Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Honda Civic Si / SiR 2005 and earlier

16791112105

Comments

  • The Temple of VTEC (www.vtec.net) recently posted a news item stating that the magazine Grassroots Motorsports had a First Drive Report on the upcoming Si. Does anyone know if Grassroots Motorsports actually test drove the car or is simply regurgitating information that has been circulating around the net? (Or better yet, can someone find a copy of the magazine and post the article?)
  • mdrivermdriver Posts: 385
    Since the Si won't be available for at least half a year, I doubt if anyone has had a chance to drive a non-prototype. There have been a number of Euro tests about the Type R which is currently available there. That should give us a clue about the Si's performance. An even better prediction is to drive the current RSX. The 2002 Si's performance will probably be identical to the RSX.
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    The Civic Si has 10 lbs less torque than the base RSX. hmm...$5,000 for 10 more lbs on the RSX. That's kinda expensive.
  • mdrivermdriver Posts: 385
    More like $2,000 more. Base RSX is just over $20k. Civic Si will probably be just over $18k.
  • ghuletghulet Posts: 2,628
    If Honda can bring the hatchback here in Si form, why not also sell a DX? Yeah, I know the CX and DX didn't do too well in the last body, but I think that has as much to do with availability as anything (i.e., if there are none on the lot, nobody can buy one). Also, hatchback popularity in general is going up. People are realizing their practicality compared to two-door coupes. Honda hatches have traditionally been among the most fuel-efficient 'regular' cars available (not hybrid or a 3-cylinder deathtrap), which certainly may come into play again if fuel prices increase. We are, after all, going to war in the middle east, this should affect fuel prices.
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    I'm sure you can get an Si for 17K.
  • himilerhimiler Posts: 1,209
    Honda's too busy building CRV's for the US at the Swindon plant. Honda apparently considers ANY hatchback model too low-volume (in terms of sales) to warrant signifcant differences in trim levels, as last seen in the '92-'95 Civic. That generation's hatch even had a wheelbase that wasn't shared by either the coupe or sedan.
  • ghuletghulet Posts: 2,628
    that the 92-95 hatch sold relatively well, and the 96 on bombed (at least from the lack of them on roads here in Chicago). I thought the design of the last gen was much better, as the small clam shell and sloping roof made it impossible to utilitze the hatch to a great extent on the 92-95 models. One thing Honda ought to bring back are the collapsing outside mirrors.
    The 96 was simple and roomy. I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens, maybe if the Si does well, the others will follow.
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    I've seen mirrors that fold inwards, but collapsing ones?
  • ghuletghulet Posts: 2,628
    ........the ones that 'collapse' are the mirrors that DON'T fold in, especially if you live in the city on a narrow street.
  • mdrivermdriver Posts: 385
    If the Civic EX currently sells for about $17k, how could the new Si sell for the same price? The Si will have the upgraded engine and alloys to name just two enhancement over the current EX. The 99-00 Si cost $18k and it had no ABS. My guess is $18,500 for the Si with side airbags.

    If one checks out the Honda UK site for the Civic 3-door hatch, you will find that the equivalent to the U.S. Civic EX coupe (feature wise) is actually cheaper than the U.S. EX. Their prices include sales tax, therefore you have to add whatever the sales tax is in the U.S. to do a comparison. The new hatch is infinitely better designed than the coupe offering considerably more room. I think they also come with folding mirrors too.
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    Is about right. I can bet that when supply is abundant, a base RSX can sell for as low as 19K. To have an Si cost 18.5K, when an additional .5 is all that's needed to get an RSX, is nonsense.
  • mdrivermdriver Posts: 385
    Why would you compare the list price of the Si to a "haggled over" price of the RSX? You are right about the $500 difference if there are plenty of RSXs to choose from and only a handful of Sis. Since nobody can predict what discounting there will be on the Si, we can only talk about what we think the sticker will say. If the sticker of the Si is the same as the EX coupe 5sp (about $17k), then it would seem that you are getting the 16" alloys and i-VTEC for free by buying the Si over the EX. For this reason alone, the Si has to be more than $17k (sticker price).
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    I think there's more than just the price difference. The U.S. isn't particularly fond of hatchbacks (at least not until recently).

    Why is it that Honda decided to only have the Si in hatchback style? I think the Si should appear in coupe style. Honda should just bring over the functional hatchback as a regular model.
  • ghuletghulet Posts: 2,628
    Maybe Honda is trying to by putting out the Si in hatch form only, or maybe they're trying to get some old Si customers back, since the Si 'traditionally' (til 98) was a hatchback.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I consider it a good thing that Honda brought back SI as a hatchback. It wasn't until 1999 that Civic SI was sold as a coupe.

    Based on CTR reviews from Europe, we're in for a surprise. One of them has to do with people who will find the interior too big, and the other is for people who will find it really spacious!

    This is my first post in this thread, but I noticed that some people were feeling proud to say that Honda copied Ford's design for Focus, by comparing the 2002 Civic SI to ZX3, and even to 1992 hatchback. Apparently, they have no idea what 1996 Civic hatchback looked like. Except for the greenhouse (2002 has it similar to 1992 version), the rest of the styling is almost identical.

    Oh yes, and reviewers have also loved the position of the shifter. IMO, this was a bold move by Honda.
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    I remember when that debate was going on.

    I'm glad I'm not the only one who realized what the Civic had looked like before the Focus came out.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    I thought posting couple of thumbnail pictures would enlighten those who didn't know about Civic hatchback styling from the near past.

    1996 Civic

    image


    2002 Civic

    image


    The 2002 styling takes its 'greenhouse' cues from 1992 hatchback (longish looking window). Unfortunately, I couldn'timmediately find a comparable picture of the 1992 hatch to post here.


    The only resemblance I see between Focus and Civic is in headlamp resemblance. But then, large round headlmaps were the strongest and unique exterior features for the 1996-2000 Civic, while Ford was selling Escort. So it makes sense to say that Ford made the Focus to resemble Civic, not the other way around.
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    The current Civic's headlights seem to evolve from the Honda Insight- which was out before the Focus.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    Although the headlamps have slightly shrunk in the coupe/sedan with the 2001 changes, but they continue the theme started by Honda in 1996. The hatchback however has the headlamps taken directly from the previous generation Civic sedan, and so does the 2002 CR-V.
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    the 2002 CR-V copied the body style of the Ford Escape. Some can say that it is an evolution of the last generation CR-V, but it just so happens that the new CR-V evolved to look quite similar in body form to the Escape.

    So I guess it evens out the score.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    the front bumper, I don't see anything on the CRV copied from Escape. I'd love to find out where do they resemble. CRV is another example of evolution, I will try to post comparative pictures here later.
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    With side views of both models. You will see how the CR-V resembles the Escape in the execution of the car's overall shape. It basically looks like an Escape with rear tail lights that runs the 3/4 length of the whole back and a spare tire tacked on. Now compare that with a picture of the outgoing CR-V model, and it's obvious where Honda received its inspirations.
  • himilerhimiler Posts: 1,209
    Can we keep this a SUV-Free Zone? It suffices to say that all the "cute-utes" pretty much look the same in my rear-view mirror.
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    But we were discussing how people were accusing Honda of copying Ford Focus's headlamps, which is simply not true.

    However, my point was that Honda is guilty of copying other cars, just as every other automaker is.
  • robertsmxrobertsmx Posts: 5,525
    When the CRV comes out, check every panel there is. I bet you'll see an evolution. The upper rear quarter is more 'squarish' now (earlier it was rounded and tapered), which to me seems to resemble a Land Rover. In fact, the CRV now looks like a baby MDX, except for the fact that the liftgate is more angular in the Acura.

    Escape to me looks like a baby Explorer to me, which makes sense as well. Although I always thought that the Explorer was sitting on its butt while being driven around.

    We can discuss this in CRV (SUV) thread though, where I have posted pictures.
  • The Temple of VTEC has a news item referring to Autoweek's test of the new Civic Si hatchback in Germany. Autoweek's article mentions that the spring/shock rates of the new Si are almost identical to those of the European Civic Type-R, that the acceleration/speed is not as dramatic as past Si's (even though the 0-60 acceleration figure is expected to remain unchanged), that the 50-80 m/hr acceleration time is lower than that of the B16A Si, and that the vehicle is estimated to weigh over 2700 lbs (This is most likely due to the weight of the larger engine. However, I am surprised that the changeover to a Hatchback body does not compensate for the added weight of the engine.)

    You may view the news item at the following address: <http://www.vtec.net/news/items/850.html>
  • himilerhimiler Posts: 1,209
    The extra weight isn't under the hood, I'm afraid. Just look at the poor thing...it's too friggin' long and tall! A 2700lb. "performance" car riding on skinny 195/60-15 tires? What a cruel joke from Honda this has turned out to be.

    Let's review: for around 20(!) Large, you get a bloated, underpowered, under-tired (in typical Honda fashion) car that could only look stylish to anyone over the age of 60.

    Honda is doing the right thing by only importing 15,000 of 'em. The words of Mr.T come to mind--"I pity the fool!"
  • mdrivermdriver Posts: 385
    Unfourtunately, much of the weight is in the body structure which enables the Si to score well in crash tests. No real way around that, unless you build an aluminum frame and body. The hatchback style is a welcome breath of fresh air in Honda's otherwise bland lineup. Over 60s usually won't go near a hatchback. I think the tires are 16" not 15", but agree that it is still undertired, like every other Honda made.
  • ... has a somewhat disjointed article on the new Si, and a cover photo to boot. The more I read about this car, the less interested I am. Glad I have a deposit down on a new Mini Cooper :) It won't be as fast as an Si, but I'm betting it will be better built and more fun to drive.
This discussion has been closed.