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

Honda Civic Si vs. VW GTI

24567…11

Comments

  • mbeards3mbeards3 Member Posts: 7
    I would like to know what, if any discount, people are getting on the SVT Focus? With only 7500 made, I doubt much. Therefore, I think the GTI and SVT have roughly the same actual selling prices. Also with the GTI, you get higher resale value, a longer list of standard equipment and longer warranty. I paid $19,750 including destination for the GTI with heated seats and a sunroof which are features I don't think are even offered on the Ford. The zetec(not great to start with) tweaked motor just does not cut it(for me) with 0-60mph times of 7.8(car and driver) and 7.39 (motor trend). Focus has the looks and race car handling but the motor is a disappointing heart of the car. The Si is mid pack in performance across the board, but it has a silky smooth motor and reliability.
    Spec V has good performance, but not the interior and the motor is harsh. Improve the spec v interior design and give the motor a smooth 200hp and I will drool. If you want bigtime power and luxury the GTI is it. For racey handling the SVT is the one. Too bad we can't choose an engine/interior/body/chassis combination selecting the best from each. The VW motor in the Focus chassis and nice body, with the VW interior quality and Honda reliability thrown in would be utopia!
  • seminole_kevseminole_kev Member Posts: 1,696
    Heated seats and moonroof are available on the SVT Focus.

    I do agree that the SVT with VW's 1.8t engine would be one hell of a package. Over on Focaljet.com there are people who have already ordered the SVT and I believe they are getting below MSRP quotes from the dealer (but I don't remember how low).
  • seminole_kevseminole_kev Member Posts: 1,696
    just forgot that the Focus RS (which I doubt will make it here) does have a 230hp turbo in it with an even more aggressive suspension/tire setup than the SVT Focus (called the ST170 in Europe). But, like I said, I don't think we'll see it here in the US.
  • mbeards3mbeards3 Member Posts: 7
    Been reading about the Dodge Neon SRT4. I think it is actually coming out late in 2003. The current neon R/T is a good little package(for the price 17k-2k rebate). The neon R/T is a good handling car and with the 150hp engine does about 7.8sec 0-60mph. The neon SRT will have a turbocharged 2.4 liter mitsubishi 4 cylinder with 205HP and 235ft of torque! Dodge claims 0-60 in 5.9 seconds. At any rate I think it should be good for low sixes in the race to 60mph. I had a neon in 1996 and I understand that they are still unrefined, but the SRT will be a fast car with great handling. Prices start at $19,995. Quality is average and resale value is kind of low, but this Dodge will raise the bar for the pocket rocket class. Maybe to combat, the Si will get the 200hp RSX-S motor? Maybe the Nissan spec v will get 200hp? Focus SVT would do well with a 200hp turbo or supercharged engine. Even the awesome looking $18k Hyundai tiburon could be a contender with some added HP. Mazda protege is a great car in need of more motor(maybe turbocharge the current 130hp 2.0 liter). A 200hp pocket rocket sounds good to me and this could get interesting in 2003!
  • shov6shov6 Member Posts: 177
    While good on paper, isn't quite up to the task of competing against any of the other cars you mention. Yes, it is quick, and yes, it posts good numbers in handling, but it doesn't FEEL substantial. I test-drove one in '99 and another when I was shopping for the Focus (just to reinforce my view on the car), and felt the Neon was seriously lacking by comparison. If you make the mistake of driving a Neon back-to-back against a VW, the competition won't even be close.

    This isn't really meant to be a slam on the Neon, and the only person I know who has one has had a wonderful experience reliability-wise (I think he has a '95 Sport, whatever year it is it's a 2dr., the prior generation)... But it (the new car) suffers from less-than-stellar dynamics and a very cheap-looking/feeling interior... even when compared to the Focus, which has been roundly panned for its' liberal use of cheap plastics.

    Throw in the fact that it's not available as a 2dr anymore, and isn't available with a hatch, and it's often not even on people's shopping lists when the GTI, Si, and Focus SVT are in the running. The turbo car will be a rocket, but I fear very much in the vein of the musclecars of old and the more recent Omni GLH, which is an impossibly fast car that is fun to drive for short hops, but is ultimately unsatisfying to a discerning enthusiast.

    At least that's MY take.
  • mbeards3mbeards3 Member Posts: 7
    I agree that the Neon SRT4 has a cheap interior and design compared to the Focus. The car will be a rocket though and come close to the SVT handling. The neon chassis is a good handling one and 205hp/235 torque will smoke the current crop of pocket rockets. The price of 19,995 base(probably will have a good level of equipment standard) is higher than the SVT, Spec v, Si, and even the GTI. The dodge SRT looks like the new omni GLH from the 80s- a super fast, great handling car, but low budget interior quality and harsh. I had a 1986 Dodge Shelby charger which was the same as the omni glh but with a sporty body. In its day it provided great bang for the buck. The sporty charger was not the sleeper car like the little homely omni. The 2400 pound dodge omni glh(turbo146hp/170torque) and the latter glh-s(intercooled 174hp/200torque) shocked and humilated a good number of unsuspecting sports cars! My hope is that the 205hp dodge srt will raise the performance bar for all pocket rockets. The more competition in this market segment, the better off the consumer is! I have owned several small dodges including the neon, and its shortcomings are refinement, average reliability, resale value. They are great bang for the buck though, especially with the $2000 rebate program that seems to never end. Think of all the pocket rockets available now- the SVT, Si, Spec V, GTI, Protege MP3, neon SRT, and even the $18K Hyundai Tiburon V6. The automakers are bringing the $20k performance segment back to life after focusing on SUVs for last 5 plus years. I think it is great.
  • mbeards3mbeards3 Member Posts: 7
    This market segment looks appetizing lately with the $23K acura rsx-s, and $24K subaru wrx. The celica GTs is available too, with a actual selling price a little lower- around $22K. For real sports cars the return on the nissan Z series and mazda rx8 is awesome. The current camaro Z28 is dead for now- maybe GM can build a new chassis and decent interior for that proven V8 monster? You can buy a 2002 camaro Z28 right now for around $21K (after discounts and GM's $2002 rebate). It is big, unrefined, uncomfortable, but 1/4 times of under 14 seconds at 105mph are impressive for $21,000!
  • shov6shov6 Member Posts: 177
    For all my panning of the Neon, I am glad that it is coming to market. Vive la difference!! If it forces the other makers to inject a few more Cheerios into their cars, it only improves the situation for all of us.

    Taking mbeard's comments to the next level, I will have to say that we live in the best of times for automotive enthusiasts. We could get into arguments all day long with the muscleheads in AOL chat about quarter-mile times and other overwhelmingly important foolishness, but today's cars are light-years removed from the dinosaurs of my youth. Keep in mind that a 1983 test of the three GM "musclecars" of that era, the Monte SS, Olds 442, and Buick GN in Car and Driver rang up numbers that would be humiliating when compared to today's hot hatches. Only the GN could outrun even the SVT (not the fastest of today's crop), and the Neon SRT would smoke the GN... And that's just acceleration. Never mind all the other imaginable performance categories, wherein any of today's hatches would annihiliate them.

    Good times. :)

    -SHOV6
  • seminole_kevseminole_kev Member Posts: 1,696
    agreed.
  • adg44adg44 Member Posts: 385
    But there is a point when all these go fast unrefined cars from the factory get boring.

    My GTI is plenty fast, enough to get me into plenty of problems. The only honda that has beaten me is an S2000, and I crushed it off the line.

    Granted I've spent about 10k extra on my GTI in performance mods, so it's not a fair comparison once we get into the modded/modded debate.

    What also needs to be remembered is that what makes a car isn't just the engine, but the amenities that comes with it, the attention to details, the build quality, how comfortable the car is, and other important factors such as that. I personally had an awful experience with a 2000 Accored EX V6 Coupe which I sold after 5 months of pure hell. I bought the GTI VR6 soon after and it has been great for two years.

    Personally, I am not a fan of the new Si, and I like the older ones better. I don't like where the shifter is, their hatchback looks bad, and the 8000 redline was cool on the last gen Si's.

    Anyways, just my opinion.

    - Anthony
  • cybergrnbugcybergrnbug Member Posts: 7
    The GTI is awesome! My friend has a 2001 GTI 1.8T and its pretty fast.
    Can we please get Neons and the Focus out of this conversation. I don't see how they can compare to a GTI!
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    Did you drive the Si? I love the shifter in it.
  • driver36driver36 Member Posts: 57
    Hi all,
    For those who interested in buying a Si or GTI, please re-think your position of which one to get. Because the Honda Si are on BIG discount at $16,000. It only FYI.
  • inigocoinigoco Member Posts: 51
    I'm not really a huge fan of VTEC anyway since the large majority of their high-powered engines i.e. the S2000 and the older Si's are not powerful until you get them over 6500 RPM. I prefer to have usable power and that's what I get in my '02 GTI 1.8T. The newer Si engine has as much HP as before, it does make more low-end torque, though the GTI will still beat it when it comes to torque. The styling of the new Si's is also horrid. To me they look like squashed minivans, especially since the windshield and the hood are nearly at the same angle. If I had to buy an Si, it would have been a 2000 model since I think those were the better looking version. But, I'd still be able to beat it quite handidly with my GTI.
  • rickroverrickrover Member Posts: 601
    Try talking chipped GTI 1.8t - I APR'd my 02 plus a couple other little tweaks for 235 lb ft of torque and 220 or so HP - Shweeeeet!

    I think the Si is a huge dud - I've seen one new Si in a parking lot, none on the street. The Honda dealer isn't deeply discounting them for nothing. Honda should have gone a little retro style, back to the late 80's Si's - those still look kinda nice. I do have to get out and test drive one just for grins.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    First I must say that I am a biased VW owner. I drove a Si for a day and it was really fun. At $19K for the Honda the GTI wins hands down. At $16 to $16,5K that the Si's are selling for in my area the Si is the one that would get my money. I loved the shifter design and the seating was very, very comfortable. Recaro comfortable. The size of the rubber is uninspiring but the handling is good, throw a set of 17's on it and it would be all good. The styling is nothing special but then the GTI has shoebox styling so neither of them is a work of art. You have to keep the revs up to keep the power going and it is fun with the shifter on the dash.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    The stock GTI handles like a pig if you don't modify it. I don't think it would be much more fun to drive than the Si unless you are stoplight racing. Of course, the ability to up the boost on the turbo is another story. (cue rickrover)

    The Si isn't worth $19k, but I also don't think I would buy a GTI if I wasn't going to take it aftermarket.
  • rickroverrickrover Member Posts: 601
    I bought mine with the intention of modifying it. A friend of mine bought a 2003 GTI 1.8t last weekend and promptly left town for a couple of weeks. He left it at my house with instructions for me to break it in. It is interesting to drive the two back to back handling-wise. Mine has a very aggressive suspension under it - racing springs with a 2" drop, bilstein sport shocks, Neuspeed upper front stress bar and 25mm rear sway bar. It handles like a go cart, very neutral and extremely tight. I think the ride is perfect still very tolorable although most people would hate it. I still have the 17" Michelin Pilot Sport's on it that it came with - these are the all season sports so not the greatest grip but I'm doing my best to wear them out :-) so I can put some Toyo Proxis T1's on it. I take my GTI on the track and also like to AutoX it, that's what I set the suspension up for. When I did it I thought I'd use the GTI for a weekend car because the ride would be too punishing for day in day out driving/ commuting. To my suprise that wasn't the case at all, I bought an X5 about a month before the GTI last year to use as a daily driver. The X has just hit 5k miles and the GTI is pushing 12k miles after a year. The only time I drive the X is when I have clients or passengers - the GTI's back seat has been out of it for 6 months now - the dogs love it. I consider it my high performance mini-minivan.

    That said the stock GTI isn't that bad a handler, it's obvious that VW tuned it for cruising, but it's handling is totally acceptable for most people. If you wanted better handling and keep 90% of the ride compliance I'd do the VW-Eibach sport springs that VW sells in it's accessory catalog for a couple hundred bucks - not nearly as aggressive as racing springs, leave the stock shocks, put an upper front stress bar (also called a strut tower brace) for $100 and beefier rear sway bar like mine for about $250. Installation for everything would be another couple hundred at an independent VW shop. A GTI so equipped would be totally acceptable for someone who wants a very good neutral handling car with no sway - it would hang with a lot of BMW's in the twisties.

    I absolutely love fast, stealthy little hatchbacks. When I was in the market for a new car last year I was on the wait list for a new M3. When it came right down to ordering the M3 I didn't think the M3 would have met my needs as well as an X5 and a modified GTI. I'd have been pampering that M3, worried of every little scratch and paranoid to beat on it at the track - if I took it there at all, forget about AutoXing it. Plus that M3 would be my only car (spouse has an Audi Avant that I've been banned from).

    On top of all this dump another grand in tuning that 1.8t motor and you have 230 HP and 235 lb ft of torque and an ear to ear grin. Plus this little GTI takes a whole lot of punishment without a wimper, they are built like a tank.
  • carrodcarrod Member Posts: 1
    where did you see si for 16k
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    Question A:
    Assuming that you couldn't modify the car, you had to pick one and stick with it. Would you do the GTI for $19k or the Si for $16k?

    Question B:
    $19k GTI, or $16k Si + $3k in mods?

    However, since you haven't driven the Si yet, you can wait to answer.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    You can get Si's for $16k in Los Angeles, I don't know about elsewhere. I can give you dealer info if you want.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    In Chicago they were advertised in paper at several dealers for $16,5 and dealer I discussed one with said $16K even if I took one in stock.
  • rickroverrickrover Member Posts: 601
    I have got to get out and test one. $16k makes it really attractive, I'll investigate what typical aftermarket performance mods would cost. One area you'd have to address that I didn't on my GTI is wheels/ tires. Every article I've read on the SI says it needs more aggressive wheels/ tires. $3k should be more than enough to address any issues. Honda aftermarket mods are plentiful and cheap.

    Do you see many SI's on the road in your area? I've seen one since they came out - they are rarer than a MINI around here.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    I have not seen one on the road. There are 5 at the dealership though, and it is a small dealership.
  • inigocoinigoco Member Posts: 51
    I also haven't seen many of them around wher I live either. I think I may have seen 2 on the road and one on a semi heading somewhere. That was all in the last few months. Before that, the only one I'd ever seen was the show one at the Denver Auto Show back in March. That was my first in person view of it and I immediatly disliked the styling. I'd also have to say that even at $3000 less than a GTI, it's still not a great deal. It's more than easy to spend most if not all of that $3000 on upgraded wheels and tires just to get to where the GTI is as far as wheel & Tire fitment. What was left over if any wouldn't be enough to get you much over the 160 stock hp. I'd still rather have the GTI w/ 17's and spend another $1000 for a chip and some suspension mods and I'd have a good handling, 220+ hp GTI that will take on even moderatly modified Si's.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    $3000 on upgraded wheels and tires to match the GTI? What for? I'm only talking about driving functionality, I don't need 17" wheels.

    So say you spend $2k modifying your GTI. All you have is a front wheel driver, with no warranty, known for being somewhat unreliable, costing slightly less than a WRX, and having inferior performance.

    That is why I'm not bothering talking about mods and all that, because you can always say, "well, for just $1000 more I can..." especially in this car segment.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    GTI MSRP for 03 is $19,640 and Si MSRP is $19,000. GTI has better performance, better wheels, better crash test rating, 2 year longer warranty. GTI is more fun to drive. As far as reliability the GTI has average to above average reliability scores so you must think the majority of all cars are known as "somewhat unreliable". Is this correct? Yes, it is common knowledge that the Honda should have better reliability since Honda is one of the best for reliability.
    And this is not a WRX comparision, the GTI will at least finish number 2 out of three in a race with the WRX, GTI, and Si with the Si dead last.
  • jfigueroa1jfigueroa1 Member Posts: 209
    I was in he market for a new car and so my wive took me to the dealer with check book on hand I got a very good price 16,800 with dealers feed waved BUT to any find out that the car can't be have in A/T and my wive do not drive s/t. The salesman told me that that is the reason they are not selling to well even with discounts. right now they have around 20 of them in all colors.
    Greetings from sunny Miami.
  • inigocoinigoco Member Posts: 51
    So, ok you don't need 17's. You can buy whatever wheels you want, but the fact remains that with the standard wheel/tire fitment, the Si does not do so well. Virtually everyone who has tested and written about the new Si has determined that it definitely need more tire under it. To each his own I guess. So, so you don't spend the $3000 on wheels & tires. You decided to spend it on upgrades. Well, for $3000 you can probably find a turbo kit to give you more power. So, now you're up to maybe 220-240hp, which by the way can be had in the GTI less than $1000. Well, guess what, now you likely need new tires & wheels. The stock fitment of 195/60-15's can hardly handle 160 hp, much less 220. Plus, you will gain a significant amount in the area of handling with a more aggressive set of tires & wheels. Hondas are good cars, and they are reliable. But, I just don't really like what they've done with the new SI. The older ones weren't bad, I would have preferred if Honda had left good enough alone and made the Si out of the current coupe rather than doing it with a hatchback that looks like a squashed Odyssey minivan. If Honda had used the coupe as a base for the Si and given it a bit more tire underneath, maybe I'd be more persuaded, but so far i am not.
  • inigocoinigoco Member Posts: 51
    I'm not to sure that the lack of an auto transmission has hurt the sales as much as you believe. VW also doesn't sell the GTI VR6 with an auto either and they seem to be able to sell them well. I actually think that the reason the Si's aren't selling as well as they had planned is because Honda tried to be the aftermarket for this car. They know that Civics are the most wanted car when it comes to boy-racer types who want to buy them and modify their cars. Honda attempted to do all that stuff to the car themselves and try to corner the market a bit and gain some of that dough for themselves. Like I said in my previous message, if Honda had done the same mods to a coupe version of the Civic rather than the hatchback, it may be selling better. People like the coupes and sedans better than they do the hatchbacks. Even when Honda sold the hatchbacks as regular models, the sales weren't even close to what the sedan and coupe were bringing in. Plus, for the same price as an new Si, the potential buyer has many other tempting choices. They can take thier money and buy a civic coupe and have a few thousand dollars left over to begin modifying the car. They can go over to their local Acura dealer and pick up a new RSX which has the same engine, but, in my opinion, looks better outside. They can even save up a few thousand extra dollars and buy the RSX Type-S which comes with the engine the Si should have gotten if Honda wasn't afraid of stealing th RSX's thunder. These are just the options a potential buyer has from Honda MC, this doesn't even begin to go into the options one has when looking into the entries from all the other makes in the same price range. Honda just didn't hit the mark with this one, maybe the next version will do the Si name justice.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    Let's get one thing straight, there is no way that the new Si (Which I own) is worth $19,000. I paid $15,980.

    I don't know what you mean by "better wheels" style? It is faster, but the handling is inferior, despite the poor tires on the Si. The Civic has perfect crash test ratings, I don't know what the GTI has, but it's not possible to be better. And the shifter on the Si is much better.

    However, let me make it clear again, if both cars were $19,000, and I had to pick one, it would definitely be the GTI. What I am trying to say is that I think that for $16,000, the Si is a good deal, and very comparable to the GTI at $19,640.

    The reason I compared the WRX, is because if you spend very much modding a GTI, you will almost have been able to buy a better car in the first place.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    This is why I don't like to have these hypothetical arguments about aftermarket upgrades, there are too many variables. In this case, there is no question that the GTI is the cheaper car to make fast.

    However, despite the poor tires on the Si, it still out handles the GTI.
  • inigocoinigoco Member Posts: 51
    I'm not mentioning these upgrades just for fun, I'm explaining what makes each car unique and wanted. The Si handles great and has a pretty well designed interior, but it lacks in the areas of power and wheel/tire fitment. Though having large wheels and tires may not mean much to you, there are thousands of other buyers out there that feel it is a priority. The GTI has its shortcomings as well. The GTI doesn't handle as well as the Si, but it does have the power advantage and it comes with a more agressive wheel/tire fitment that gives the car more of a sporty look. The only reason I mentioned any of this was to compare the cost of amking each car as good as the other. To make the GTI handle better, all it takes is some upgraded springs & struts and a few braces. This can all be had for around $1000. The GTI already has power and larger wheels, so that upgrade is not needed. For the Si, if you wanted to give it more power, you would spend a good deal more than $1000 and you probably still wouldn't have the power of the GTI in stock form. As far as the wheels/tires go, you may not want to get larger wheels, but it's still a good idea to get wider tires and thus you would likely need wider wheels as well. That also will cost more than $1000. This comparison doesn't just cover the GTI either, you can compare the Si to the SVT Focus, the Tiburon, Sentra SE-R and many others out there and you'd still have the car with the least power and smallest wheel/tire fitment. What this all comes down to and the main reason I posted about it is because even at $16,500, the Si still doesn't compare as well to the other vehicles in it's class since that extra money saved would have to be used just to get the Si on par with the other vehicles in its class.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    The GTI vs. Si stock is faster in 1/4 mile, faster lap times on track, faster slalom times, stops in shorter distance, is faster in 0-60 mph, has higher top speed. The increased performance of the GTI erases any handling advantage you may think the Si possesses. The Si outhandles the GTI right to last place. As far as the price being less than the $19000 MSRP that is only evidence of lack of demand. Heck, even the New Beetle Turbo S is faster than Si!
  • sunilbsunilb Member Posts: 407
    It seems to me that while the GTI ahead of the SI in many aspects, the SI is probably the best "compromise" out there...
    You want sporty, reliable, and good resale value? Get the SI (I think while VW's reliability is improving, it's still not as good as Honda's).

    Actually, if you look at all of Honda's cars (with the exception of the Type-R's and S2000) it appears that's what they go after-- the best "compromise". It's not a bad thing, just different.
  • rickroverrickrover Member Posts: 601
    GTI resale is excellent, as are most all VW's. The Passat rated tops in resale - I read it on Edmunds front page. As far as reliability goes VW has made huge strides as has a lot of other car companies. My GTI hasn't had a problem in it's first year - I think that bodes well for the future, especially considering all the upgrades I've done to it.

    I know Honda's typically have high resale value, but I doubt the SI will. For a car to have high resale it has to be popular and the SI isn't. For $16k after discounts on a $19k SI at least Honda is picking up the first years depreciation for you.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    moparbad (msg #67) - You seemed like a fan of the Si in this message, what happened?

    inigoco (msg #76) - I missed this before, but there is no way that the GTI's wheels and tires are worth $3000 more than the Si's. That is just absurd.

    inigoco (msg #80) - I strongly disagree that the stock Si tires can hardly handle the current power.

    moparbad (msg #86) - re: lack of demand. That was not my point. I know demand is poor, the market is correcting itself. And what I'm trying to do is see if $16k is a good price point for the Si.

    sunilb (msg #87) - I agree, the Si is a great compromise.

    rickrover (msg #88) - That's true, I bought this car for less than it would have cost to get a used 2000 Si! (which they tried to get me to buy)

    So let me rephrase my question once more. Imagine, there is NO aftermarket, you are stuck with what you got. Is the GTI worth $3000 more than the Si?
  • inigocoinigoco Member Posts: 51
    The resale value on the VW's is really great and even better for the GTI's since they are typically the rarest and best performing VW's. Last year I traded in an '01 GTI VR6 for the '02 GTI 1.8T I currently own and I actually got a little money back. I think the prices came out about $20 different. Yes, the 1.8T is a cheaper car in the first place, but to have that kind of resale after 1 year seems pretty good to me. Muffin Man, first of all I never said the GTI's tires and wheels actually cost $3000, though it's likely not far off. Have you ever priced factory wheels? On the VW website in the accessories section the replacement wheels are about $300-$430 apiece, plus tires at about $200 apiece you get about $2000-$2500 for a set like the VW's have. Sure, you could go with any companies you want, but to get quality tires and wheels it is very easy to spend $3000 or more. That was my point, not that the GTI's setup was $3000 more, just what it would cost to upgrade the Si to larger, more aggressive shoes. As for the stock Si's tires not being able to handle all the power. Well, I have a theory about that one too. Like I said, I had an '01 GTI VR6. That car had the 205/55-16's. I had absolutely no problems spinning those tires off any start, the Trac control would intervene every time. Now, I have the '02 1.8T with the 225/45-17's and they hold the power much better than the narrower 16's I had previously. It just seems that even with less power, the Si would have a tough time getting power to the ground with even narrower tires than the GTI comes with base. The only reason I can think that the Si's tires can hold the power is because it has very little low-end power. All the power that engine makes is at higher revs and even then it's still not a lot, so the tires have an easier time controlling that kind of power. So again, all I was saying is that if a buyer decides to soup up their SI with more power, they will likely need to foot the bill for some tires as well. Now, for your final question, would I still buy the GTI over the Si barring any kind of aftermarket? Yes, I would. You say the Si is a compromise, I say the GTI a great compromise too. It has more power, is faster and is available with more options than the Si. OK, so maybe it doesn't handle as well as the Si and the transmission may not be as good, but the new 6-speed VW has is miles ahead of the current transmission, so that problem may be going away soon. I guess I'd just rather have a faster car that handles slightly worse than a great handling car that isn't as fast. This is why the aftermarket exists in the first place to make good cars better. But, yes, barring the aftermarket I would still buy the GTI, but to each his own.
  • gotenks243gotenks243 Member Posts: 116
    Actually I think Honda's problem with the Si is that they did too little to try to be their own aftermarket. Ford tried to be their own aftermarket with the SVT Focus, to a seemingly greater degree than Honda, making significant changes from a stock ZX3, including the addition of 17" wheels and performance tires, and last I heard, demand was great enough that dealers are charging over sticker, not under. I don't think Honda did enough in that regard.

    I also don't think that it would sell any better necessarily if it was a coupe. If it was a good looking coupe, it probably would, but if it was a good looking hatch, it would too. It's more styling than body style, from my point of view.

    Mike
  • revkarevka Member Posts: 1,750
    Also, I'd like to make a suggestion for those of you with longer posts (i.e. post #90). Break your message up into smaller paragraphs. This will make it much easier for people to read. People will be more likely to read your entire message if it's easy on the eyes.

    And now, back to the subject of the Honda Civic Si vs. VW GTI. Thanks for your participation! ;-)


    Revka

    Host

    Hatchbacks & Wagons Boards

  • rickroverrickrover Member Posts: 601
    I think I'd still lean toward a GTI - but who knows? I still have to get out and test an SI, $3k difference could possibly sway me toward an SI if I had no intention of modifying either car. That is if the SI is a total blast to drive stock. The SI will have to be sweeet to sway me from a stock GTI 1.8t.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    inigoco - have you driven an Si?

    "It has more power, is faster and is available with more options than the Si."

    I don't think that more power and faster get to count for two seperate things. But it does have more power. What options do you speak of? And if you haven't sat in the Si's seats yet, I highly recommend it. I never used to pay much attention to the seats except for lumbar support and leather/cloth, but these seats are amazing.

    "I guess I'd just rather have a faster car that handles slightly worse than a great handling car that isn't as fast."

    Fair enough, it's not an easy choice, and I had trouble deciding myself. The $4000 price difference made up my mind. That is a lot of money.

    rickrover - I've never had a chance to take a GTI to the same types of roads I take my Si. But once I'm there, it's wonderful. However, I wouldn't say it's a total blast in day to day driving. Because besides blasting from stoplight to stoplight (GTI's forte), what can you do?
  • inigocoinigoco Member Posts: 51
    More power and faster are easily two different things. Power can be made in many different ways and feels different when it's made differently. The Si has a VTEC system which makes the majority of it's power up high in the rev range where few people like to tread. The older Si made the same power, but at an even higher RPM, plus it had an 8000 RPM redline. Honda had complaints from some buyers about the lack of low-end power and about how the power that was made was all above 6000 RPM. So, they tuned the new Si's engine to make more low-end power and to have a lower redline. They succeded in that quest, though the additional power is still pretty meager. The Si makes the least amount of power of any of the other vehicles in it's class, i.e. the SVT Focus, GTI, Sentra SE-R, Mini Cooper S etc.


    Some people love the way VTEC works and the way it sounds. I personally would rather have more usable power than power which is made at high revs only. The Si only makes 132 lb. ft. of torque @ 5500 RPM. That is pretty low, especially for a sporty car. Torque is what will make your car quick though, so this is why I like it. The GTI makes 173 lb. ft. of torque from 1900-5000 RPM. That makes for much more usable power. Not only does the 1.8T make more torque, it also makes it at a much lower RPM than the Si. This makes for a quicker car. With that kind of a powerband, all you need to do is hit the gas and the engine takes care of the rest. In an Si, you'd have to downshift a gear and maybe 2 just to keep up. Again, it's all about what you prefer. I myself prefer the more usable, wide powerband of my GTI than the peaky powerplant of the Si. Even the 200 HP engine in the RSX Type-S still doesn't make a lot of torque. 142 lb. ft @ 6000 RPM.


    This all translates into what makes a car faster. Though the Si may be a slightly better handler than the GTI, you'd never be able to hang with it in the straights and a race betwen them would be a close one, each giving up something to the other. A few months back, I believe Motor trend even did a test between the GTI 1.8T, the Focus SVT and a Civic Si. If I can find the issue, I'll recommend it. I did, however, find a story from Road & Track, but it didn't have the GTI included. Still an interesting read though. The link for that story is http://www.roadandtrack.com/reviews/roadtests/ArticleDisplay.asp?ArticleID=234&page=1 Make sure you check out the lap times for all the vehicles. The Si came in 3rd in time and 3rd in average speed even though it handles great. That is not everything. The Si also has the smallest brakes, less power, and narrower tires. Anyway, I have to get going right now, but maybe I'll add a bit more later.

  • inigocoinigoco Member Posts: 51
    I found a few more links where you can read up on what others say about the Si and many other cars in this class. Here on Edmunds they did a test between the Si, SVT Focus, and a New Beetle Turbo S. The link for that test is http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/57200/article.html
    You can't really compare the New Beetle in this test a GTI Turbo, especially based on some of the complaints they had about the NB. Virtually everything they said bad about the NB, can't be said about the GTI because they are not the same inside or out. The only real similarities are in the powertrain. Also, about the performance of the NB. They came up with a 0-60 time of 8.1 sec. which is strange. Even VW rates the time at about 7.5s and they are conservative about it. The other two car were slower than others have said as well, but the NB had the largest gap. Many other mags have tested the car and come up with 0-60 times less than 7sec, not anywhere near 8.

    If you'd like to check some performance numbers on a huge number of vehicles, check out http://www.car-stats.com They have 0-60 and quarter-mile times and speeds for virtually every new car on the market and many older ones as well. There you will see what others have listed as performance number for these cars.

    If and when you read some of the articles I've given links to, you will find that the Ford Focus wins every time. I say this because I am not afraid to say that the GTI is not the best car out there. It gives up some weight and handling to the others, but I still like it. Others will like other cars.

    Though I'm not a huge fan of Ford, if I were given the money and had to pick a car that I would drive without making any changes to, it would likely be the SVT Focus. But, this is reality, and here we are able to make mods to our cars and as such, I feel the GTI 1.8T makes the best base model for such mods. You can bulk up in the handling department with some minor mods to the suspension like new springs and struts, plus add a few braces and you've got a great handler. Add a chip, intake, and exhaust and you've got a 230-240 HP GTI that will not only go very fast straight, but handle as well and you spent about $2500 total on mods. You won't get the same effect out of $2500 on any of the other models in this class. You may get more power or better handling, but likely not both and not to the degree that you would get from the GTI. Just my opinion, and everyone has their own, but this is mine.
  • inigocoinigoco Member Posts: 51
    Whew, after some torrid searching, I found the article I was looking for. I was sure I had read it in Motor Trend or R&T, but it was in Car & Driver, so that's why i couldn't find it. Anyway, here is a test they did between a Civc Si, a GTI 1.8T, and a Focus SVT. You already know the winner, but we aren't here to talk about the Focus, the battle between the Si and GTI is the more interesting one here. The link is at http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/comparisontests/2002/march/200203_comparo_foxes.xml?&page=1 There you go, I have left a number of articles for you all to read if you're interested in what some respected magazine testers think about the cars in question. Happy reading.
  • inigocoinigoco Member Posts: 51
    This will be a short post I promise. I always seem to make long posts because I feel I have so much to say. Is it agreed that the skidpad rating of a vehicle is a pretty good indication of how well a vehicle handles? Since most every tester uses this I would say yes. Well, in the Car & Driver test link above, the GTI has a better rating than the Si, 0.86g compared to 0.84g. What most people have a problem with in the case of the GTI is that it has a lot of body-roll which is true, but that doesn't necessarily translate into worse handling just different and the numbers show it. Overall track lap times also show how the power of the GTI helps. The GTI was only 0.66sec off the pace of the best car, the Focus. Not bad for a car that handles worse huh?
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    feel so different...SI feels light when you drive it, GTI feels like the Titanic. That is what they attempted to address with the 337 this year, and what they promise to rectify completely with the next gen, if you can believe the car mags.

    For power and sheer acceleration, I would have to give it to GTI of course. It feels much stronger. They both have really nice interiors, best in class.

    Point is, will VW discount GTI heavily? I don't think so, it is a star car for them. SI is down to $16K and falling, and unless you are super concerned about the market for resale, this car is finally down to a price that is appropriate for what you get. That makes it the better deal to me...

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • inigocoinigoco Member Posts: 51
    VW has no need to discount the GTI. They sell all they need. The supply and demand are there. The Si is essentially a star car for Honda as well. Yes, the S2000 is faster, but it's also less useful, being a 2-seater and it's much more expensive. So the Si is the car they created to be the mass-market car to showcase what they could do. Well, they found that the demand wasn't there and they've had to discount the price in order to ge the demand to go up. It doesn't have so much to do with customers feeling they are paying too much for VW's and others. If that were the case, we'd see the demand drop off for them, which it has not. Plus VW kind of did do a little price adjustment for 2002. Now you can get a VR6 GTI for about $2000 less than in 2001 and the 1.8T's are about $500 less also. They did not need to reduce their prices as much as Honda in order to increase their sales, so that shows that customers feel they are getting what they paid for when they buy a GTI. This apparently isn't the case for the Si, customers felt that even $19,000(which is about the going rate for an entry level sport-compact these days) was too much to pay for the Si, so Honda was forced to offer deep incentives in order to get customers to look in their direction. This to me shows that customers feel that the Si is not the better car. Not that the GTI necessarily is, but I don't see any other manufacturers giving incentives for their sport-compacts either. I'm not necessarily disputing that the Si isn't a better handling car than the GTI, but for what you get, the Si just isn't as much of a deal.

    I'll throw out another question similar to one asked in an earlier post.
    Would you rather buy a Honda Civic Si and have $5000 in upgrades or would you buy a VW GTI 1.8T and have $2000 in upgrades? Both would have a similar end price of about $21,000-$22,000. You can buy any upgrades you want. I know what I would choose.
  • rickroverrickrover Member Posts: 601
    I got the dealer to knock $1,150 off the MSRP on my 02 GTI 1.8t with the Luxury Package (sunroof, Monsoon sound) and 17" wheel package about a year ago. More recently a friend of mine got $850 off an 03 GTI 1.8t with Luxury, 17" wheels and leather interior - we also got them to throw in the heavy duty rubber GTI floor mats. Both cars are from the largest VW dealer in our area - when I got mine they had a total of 3 1.8t GTI's on the lot and there were 4 total when my friend got his a couple weeks ago. GTI's fly off their lot, but they still give discounts.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Member Posts: 865
    Why do you think that that the Si beat the GTI in that article? It wasn't about the numbers and it was in spite of the crappy tires.

    I think the Car and Driver article pretty much summed up my feelings on the second page:
    "Here are our priorities for a successful hot hatch: (1) Fun to drive. (2) Fun to drive. (3) A hatchback. (4) All that other stuff."

    The Si is fun to drive, and according to Car and Driver, more fun to drive than the GTI. And to think, it finished second place despite it's tires and high price tag. At $16,000 (or less), it becomes an outstanding deal. (and in that test, they gave a 6.5 0-60 to the GTI, and an 8.0 to the Si, which is faster and slower than normal for both cars, respectively)

    I think you underestimate the driveability of the Si, which is something I enjoy every day. Even at MSRP, I think the GTI might be only a marginally better car, (not counting modability). For $4000 less, I want the Si.

    And I wouldn't spend $22,000 on either car. I don't like front wheel drive, and I don't like the torque steer that comes with it. (I bought my car because it was an amazing deal, I was actually going to buy a new MR-2) Come to think of it, the wheel of rickrover's GTI must almost rip out of his hands at every stoplight!

    I think by now we are all familiar with the strengths and weaknesses of the GTI and Si, so I won't go through them again. But when I think about how annoying body roll and torque steer are, and how much a good shifter and great sports seats can improve a drive, I know that I picked the right car for me.

    Especially for $15,980 @ 4.9% for 60 months.
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles