Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Ford Focus ZX3 / SVT vs. Honda Civic Si / RSX
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
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!
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.
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.
Brand new 2003 Focus SVT are available for $15,500. Better value than Si.
When you figure in resale, reliability and fuel economy Ford WILL cost you more, don't believe me? Read consumer reviews about focus.
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) ...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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?
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?
"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?
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.
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?
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!!
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 . . .
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.
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.
A) Fantastic Seats
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.