Has Honda's run - run out?

varmint

Those will go, too. The concept Si had them, but the production model doesn't. Honestly, that deletion really tames the look of the car.

robertsmx

In case of Civic, I thought the coupe to sedan sales volume split was like 50-50 (unlike Accord). And coupe has always appealed to a younger audience (about 4-5 years younger than buyers of the same model’s sedan version). I expect that to continue.

OTOH, Integra GS-R sedan was a rare model to be found. I wanted one, and would have gotten one over Prelude that I ended up with (later had to give that away for Civic sedan, thanks to my wife pushing me to go sedan AND automatic… we could have run a compromise with sedan AND manual, or I could have attempted to, but no GS-R sedan was in sight).

stickguy

I like the sedan. Might give me an excuse to trade in my Accord next year! Although I think my rapidly aging body has gotten used to the comfort level of the Accord... Still, worth a look.

I should have bought an Integra when I had a chance. My BIL had one (maybe a 1999?) that he sold a few years back when he took over his wifes TL. Had about 60K on it, but looked brand new (highway commute, but off the road in the winter for a couple of years). Really looked new, even underneath (his analness makes me look like a car slob)

I think I could have had it for ~10K. Think it was a GS-R, or was there just a GS too? It wasn't the race car version, (oh, it was a 4 door), but it had the high strung engine and all the goodies (roof, etc.). Green over tan. Very sharp.

Drove it once, and it was very nice. Felt somewhat similar to his S2000 in some ways, mostly the sharp reflexes and high strung nature.

ateixeira

I like the subtle flares over the fenders. They incorporated them without going overboard. And it breaks up the monotony of the sides of the regular Civic sedan. I hope they manage to keep them somehow.

Did the coupe concept have them, then the Si coupe lost them? Bummer.

Looks like it'll have a wing, but a more subtle one, per Edmunds.

Caliber SRT4 is getting a mind-boggling 300hp, but that also might be a front axle-boggling level of power. It'll get a front LSD but no AWD.

-juice

varmint

"Did the coupe concept have them, then the Si coupe lost them? Bummer."

Yep.

Civic Si Concept vs. Production version

Now look at the sedan version and you'll see similar ground effects.

Sedan Si

ateixeira

Well, at least the coupe maintains a crease in that same area.

Let me find a pic of the regular Civic Sedan...



Very subtle creases there as well. You can hardly see them in blue or red, but in silver it's more apparent.

-juice

nippononly

BUT two things have happened since the advent of the GS-R sedan:

(1) the market has shifted substantially away from coupes, and

(2) there has been the arrival of several go-fast sedans, starting with the WRX, then the Neon SRT4, and Toyota's attempt with the lesser-powered Corolla XRS. Isn't the most popular one in that group still the WRX? And it sells well.

I think there will be much more interest in the SI sedan today than there was in the Integra sedans of the 90s.

ateixeira

WRX was probably the first to break the $20k price barrier, and now they're common: Lancer EVO, Neon SRT-4, Cobalt SS, Jetta GLI, etc.

I don't think it's so much sales volume as much as it is about price.

Before that, most of them were under $20k (Protoge MP3, Focus ZTS, Corolla XRS, etc.)

Honda probably feels like consumers are now willing to pay over $20k for a sporty small sedan (where they can make profits), so they jumped in.

-juice

nippononly

would be the Cobalt SS S/C, which is coupe-only, I believe. But the point still mostly applies: a $20K-ish compact car with a couple hundred horses.

In this crowd, the SI is going to be the slow-poke because all the others have forced induction, and consequently the torque is way down (in amount) and way up at the top of the tach compared to them. But it should handle as well or better due to its lighter weight, and of course there will be a little Honda magic in there too. The RSX-S was winning comparos with this group well into its fourth year, and now the SI with essentially the same specs will finally have four doors as well. I hope the longer wheelbase doesn't hurt handling too much.

There is only about a $500 separation in price between coupe and sedan across the rest of the Civic line, so if the SI sedan comes in around $20,5 or $20,8, it will be at least a couple thousand cheaper than everyone else in this group of cars too.

varmint

One big reason for the demise of the 80's sport coupes was a gradual increase in price. The Z cars, the Supra, and such all took a page from Right Said Fred. Even the Prelude (a relative bargain in the mid $20s) died when cheap speed became common.

Now we have those cheap economy-cars creeping up into the same territory that killed the earlier herd. Are we watching history repeat?

The Golf GTi used to be a bargain hot hatch. In a comparo with the Civic Si, the car C&D tested had a price comparable with the TSX. And at $21K the Si isn't exactly cheap either.

nippononly

$27K for the GTI is far from cheap, but $21K for the SI is a fair bargain these days. That is now pretty much the BASE price of cars in the next class up, with a couple of second-tier 4-cylinder outliers thrown in. Plus, among similar performance cars in its class, it is least expensive, and will have performance comparable to a few cars that are several thousand $$ more expensive.

Toyota's sticker on Matrix/Corolla XRS is up to $21-22K now, and that car has like 164 hp/130 tq and is substantially slower, not to mention not as well outfitted.

On the other side, the SI will likely out-motor the cheapest Acura sedan and the cheapest Lexus sedan, which cost $7-10K more, and will be substantially equipped for its price range.

varmint

The description given by Honda suggests the Sedan Si will be equipped with the 6MT only. Will they stick with it? Will they give in and offer a 5AT version later on down the road? Or... will they give the EX the same 197hp engine with an AT, but no suspension, brake, and tire upgrade.

nippononly

the RSX line continues, I bet the next base model will have the same powertrain as the SI, in which case I imagine they will engineer it for an available automatic as well. If all that happens, I bet the SI will get an automatic at the same time. And I bet that will be a paddle-shifted auto also.

I doubt they will stuff this engine in an EX without chassis upgrades, and make an automatic available that way.

robertsmx

For that reason, I hoped Honda actually threw in 2.4/I-4 in a sport version of the Civic (not Si, but something else... let us call it "SX"). They could have kept the power output to about 170-175 HP, but managed to offer 5AT as an option from the parts bin, while chassis tuning was more oriented towards sportiness. Essentially a truly "practical" sport sedan. 6MT works well but for a very small chunk of buyers.

An automatic with the 197 HP/2.0 would likely require detuning of the motor in terms of revs, and power anyway, unless Honda goes about designing a brand new transmission of an 8000 rpm engine.

robertsmx

the market has shifted substantially away from coupes

I'm not sure about that. Is Honda selling fewer coupes now than they did back then?

ateixeira

You know we're in the middle of a horsepower race when a very quick near-200hp sport compact is called that.

I don't think it'll feel slow at all out on the streets. The same way my 116hp Miata doesn't feel slow - it's light and nimble and easy to drive around quickly.

The only issue I can imagine is riding around with a lot of weight in it, say you have 4 people. Torque is not that high so it won't feel fast when it's loaded up like that.

varmint: the GTI was estimated at something like $26-28 grand, right? I thought that was a bit unfair, especially since they equipped the already pricier Golf with DSG.

Strategy: here's what I think they should do...

For the first year, make the Si 6 speed only. Let that establish a halo over the Si name. Then, in year 2, come out with the automatic. We all know that car will do more volume, but the Si will have a more established reputation in the enthusiast community.

If they are patient, and wait to launch the slushbox later on, I think it'll really pay off.

That worked for the original Taurus SHO. At launch it only had a manual, it didn't sell so well, but the SHO earned a good reputation. When the automatic came out later, they sold like crazy, and the rep remained intact. Ford milked that rep for a couple of years.

-juice

nippononly

the "slow poke" thing was just meant as a relative thing. The SI is far from slow, that's for sure. But most of those cars I mentioned are quicker.

Right now the market is going crazy with fast cars and a raging horsepower war. In fact, Honda was half a step late in realizing that, which is why they never managed to sell many of the '02-'05 SIs.

ateixeira

I knew what you meant, I was just commenting on the general state of the HP Wars.

SRT-4 will have 300hp for $25 grand. :surprise:

-juice

varmint

Yeah, I think C&D put the GTi's price at 28K. Though there may have been a few options which would not have impacted the car very much when deleted.

"If they are patient, and wait to launch the slushbox later on, I think it'll really pay off."

That's a possibility. I see an 5AT Si being something of a competitor for the Mazda3 S. Which isn't a bad idea. However, I do not want Honda chasing the Mazdaspeed 3 with a factory Civic.

As long as I'm playing CEO, perhaps the Si Coupe should be replaced with a Type R when the Si Sedan arrives...

ateixeira

Well, Mazda is having Heat Soak issues with the Speed6 (losing HP). The engine is tuned more tamely for the CX7 and supposedly the 3 will get that version of the engine, but let's see if Mazda can resolve this first.

-juice

nippononly

can you imagine a turbo version of the SI, using SH-AWD? Price it the same as the WRX, make sure it makes at least 250 hp (like, for instance, a juiced-up version of the RDX's engine would), and just SEE which one sells better. My guess is WRX sales would falter overnight. Of course, Subaru can crank out more WRXs than Honda would be able to crank out such an SI-R, so limited supply would keep the ball in Subaru's court.

carlisimo

It'd probably be boring to drive.

varmint

Soobs would have some advantage with an existing presence in the market and also a racing history to back it up.

I'd rather they stayed away from that kind of performance in the Civic line. They should just produce the Sports4 concept under the Acura brand.

nippononly

Fair enough - call it the next RSX/TSX. Make both in just one trim line, no more RSX-S. Dare I hope for a future for the little RSX?! ;-)

explorerx4

juice... you are a good guy, but don't dis the SHO for performance. an '89 can still run with most of today's performace vehicles. my '92 auto was nicknamed 'heroin'. it encouraged a 'need for speed'. i sold it before something bad happened, but kept my slower mustang gt(which i still have). how many years later did honda and subaru provide a mid size sedan that could compete?

gee35coupe

In search of a real chassis. It was the equivalent of a Turbo Yugo. Or maybe even when Buick made that super fast GNX out of the Regal. Just dropping a fast engine in a car does not make it great.

explorerx4

as a former owner a all generations of sho's i disagree about the chassis. the big problem was the price. i hope the civic si sedan doesn't have the same problem.

gee35coupe

Since Honda build pretty much monospec they have always been very competitive in that area. There are very few cars that compete with them when you compare then on features, safety, power, and history of reliability.

As far as the SHO, I didn't mean the car wasn't great when new, but as with most Tauruses, they started to look crappy as they aged. The paint and plastic cladding warped and started looking dingy. The engine was great though.

rsholland

The SHO engine was engineered and built by Yamaha, not Ford.

Bob

gee35coupe

And the rest of the car wasn't. Kinda like a 50 year old getting a heart transplant from a 20 year old athlete donor.

And as for the second SHO, I don't see putting a heavy V8 in a FWD car. You end up having to put wider tires on the front of the car. Is that wierd or what?

robertsmx

What was so great about the SHO engine(s)?

explorerx4

this is a honda discussion, but i guess i have to respond.
hopefully the host will give me some leeway.
in the 'old days' car had to be designed to be more balanced, chassis-wise, than today.
take your favorite turn in your 'gee as best you can, then turn off the 'vsc' and do the same.
those electronic nannies make people feel like thay are better drivers than they really are.
actually, i don't want you to do that, i am just trying to make a point.
does the new civic si 4 door have 'vsc'?

explorerx4

the original sho engine (1989) was built to turn up to 11k rpms. :surprise: due to the lower designed ford components running off it, a/c, alternator, etc... it was limited to just over 7k rpms.

gee35coupe

But when the SHO engine came out, it was one of the first 24V V6's in a mainstream U.S. car. Not only did it have one of the best hp per litre but it also had one of the best looking tuned intakes.

explorerx4

so now is what your point? i am posting on what i know. it can be backed up on 'sho' websites.
sure, the sho's were the same as the mom and pop versions of the taurus, if you exclude the engine, transmission, exhaust, brakes, suspension, and front seats.
are you ready to turn off your 'vsc'?
i am still waiting to find out if the civic si sedan has 'vsc', just to stay 'ot'. i think it has a lot of potential for honda.

nippononly

did its usual magic when it designed the heads for the first SHO engine. That thing was amazing. This was at a time when Yamaha was doing all the heads for the go-fast versions of the Celicas. Just close your eyes and imagine what a STICK SHIFT Taurus with 4-wheel discs and a 24V engine must have felt like in 1989...

Come Gen II, Ford decided to go typical domestic instead, and substituted brute force and size for technical artistry. The result was the big-engined Gen II SHO. I wonder how much torque steer it really had, or if that was just something for people to complain about.

I really could never forgive Ford for making SHOs automatics after the first few years. Luckily, Honda has gone the opposite way and made all its sportiest models, even the family sedans, stick only. :-)

explorerx4

sho engines were 3.0, 3.2, and 3.4 litres. how many litres is an accord v6? :surprise:

gee35coupe

But I don't think anyone doubts that the SHO's engine was a great technological feat for its day. They just didn't have a modern chassis that deserved it. Not to mention one that would last long enough to enjoy said engine for years to come. I mean, you don't have to close your eyes and imagine what a 1990 stick shift Accord would feel like. There are still examples running and in a condition that you would still want to have one. When you consider the volume sold, you can't really say that for the 1990 Taurus. Let alone the SHO.

And no the SI doesn't have VSC. It does have limited slip though.

robertsmx

I read a little about the SHO engine, and it wasn't meant for Taurus to start with (but ended up there after Ford dumped the idea of launching a MR performance coupe).

Toyota was already using 24V V6 in its Camry/ES250 at the time although neither were tuned for all out performance. Honda was happy offering V6 only in its flagship sedan (Legend, 2.7/V6 24V, 160 HP) and its supercar (NSX, 3.0/V6 24V, 270 HP) at the time. It wasn't until third generation Legend, Honda got serious about V6 (and not until MY1998 in Accord).

Offering a (relatively) high performance V6 in a family sedan is the only thing that stands out to me, about the SHO engine, besides its use of variable intake manifold.

explorerx4

ok, i'm done removing the 2+ feet of snow.
i am somewhat wary of vsc, because i think it encourages automakers to create a vehicles with more engine than chassis. The G35 happens to be a good example. on the other hand, i glad to hear the civic si sedan does not have it. it is just my opinion that it makes drivers feel like they are better than they really are.
if someone has fond memories of their 1990 accord, that is great. i have mine from my sho's too; four wheel drifts, 6500 rpms in top gear, etc...

ateixeira

Here's what I said originally:

That worked for the original Taurus SHO. At launch it only had a manual, it didn't sell so well, but the SHO earned a good reputation. When the automatic came out later, they sold like crazy, and the rep remained intact. Ford milked that rep for a couple of years

What I meant is that Ford didn't update the design often enough, that's all.

I mentioned the SHO as an example of a launch strategy that worked, suggesting Honda do the same with the Si.

-juice

ateixeira

Finally sat in a new Civic, plus an updated Accord. They didn't have the Fit there.

New Civic Si interior was a bit hard to get used to. With the seat in the most comfy position, the steering wheel would not lower enough that it wasn't blocking the speedo. I had to lift the seat to a higher position that I prefer just to see it, and I'm 6' tall.

The front seats are fantastic. It was fun just sitting in them.

The rear seats in the coupe are smaller than I thought, near useless unless you're talking about putting kids there.

The sedan, though, wow. With a flat rear floor it feels almost as roomy as the Accord's back seat. Very space efficient. It was a hybrid and didn't seem to lose any space back there, either.

Still had the issue with the steering wheel blocking the speedo, though, in the sedan.

Wife and I were also checking out minivans and the Ody misses on 2 key points vs. the Sienna - the 8th seat is too small to be useful, and no AWD option.

Surprisingly, the kids spent the most time crawling around in a Kia Sedona.

-juice

robertsmx

Surprisingly, the kids spent the most time crawling around in a Kia Sedona.

They must have seen the Kia commercials.

gee35coupe

By not offering the AWD Ody. Another choice in that segment would only mean fewer customers to go around. I bet the number they would sell would compare to the number of V6 6 speed NAV Accords. As much as we love to harp about it here on Edmunds, I'd be willing to wager there is very little real world demand.

I don't know about the 8th seat, but the other 7 are awesome. Plus the Ody simply looks better than the Sienna. And don't get me started on that new Kia.

Those seats in the new Civic are to die for. And that dash IS something you have to work to get used to. I'm gonna wait a while more before I try to buy one though. The dealers think those things are golden right now.

explorerx4

i'm not taking the bait. let's just hope the civic si sedan enjoys a memorable legacy.

carlisimo

Anything think the Si has reached a pleateau?

Honda's best, whether it's been the Civic type R, Integra type R, or the Honda Si, hasn't changed much in specs for a while. The suspensions have regressed, hp/liter has been constant forever, 200hp is old news...

That's all fine with me if real cost has gone down. I don't have those numbers though. But we haven't seen any breakthroughs in the segment for a while. New applications of old ideas, maybe, but that's it.

varmint

I think that's pretty standard trickle down. The good stuff is introduced in the Acuras then it makes it way down to the Honda models. Look at BMW, Subaru, Toyota, or just about any other manufacturer and you'll find the same process in effect.

nippononly

is news of 200 hp really that old? I am struggling to think of any car coming in under the SI's $20K sticker that has more power? Not to mention a standard stereo with subwoofer, moonroof, limited slip, and 17" alloys?

I think the SI was a bit disappointing for a $20K car in the last round, although if that had been a $17,500 car I would have had a very different opinion.

But the new one is a real decent value, I think, not to mention a pretty exciting car to own, and as long as Honda doesn't rest on its laurels and continues to move it forward a full notch with the next redo five years from now, then no, I don't think it has plateaued.

carlisimo

By the old SAE standards, the 1996 Integra type R had 197hp. I just looked it up; that was in Japan, and it came out two years later here with 195hp. By the new standards that's only around 185hp, so it turns out I was exaggerating. Still, that was 10 years ago.

Then in 2002, 200cc were added, and the Integra type R got a claimed 220hp. That's probably a little above 200hp by the new SAE standards. Not really old, but as long as I'm looking this stuff up I may as well write it down. The new Civic Si has the engine out of the Integra type S / RSX-S.

And then there's the suspension, but that's been talked about a lot already.

All in all, the new is a great value, but it's not unworldly like it used to be. There used to be a halo effect. Or maybe I was just in high school at the time.

nippononly

that high school thing you said! :-)

Seriously though, there was just a lot less out there back in the 80s when the SIs first interested the pocket rocket generation and tuners everywhere.

By the late 90s all the domestics had taken notice of what Honda did there and started developing a model of their own. Of those, most are still around to compete with the new SI - the only one that is gone is the Focus SVT. Not to mention, Nissan's post-Y2K redemption plan was to sell horsepower in a big way.

So the SI is not as unique and exciting in today's market as it was in 1986. But it is still a great deal for what you get, especially if you can get one out of a dealer's sticky hands for less than MSRP. :-P