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

19192949697105

Comments

  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Posts: 2,797
    But you are right about the Si not having "chick appeal". Most of those "chicks" prefer to drive Chevy Cavaliers and Pontiac Sunfires - why I don't know. All you have to do is crack open any auto magazine to read how dreadful they are. Hey! I just answered my own question.

    Most people can only see the beauty on the exterior, we are a nation of very shallow people. Si is ugly, but you know sometimes a Pug is so ugly it is cute, so is the Si. And she makes up for the "door stop" styling in handling, perfomance and most importantly "creature comforts"

    Cavaliers and Sunfires may have some styling, but the insides are still the 1983 design.
    Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.
  • gee35coupegee35coupe Posts: 3,475
    There is no better $16k car on the market. As far as the $19k list price....I wouldn't pay that much.

    As for the Mazda3 being "superior". Last I checked they didn't make a 2 door hatch 3.
  • boston14boston14 Posts: 111
    Hi, I test rode a 05 Si and loved it. Totally loved it. Please tell me how to get one for under 18 grand. Best I could do was 18,800 and free security system put in. I cant see how they can sell for some of the prices I have seen posted here.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,691
    the market was flooded with SIs, which is how some people got such low prices. Since last year, Honda has limited the number of SIs it brought here, so the days of $15,9 for a brand new one are probably over.

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

  • mautomauto Posts: 75
    Yep, the Mazda 3 is not a three door hatch. It's a five door. That's why it is "superior". You know this car is selling like hotcakes since there's no rebate - unusual for a Mazda.

    The Si is a nice car and I do like the styling. But selling a manual trans. 3 door hatchback in the land of automatic sedans was always gonna be a tough nut to crack.
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Posts: 2,797
    The Si is a nice car and I do like the styling. But selling a manual trans. 3 door hatchback in the land of automatic sedans was always gonna be a tough nut to crack.

    I wish all the cars were manual. It would keep un-skilled drivers off the road. If one does not want to put time and effort into driving, maybe they should not be driving. Auto's should only be sold with a doctor's note to someone who physically can not shift (amputee's and such). There is no reason why a healthy person can not drive stick, except for being lazy. The latest surveys show that we are a nation of lazy bums who do not eat right, do not excersize, and allow ourselves to look the way we do. Don't laugh, it is all connected. Lazy people don't feel like eating right, don't feel like excersizing, don't feel like being active, don't feel like exerting any kind of work, including shifting their own gears.
  • john500john500 Posts: 409
    I agree completely with blueiedgod.

    Forcing manual transmissions onto the market would reduce the amount of accidents from people who feel that they have something better to do than drive when they are on the road (i.e. eating, talking on the telephone etc.). You should try driving in Louisiana. Everyone owns a 3 ton pickup with an automatic transmission and they never use turn signals for lane changes or turns. They don't even have to change gears and they fail to drive properly. If a trucker can negotiate 13 gears and drive impeccably, then the average citizen can negotiate 5 or 6 gears. Manual tranmissions would also reduce the weight of the vehicle (no torque converter) and give better control of rpms. This has the added benefit of improving the gas mileage of all the cars.
  • I agree too. In addition I feel the world would be a safer place if all auto's were limited to 90 HP and speed limited to a 75 MPH.
  • carlisimocarlisimo Posts: 1,280
    It doesn't improve gas mileage when you're driving stick the fun way!
  • gee35coupegee35coupe Posts: 3,475
    I could have waited for the 3 or bought a Mazda5. Obviously the Civic was what I wanted. In that case I feel it is superior to the 3 since they don't offer the configuration that I desired.
  • The 5 door hatch is only superior to the Si if you need the extra 2 doors.
  • boston14boston14 Posts: 111
    The Mazda 3s has a engine that is a little bit different in feel than the SI. Has a lighter feel to the throttle and spins a little quicker. The first time I tired the 3 it felt like a sportbike engine. Very quick Revs.

    Its a hard choice between the SI and 3.
  • I looked at both, to me the 4 doors make it look like a family station wagon.
  • mautomauto Posts: 75
    "Its a hard choice between the SI and 3."

    17" wheels vs. 16"

    More torque (w/no mpg penalty) vs. less

    50k b to b warranty vs. 36k

    Curtain air bag vs. none

    Selling like hotcakes vs. giving them away

    Sounds like an easy decision to me.
  • gee35coupegee35coupe Posts: 3,475
    2 door sporty hatch vs. 5 door sporty wagon....

    Again there's no comparison between the two cars. Might as well compare them to a minitruck.
  • Worse crash test scores versus better (just because a car has side curtain airbags, it doesn't automatically mean you are safer in it than a car without them)

    According to edmunds; slower 0-60 time vs. faster.

    An excellent manual transmission vs a good one.

    Excellent rep for reliability vs. an ok rep.
    (might be why the latter needs a longer warrenty)

    I could of course go on. Ultimately I am not trying to dis the Mazda in favor of the Civic, they are both very good cars. For some, indeed for perhaps the majority the Mazda will be a better choice (anyone who needs an automatic, or wants certain luxury features like leather seats, etc). On the flip side though there is alot to recommend the Civic; its a solid little run about with good performance, good utility and its a bit different than most things you will see on the road. Its relatively weak sales also means that it will be easier to negotiate a price than on a car that is selling like hot cakes.

    So mauto, while the decision might be easier for you, for some it might be a bit more difficult.
  • I wouldn't say there is no comparison between them. In fact other than the extra doors, or lack there of, I would say the two are very comperable vehicles. Both are sporty hatchbacks targeted at the younger crowd with excellent cargo utility.

    Indeed unless your requirements include 4 doors or an automatic transmission (and some people's of course do) then I think it would be natural to cross shop these vehicles; heck last year when I thought I needed to replace my VW I certainly did.

    --
    Bill
  • gee35coupegee35coupe Posts: 3,475
    All cars are comparable in one way or another. I could have bought anything from an Civic EX to a EVO. But if you don't care for the Mazda3 because it has a plastic core support, find the steering position canted toward the center of the car, and the faric on the seats feels like cheap stretched nylon over foam, you don't want a 3. I like my steering wheel, solid feeling construction, and suede bolsters on my current(third EP) SI.
  • Right but my point is that the two cars in question are not exactly apples and oranges. They are in the same class (compact hatchbacks, with a bit of a sport image), same general ball park on price. Really if Honda had brought over their 5 door Civic (which is much like the 3 door) and gave it the Si treatment then they would be direct competitors, as it is they are nearly so.
  • It's an individual thing - to me they are apples and oranges. i don't want a "sport wagon" I want a hatchback. If I was in the market for a hatchback right now, I would be looking for 3 doors.

    Bottom line is, the Mazda 3 does not share a bodystyle with the Si.
  • I grant that there are differences between the cars, just like there are differences between every car. I was specifically trying to counter gee35coupe's contention that seemed to indicate that the two cars are so different as to make it silly to compare the two.

    I can certainly understand that everyone has individual preferences that would rule one or both of the cars out for them, but I think the cars are close enough in their functionality and their prospective audiences that it makes sense to compare them here.
  • gee35coupegee35coupe Posts: 3,475
    Disappeared in this country. If the cars were that close, there would be many more of them. But it looks like there is a stong enough "preference" where automakers feel most people would buy a five door but not a three. I, as in me, as in this consumer, loves my SI evev though I had the choice to get any of the five doors out there.
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Posts: 2,797
    I don't think that it would have hurt Honda to offer a 5 door hatch in this country. The car is in existence in UK. They would just have to bump up the production and put the current Si's engine in it, instead of UK's 1.3 or 1.7 engines. Then they can go ahead and put the current RSX-S engine in the 3 door hatch, to make it more sporty than the 5 door. And maybe offer the 5 door with a diesel. I would be the first one to dump my Si for a diesel Civic 5 door, if the prices are reasonable, of course.
  • I don't know whether a 5-door Civic Diesel would sell or not, but I would definitely like a k20a2 powered Civic Si.
  • john500john500 Posts: 409
    Let's say I have two cars. One is a stock 2003 Honda Civic SI (horsepower 160, torque = 132 ftlb). The second vehicle is a hypothetical 2003 Civic SI with a V6 engine that has the same horsepower but higher torque ( for example, horsepower = 160, torque = 160 ftlb). If all other parameters were identical (vehicle weight, driver weight, gear ratios, driver shifting experience, etc.), would the V6 make it down a quarter mile track quicker (because of a longer length of time at a higher horsepower while shifting through the gears) or would the cars reach the quarter mile marker at about the same time?
  • gee35coupegee35coupe Posts: 3,475
    The diesel Jetta's are quicker than the base model gas for that reason. The diesel puts out less hp but more torque so it's quicker up to a certain speed.
  • carlisimocarlisimo Posts: 1,280
    It's hard to say. The V6 would be faster in each gear (more area under the torque curve = more speed) but it'd have to shift sooner. The I4 might catch up while in first gear once the V6 has shifted. You can probably calculate the problem pretty exactly if you actually have the curve showing torque to revs. I have a feeling the V6's flatter torque curve would overcome the gearing issue.

     

    Around a track, the I4 would be able to take some of the corners in a lower gear and would be my favorite.
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Posts: 2,797
    Let's say I have two cars. One is a stock 2003 Honda Civic SI (horsepower 160, torque = 132 ftlb). The second vehicle is a hypothetical 2003 Civic SI with a V6 engine that has the same horsepower but higher torque ( for example, horsepower = 160, torque = 160 ftlb). If all other parameters were identical (vehicle weight, driver weight, gear ratios, driver shifting experience, etc.), would the V6 make it down a quarter mile track quicker (because of a longer length of time at a higher horsepower while shifting through the gears) or would the cars reach the quarter mile marker at about the same time?

     

    No need to ponder, no need for a V6. A Civic Si with a K24 transplant is faster. Whether the transplant is from Accord (160 hp, 160 lbs.ft.) or TSX (200 hp, 170 lbs.ft??). There is an Si out there with a "Frankenstein" engine, it has a K24 block, and K20A2 head (from RSX-S). It was featured in SCC a couple of summers ago. It was faster than CTR on the track. The fatter torque curve made it a really nice car to drive in traffic or on the track.
  • just for conversation sake, had our first 8 inches of snow in the driveway today, Si did well...I hate to shovel if I don't have to....
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Posts: 2,797
    just for conversation sake, had our first 8 inches of snow in the driveway today, Si did well...I hate to shovel if I don't have to....

     

    The stock Michelins are very good in the snow. I had no problem driving in the 4 blizzards we got last year. I had a 60 mile (one way) commute. I did have to slow down to 50-60 mph from my usual 75-80 mph. One time, there was this Ford Explorer who thought that he was better suited for the conditions. He high beamed me to get out of his way, and I did move to the center lane. a couple of seconds later I saw his tail lights switch into head lights and then tail lights again, and then he hit the center guard rail. I swirved around him with no problem on the stock Michelins.

    Last summer, I replaced them with Bridgestone Potenza 950, which were advertized as all season. They are much better in the dry, and wet than Michelins. And, as advertized, they are excellent in the snow as well. I was thinking of getting winter tires from Tirerack, since I moved to Buffalo and it snows here on a daily basis. But, I think I can drive on the Potenza's through winter. I am very impressed, so far.
This discussion has been closed.