better than average.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    Well, I'm quite happy with my Si, and have had no problems with it. At the same time, I haven't read any problems from SVT owners on this board, then again, how many SVT owners are there?
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    Since I own an Si, I can say that Si is a good little car. But, I think that PZEV Focus ZX3 would be a good choice as well. Focus SVT may not be your best bet for city driving, it is a little high strung. What you will notice when comparing Si with SVT, Si has lots of useable torque down low, but it cuts out at 6800 rpm. PZEV Focus comes with Mazda's 2.3 liter, and may be just as good for city driving as the Si.

    Volkswagen Golf 1.8T may also suit your needs. I agree that R-32 is nice, but it is way overpriced. Doesn't R-32 come with 4WD, just like Audi TT?

    Another small vehicle to look into is Scion xA. It is a 4 door, but it is no bigger than Si lengthwise. Even the seemingly "big" xB is short. The scions are not too sporty, but should be fun to drive.
  • silversolarasilversolara Member Posts: 113
    ...went to Burns Honda off of Rt. 73 in South Jersey. On top of traffic being terrible, I was greeted quickly, then left to my own devices for 10 mins. Their excuse: inventory showed an Si as being on the lot, but there was no key, and none visible on their huge lot. After another 5 mins of being left alone, I exited. I'll call them and arrange a 'real' appointment next time...

    Why I don't want a GTI 1.8: talked to 2 different owners (and I was a past owner of a '72 Fastback), and both got rid of theirs after a few years due to odd electrical glitches ie. windows, lights. I'd like to keep the price to under $18K. Yes, the recent reliability issues of Volkswagon are coming into play, but the R32 is for the most part built in Germany. I think offlease would be the way to go for the R32...

    In case I haven't stressed it yet - I REALLY want a 2-door hatch. I only have one other passenger to worry about...

    I work in the NorthEast, which gives me immediate access to highways - no need to real city driving.

    The SVT had gobs of low torque, but I found the one I test-drove to have an annoying bout of electronic throttle lag. Waiting that extra second for the engine to stop revving was really off-putting, but I will test drive another SVT to see if it is a common thing.

    My main concern with the Si - cabin noise. I hated test driving the new Celica GTs due to the high-revving whiny engine. I guess i am a little old-school: I'd take low-end torque versus hitting the sweet spot on the power band at 6K revs... but if the cabin is decently quiet at that RPM for the Si, that would help...

    Many thanks to everybody who posted a reply.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    The electronic throttle lag you describe sounds like an emissions thing. It would stay full throttle after you shifted for a moment? I don't really know anything about that.

    I remember thinking that the Si was a pretty quiet car before I put an exhaust on it, now I hate taking it on the freeway, but it sounds good around town.

    The Si has slightly more torque than the RSX-S or Celica GTS until 6000rpms or so, so it will feel similarly quick under most driving conditions.

    The Celica GT is definitely slower and noisier. The PZEV Focus is pretty quiet and has a great engine, but the power difference is noticeable. Then again, I've seen stripped down Foci for like $10,000.

    The Si is very comfortable at freeway cruising speeds, power to spare. I'm sure you would be happy with it.
  • silversolarasilversolara Member Posts: 113
    the electronic throttle lag was described in a test drive by an Edmunds editor in its counter-test against the Mini - defined as "slow to throttle down"; and from Motor Trend 2003 "... a pesky throttle positioner, which kept revs from dropping when the throttle was lifted..."

    Realistically, my budget stays firm at $18K. Dropping down to a regular ZX3 is understandable, but probably won't put a grin on my face like the SVT.

    The Acura RSX-S owner I talked to said he couldn't hear his high-revving engine while driving... due to his stereo being so loud... :)

    Well, I'm not taking the Si off the list. I am looking forward to finally test-driving the thing... possibly this Friday night... if the SNOW would go away...

    take care
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    I don't think VW's problems are solely from the assmbly location. I think it is a design flaw. Audis, which are for most part are assembled in Germany suffer from the same problems as plebian VW's.

    I personally would welcome the throttle lag on the dow side and would be more concerned with the throttle lag on the up. I remember test driving then new 99 Jetta, and I stalled out because when I pressed the accelerator the rpms were not there, but I have already started to release the clutch.
    Throttle lag on the down is a good thing for slow shifts, makes them smoother, I think.
  • tpat3tpat3 Member Posts: 119
    Trying to decide whether this type of car suits my needs and whether one deal in particular makes sense.

    I'm a longtime Honda owner and fan, perfectly willing to overlook the si flaws mentioned in these posts. This would be a second car, used primarily for commuting plus weekly dump runs and the occasional hauling of bulky items. The main family car is a Passat wagon (family defined as my wife and 3 year old daughter and her little brother).

    I'm looking at the Si, Scion xB and might consider an SVTF, but am still recovering from a previous experience with an SVT Contour.

    I'm pretty sure the Si would be a fine/fun commuter but am less convinced of its utility re. the kids and car seats and cargo room (seats folded). The exact opposite is true of the Scion.

    Anyone have experience with children in the Si? How much crap can I fit in the back? Am I being narrow minded about Focus reliability? Should I just grow up and buy a damn mini van or SUV?

    Saw an ad for an '03 Si with 207 miles on it for $15,999. Good deal?

    All feedback much appreciated. Thanks.
  • sparky56sparky56 Member Posts: 8
    Long time Honda owner here as well and although I was tempted by the Si I decided that if versatility was the goal then two doors would not fit our needs. Fitting two kids under three in the back seat on a semi regular basis might make the mini van look much more appealing. I remember being distinctly unimpressed with the access to the rear seats in the Si.

    Have you looked at the subaru impreza TS wagon? Pretty fair cargo area, reasonable back seat with good access and a hoot to drive. Reasonable price too.

    We bought the 5 door SVT. A few thousand miles and no complaints. Actually it is has been fantastic. Ever been carrying a wheelbarrow and bags of mulch and have a kid want to race? As far as reliability, is there a major component that has not been recalled yet? I like to think that Ford has "two putted" the Focus into a rather good car. Then again, maybe that is pride in ownership speaking. Not sure what this means but the vanilla Focus has the same CR quality rating as the Matrix.

    Resist the temptation to buy an SUV. I am convinced someday they will be in the same category as leisure suits. Everybody had one, but no one will want to admit it.
  • nitromaxnitromax Member Posts: 640
    I like to think that Ford has "two putted" the Focus into a rather good car. Then again, maybe that is pride in ownership speaking. Not sure what this means but the vanilla Focus has the same CR quality rating as the Matrix.

    The latest Consumer Reports has bumped the Focus up into the "recommended" list and says Ford has improved the reliability of the Focus from the previous three(?) years.
    Good for them. I always liked the car and would have bought a ZX3 in late 2001 had it not been for the reliability issues with it. Instead I went with the RSX because of the build quality. Both are very fun cars to drive(had a Focus rental while my Explorer was in the shop)...both excellent commuter vehicles.
  • tpat3tpat3 Member Posts: 119
    Since the kids would ride in this car pretty infrequently, I'm tying to figure out if I want to deal with the inconvenience. My wife busted me posting the previous message last night and just groaned and walked away, so maybe I have my answer:) but still looking for help rationalizing that part of the equation. I should probably just take one of the kids with me to the dealer and test it out.

    We did consider the WRX wagon a couple years ago and my impression was it's a dog at low rpm and hence a poor daily commuter in heavy traffic. Maybe the TS is a different experience altogether and worth considering.

    I think you're right that the Focus has wound up being good, but I remain wary of it.

    Thanks.
  • silversolarasilversolara Member Posts: 113
    More confusion at Burns Honda when I arrived - I was scheduled for an appointment, but no one was listed to show the car to me. After 10 mins. of watching their staff mill around aimlessly, finally someone condescended to take me for my test drive.
       When we got outside, the salesman was very polite but determined that I should hear his whole monologue on the car, ignoring my stamping feet in the cold - ignoring me when I told him that my main criteria were the engine's high revs filling the cabin with noise & whether or not my knees could fit under the steering wheel.
       Test Drive: for any late model Si owners out there - where does the clutch engage for you? In my Solara, the clutch engages only a few inches off the floor. In this particular 04 Si, the clutch engaged at twice that distance, at almost a 45 degree angle off of the floor.
       I was very embarassed at having the car lurch a couple of times during the drive. All I could think was that I've been driving a stick for 4 years, and I learned how to drive 20 years ago on a manual tranny. So maybe I could learn the new clutch, but compound that with the new position of the shifter on the dash (cool to look at, but execution of the shifting is a vaguely difficult experience). All in all, my left foot/ankle were pretty tired at the end of the drive.
       Outside of that: my knees fit well under the steering wheel, the car handled like a true sports car, and at low speeds/revs, the Si is pedestrian. Take the car up to 5K-6K revs, and now the engine is making more masculine sounds, and I couldn't get the grin off of my face.
       But at the back of my mind was how I could deal with the noise at a 45 minute commute averaging 75mph. And when I got out of the car, I smelled a dreaded burning odor.
       Overall, I am going to test drive another Si before I make my decision - but the main problem is the clutch. If most Si clutches have a high-engagement position, I am leaning towards getting an SVT.
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    I know what you mean by the high clutch engagement in the Si. My girlfriend has a regular Focus, and yes there is a difference in clutch feel. I think Focus has power assisted clutch, the Si as far as I know is not power assisted hydraulic clutch. Mine starts enagging about half way off the floor. I have always had Honda, so that is normal to me.

    Too bad you did not like the shifter position. As soon as I drove it, it became natural. The shifter is right there by the steering wheel, which minimizes the time you are driving one handed. I have to say, I have harder time adjusting to other cars shifter, which feel unnatural after driving Si for a little over a year.

    As far as engine noise at 75 mph, it is much quieter than Focus is at 75 mph. I have a 60 mile one way/120 mile daily commute in the Si. Most of the time I am going 70-80 mph and have yet to be bothered by engine noise. The engine is at 3500 RPM at 70, 4000 RPM at 80 mph, which is normal for a small displacement 4 cylinder engine. At low RPM the the engine growls, which is a positive thing to me. Si has a very distinct deep baritone engine growl when floored at lower RPMs.

    One of the benefits of the i-VTEC is that you don't have to bring the engine to 5000 RPM to get results. The system monitors the throttle positon, pedal input, gear, and speed. If you were to simply stomp on the gas at 30 mph in 3rd gear, the car will just accelerate without need to downshift.

    Ankle pain may be a sign that you need to do more Donkey raises at the gym. (excersise your calfs) Si clutch is not that stiff, I used to drive a 91 VW Jetta with aftermarket clutch, now that was STIFF.

    If you like SVT better, then go for it. Si is not for everyone. It seems that there are better deals on SVT right now. And you can get SVT in 5 door, I think
  • vadpvadp Member Posts: 1,025
    1. There is no such a thing as a power assisted clutch.

    2. The new Focus with the Mazda engines is much quiter than the older versions.

    3. Give yourself a favor and test drive the Mazda3 with 2.3L engine before making a decision.
  • silversolarasilversolara Member Posts: 113
    thanks for your posts.

       blueiedgod - i didn't drive my manual tranny cars with a shifter on the dash. Comfort being relative, I feel it is only logical that after 20 years of driving my cars, i might need a break-in period for learning the new shifter for the Si. "Deep baritone growl" would be the LAST way i would define the noise the engine makes at 5000 rpms - tenor, maybe, but still not deep. :)
      Regarding the exercise: I had severe ligament damage (3rd degree ankle sprains) to both of my ankles (consecutively, not simultaneously) a decade ago sustained while playing volleyball. After a years of intense rehab, I still live with a loss of 12 inches of vertical leap, and lateral movement to my ankles. I would have to say that if the next 04 Si I test has the same high engagement position for the clutch, I'll sadly have to cross the Si off of my list.

      Vadp - thanks for the advice, but if you noted my original query, I want a 2-door hatch. To quote my post from #181: "In case I haven't stressed it yet - I REALLY want a 2-door hatch." Maybe the 3 is sold as a 2-door hatch elsewhere?
       A lot of folks have questioned me as to why a 2-door hatch - answer: I don't/won't have any kids, nor will I volunteer to be anyone's taxi.
  • dmoulddmould Member Posts: 76
    I am quickly approaching 50,000km in my '02 SVT in just over 14 months. The car has proven to be very reliable. There was an issue with a rough idle/surging that was cured with a software flash update from Ford. Once had a check engine light which required a new fuel cap to cure.
    This car is a joy to drive on a daily basis. The extras the Focus SVT offers over the Civic Si such as the audiophile sound system, heated seats, traction control and 17" wheels make a difference in the value proposition. The SVT is more relaxed on the highway than the Si, with the engine turning about 500rpm less in 6th gear. The SVT makes decent torque down low, and performs well enough if shifted at 3000rpm. With a set of snow tires working with the traction control, the SVT even works well in the snow. Ford offers a good warranty on the Focus, so you can't go wrong! One thing I recommend to SVT Focus owners - you must rotate your tires every 10,000km or so. The rear tires get worn on the inside edge, and can get loud if not rotated every so often.
  • charlieplcharliepl Member Posts: 6
    I have had my Ford Focus SVT since Sept. 2002. I bought it mostly for cool European styling, great handling, comfort (the car fits like a glove) and a racy sounding exhaust.

    I had the following mechanical problems (none of them major)
    1) A/C motor replaced
    2) Dashboard replaced (fuel gauge didn't read correctly)
    3) Loose piece of trim next to passengers seat reattached
    4) Driver's seat's bolt tightened (it was squeaking)
    5) Clutch spring replaced (squeaking)
    Overall I am reasonably satisfied with mechanical reliability so far (23000 km)

    The car has poor build quality (rear hatch misaligned with very uneven gaps, dashboard misaligned, huge tolerances for plastics inside the cabin etc:). Materials quality is poor, but at least better than most North American's GM offerings.
    To sum it up: I am not pleased with build & materials quality in this car (most Americans don't pay much attention to those things, that's why they build them the way they do here)

    If I had to buy a new car now I would go for Mazda 3 which I don't think is cheapened out for North American market like Focus was and still is (and probably always will be).
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    dmould - how much did you pay for your SVT? The 7 problems that were reported between you and charliepl were a major reason I didn't buy the SVT - I had concerns about build quality.

    As far as value:
    1. heated seats - no use for me (in California)
    2. 6 speed - wish I had one
    3. sound system - would have to hear it before I judge
    4. 17" wheels - How much do they weigh and what tires do they come with? This is probably worth less than $500.

    The SVT is a good value and a good car, but I paid $15980 for my Si, and I don't know that I think the SVT is a better deal. Especially with all of the issues reported in the last two posts.
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    I second that. At the time I was looking at cars, end of 2002 - early 2003 the SVT had no rebate nor discounts. The WRX could be had for $20,000 for a left over 2002, Matrix/Vibe were both in high $19,000 for XRS/GT, Mini was still at $25K for Cooper S with options to make it comparable to Si. And Si was advertized in local papers for $15,000 for a 2002 left over. I scored one for $14,500 with 1.9% financing.

    1. Heated seats - would have been nice in winter, but suede does not get as cold as leather.
    2. 6 speed - i would really like one, but if it geared taller than Si's 5th. The RSX-s 6th gear is same ratio as Si's 5th. Not sure what the gear ratios and final drive is in the SVT. But if I could make my car run at 2500 rpm at 80 mph, it would be nice.
    3. I replaced mine with MP3 headunit anyway
    4. 17 inch wheels are useless, only more rotational inertia than 15 inchers.
  • dmoulddmould Member Posts: 76
    You did very well picking up your Si for that price. At the time I bought my SVTF, the Civic Si was selling for about $2000 CDN less.
    FYI - most Focus SVTs seats are leather on the outside edge, with a cloth insert to breath and hold you during aggressive driving. The seat heaters provide heat well before the heater on cold mornings! The SVTF 6th gear is definitely taller than the Si 5th, although it still turns close to 3500rpm at 80mph. The Focus audiophile system sounds very good, much better than the Infinity system in my Dakota.
    How do you figure 17" wheels are useless? In addition to the good looks and aggressive stance, they offer a ton of grip with the factory summer performance Continental tires. Superior handling and braking. I hardly call that useless. Why do you think Honda went to 16" wheels on the '04 Civic Si?
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    Tires have much more impact on braking and handling than wheels. Factory wheels tend to be heavy. I bet you could save 10 pounds a corner going to lightweight 15" wheels, with no handling compromise. I think the dynamic improvements provided by the lighter wheels outweighs any visual benefit.
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    How do you figure 17" wheels are useless? In addition to the good looks and aggressive stance, they offer a ton of grip with the factory summer performance Continental tires. Superior handling and braking.

    The wheel diameter has nothing to do with amount of grip tire can privide. It is the cross sectional area of the "contact patch" that privides the grip and traction. A 15 inch wheel with a wider tire will provide the same amount of grip as a 17 inch tire with the same width. But the 17 inch wheel will have about 4 times the rotational inertia of 15 inch wheel. Inertia is described as I=mr^2, where m= mass at the radi, and most of the weight in a wheel is concetrated at the rim/tire rather than hub, and r=radius. Increasing radius, increases rotational inertia (I) exponentially.

    Increased inertia puts additional stress on your hubs and bearings, as well as reduces your et times.

    Large wheels are all about show, they do look nice. This is why Honda offered 16 inchers on the 2004 Si, because most kids have no clue what larger wheel does to car's handling characteristics, but it looks nice.

    Formula 1 cars still use very small wheels, ever wonder why?
  • dmoulddmould Member Posts: 76
    The factory 17" SVT Focus wheels weigh about 21 pounds, about 5 pounds more than your typical 15" alloy wheel. A switch to 15" tires of the same width would require a higher profile tire, which would weigh a little more than the low profile 17" tire. Overall though, yes a lighter wheel/tire combo is beneficial, especially in acceleration and braking, less so in cornering.
    "A 15 inch wheel with a wider tire will provide the same amount of grip as a 17 inch tire with the same width." This statement is only true if the 15" tire is the same diameter as the 17" tire, as the diameter also affects the contact patch. A 15" tire of the same diameter will have a taller sidewall, resulting in a loss of responsiveness (and possibly grip) with the added flex in the tire. There is something to gain with a larger rim/low profile tire combination. The added weight and inertia is overcome with more horsepower and better brakes on modern cars.
    Perhaps the 13" tire technology from Formula 1 will make its way to the streets, reversing the trend to larger wheels?
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    A 15" tire of the same diameter will have a taller sidewall, resulting in a loss of responsiveness (and possibly grip) with the added flex in the tire.

    Having a 15 inch wheel with a 2 inch side wall would definately defeat the purpose of having a 15 inch wheel in the first place. I was merely comparing the 15 inch stock wheel/tire combo on Si to the stock 17 inch wheel/tire combo on SVT.
    If my stock tire is 195/60-15 and I were to upgrade to 215/55-15, I will increase the contact patch while only gaining 0.1 inches in radius. For the 17 inch wheel you would have to have 205/45-17 tire to have roughly the same circumference, radius and diameter. Problem is that the mass will be removed father from the axis of rotation, resulting in higher rotational inertia.
    You can't beat physics.

    I wonder how often drivers out there take their cars to the limit of adhesion in every day driving. I do, (I admit, I am an aggressive driver, let the flaming begin) on my daily commute, but I see more expensive and more capable BMW's and Porsches just hogging the left lane.
  • spy_hunterspy_hunter Member Posts: 5
    Hi all, I'm soliciting opinions about my impending car purchase:

    I'm moving to CA, and need to unload my beloved '91 Integra RS (best car I've ever owned, btw). I can afford a new Focus ZX5, and I like the idea of having rear doors and the PZEV engine, which I hear is quite spunky. (I test drove an SVT at my local dealer, but they didn't have the 2.3 on the lot).

    I hear that the Focus' reliability has improved, but I'm concerned about the long-term outlook and resale value.

    On the other hand, my Integra has treated me sooooo well, that I'm considering getting a 2002 RSX-S or even a 2001 Integra GS-R. Unfortunately, the new ones don't fit in the budget.

    Finally, my girlfriend just bought a new Civic Si, which drives beautifully (and I have no trouble switching back and forth from her shifter to mine). I just don't like the profile--I think the Edmunds reviewer called it "a door wedge with wheels."

    Any thoughts?
  • vibsrvibsr Member Posts: 47
    spy_hunter:

    I'm a bit biased in that I own a 2004 RSX (160 hp/5-spd man). For the sheer fun factor alone, given your choices...I would go with the '02 RSX-S.

    HOWEVER, the RSX-S (200hp/6-speed) requires PREMIUM go-juice! California has the highest gasoline prices in the USA. Those facts alone would weigh heavily on my decision process. *** I just checked the EPA! A 6-speed Focus requires premium, too!***

    A 2001 Integra GS-R? Hmmm....See if you can find an article on a 2002 RSX-S. Drive them both if you can. If you lean toward a 2001 GS-R, I think you should look for one that hasn't gone through any serious aftermarket mods.
      
    Long-term resale value is typically lower on a Ford than on a car of the same size/class/age from Honda.

    Reliability concerns...
    Anybody can build a lemon! I once owned a car that some folks said would require major engine-work by 60K. It was a 1986 Escort with a 5-speed. It went nearly 70K on the original brakes, over 100K before it needed a new muffler, and only twice in over 100K miles did it fail to start. Once because of a dead battery, and again because of a bad ingiter. Since then, I've owned a Mazda MX6 that needed a new engine at 194K (got wrecked after the fix %^#&), a Toyota Camry (too polite), and now I have this RSX with about 3K miles on the clock. I've had more repairs on the MX6 than I EVER had with the Escort (but that MX6 was sweet!). Ford has had some wierd problems with the Focus, but by now I would be reasonably certain that most of those bugs were effectively dealt with.

    Practicality concerns....
    If kids are in your not-too-distant future, a ZX5 might be a bit handier for positioning the tax deduction in the car seat.

    Either way, you're in for a fun ride. Hope I didn't bore y'all!!
  • spy_hunterspy_hunter Member Posts: 5
    Thanks for the valuable comments, vibsr!

    The premium gas issue is a great point. From an environmental perspective, I think the 2.3 l Focus is the better car. Not only does it get a little better mileage, but the PZEV engine won't contribute so much to my girlfriend's asthma.

    The Acuras are faster, but if the newer ones are anything like mine, low end torque is a little weak. I suspect the 2.3 l Focus probably steps off the line a little better. Driving around San Diego, this is probably more important than flat out speed.

    All that being said, I still can't discount the fact that my 13+ year old Integra runs just beautifully. I just arrived at my parents' house, 375 miles from where I live. She's purring so fine right now, I'm getting really depressed that I've got to sell her.

    Plus, I did learn an interesting thing or two from Consumer Reports. I don't rely on them too much for driving impressions, but they do a good job of looking into the small things that may be important. For instance, the ZX5, unlike the SVT, has no rear head restraints! Pretty strange for a more family-centered car. Also, no exterior latch for the hatch. I like throwing my briefcase back there before getting in the car, but no can do in the ZX5.

    Oh, well, I guess I'll just have to go and drive them some more . . .
  • sparky56sparky56 Member Posts: 8
    The lacking rear hatch latch seems to be a new trend with some carmakers. They do give you a button on the fob though.

    2.3s can be scarce, at least outside of carb states. The new duratec 2.0s seem to be better than the old zetecs. Good luck.
  • joe249joe249 Member Posts: 95
    I have one and I paid 25 k as I put a clear mask ,spoiler,fog lights and what ever. This is my 4th accura. They are bullet proof.
    To get heated seats,you have to buy it in Canada.
    ;Also, premium gas is expensive . I run (91 to 93 octane.)
    I love the looks of the Focus and tried one but, the thrill isn't there. I'm scared of VW's but, like Subaru they got heated seats. I sacrificed heated seats for quality.
    I tried the Mazda 3S Hatch and the sales person said to step on it and the engine made alot of noise but,no Zoom Zoom to me.BMW has heated seats as my wife drives a 5 series but that's her baby.
         My Type s has them all beat,although the low end torque leaves alot to be desired on the highway it's a rocket and a fun ride.I'm 65 and it rides stiff and you feel every bump,but it's a great machine that just wants to go .
        Lastly the tires are same performance tires on Maza3 Michelin's 17 vr.
       I want heated seats,but can't find a reliable car as mine that has them.
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    Spy, if cost is an issue and you like the way your girlfriend's Si drives, get base RSX. RSX is exactly the same car as the Si, except for a few minor details. And they sell for much less than RSX-S.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    The few minor details that separate the Si from the RSX are the best reasons to buy one.

    A) Fantastic Seats
    B) GREAT shifter position
    C) More cargo space, better access to it
    D) Better aftermarket support
    E) Cheaper $$$
    F) Relatively rare
    G) Seats 5 (RSX seats 4)

    The advantages of the base RSX are:
    A) Slightly more torque
    B) leather available (but worse seats)
    C) 12 months more warranty

    As far as power goes, both the Si and RSX make similar power to the RSX-S until 6000rpms.

    You'll notice that joe249 paid ~25,000 for his RSX-S - and it is certainly a great car. That said, the Si is still definitely available for mid 17s (maybe 17 even), and the RSX for mid 18s. $6000-8000 difference is nothing to sneeze at in this price range.

    My pick is the Si.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,250
    got a focus 'zts' with 2.3 pzev and a 5 speed about 3 weeks ago. got it as a car to keep the miles off our suv's. am very impressed with the 2.3 engine. it's very smooth and has plenty of torque. the four bangers i have driven in the past didn't react well to additional weight or running the air. i haven't been able to tell the difference in normal driving, even with 4 people on board, one time. hills don't bother it either.
    mine has anti lock brakes, power moonroof, windows, door locks and side mirrors, heated seats/mirrors, tilting/telescoping steering wheel, cd/mp3 stereo, alloy wheels, remote keyless entry.
    the doors are kind of tinny sounding, but other than that it's a nice package. got it for a franklin over 13k, plus tax and reg.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,250
    meant for a ulysses over! spell checking that one was a chore!
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    Muffin, I agree that Si is a better package than RSX, but Spy-hunter specifically said that he did not like his girlfriend's Si because of the looks. Some people can look beyond the shell (like us, Si drivers) and some can't (can we put Shallow Hal spell on people who don't like Si's styling?) I was merely suggesting that if he liked the Si's dynamics, that RSX base would provide the same.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    Ah, I missed that.
  • spy_hunterspy_hunter Member Posts: 5
    Blueiedgod, I like your suggestion about the base RSX. I really don't need 200 hp, and the torque is about the same (and more accessible) in the base than the -s.

    And Muffin_man, I do appreciate your fondness for the Si. I really like driving my girlfriend's car. I don't HATE the styling, but I just like the Focus' shapely rounded figure better.

    I just did some checking on the NHTSA website:
    http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/NCAP/Cars.cfm
    The RSX did somewhat better in frontal crash testing than the Focus, 5 stars compared to 4.

    Looking at the raw data, (bottom of screen) the head injury criterion (HIC) for the Focus driver is 403 and 274 for the RSX. The femoral load on the Focus driver is 900-1000 lbs., and only 110-130 on the RSX. This translates into slightly reduced risk of head injury and femoral fracture for the RSX driver, although looking at the injury curves (see this link:)
    http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/NCAP/Info.html#iq8
    The risk in either car is actually pretty small.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,250
    6. Can I compare vehicles from different classes?

    Depending on the weight of a vehicle, it can be compared to other vehicles in its class. Since a frontal crash test into a fixed barrier is similar to a crash between two vehicles of the same weight, ===>> the frontal crash test results can only be compared to other vehicles in the same weight class and those plus or minus 250 lbs. <<===

    Side crash test results can be compared across all classes because all vehicles are hit with the same barrier and at the same force.

    Rollover Resistance Ratings can also be compared across all classes.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • spy_hunterspy_hunter Member Posts: 5
    Explorerx4:

    According to the NHTSA, the RSX, Focus and Si are all "compact passenger cars." Their respective weights are 2708, 2630, and 2502 lbs. Therefore, they satisfy both of the above criteria, and I'm unsure what your point was in posting them.

    I agree that the star rating doesn't give a complete picture--that's why I think it's important to look at the actual numbers, which show significant differences between these cars.
This discussion has been closed.