Honda Civic Sedan 2006

snakerbill

Sure, for someone who never drives their car, 20 cents per gallon is not a problem. But for me, I drive 65K per year, it makes a LARGE didfference, and why accept the fuel penalty when there are a lot of cars that use regular that have very high performance, (the Mustang GT comes to mind), so I can not see any reason to do anything which raises the cost of fuel per gallon. Fuel mileage is the reason I am going to move to a smaller car, and it would really be stupid to buy a car that must have premium fuel when the car I now have uses regular (Honda Accord EX V6), and it has plenty of performance, so what is the justification for premium fuel except to enhance the already bloated profits of the oil and gas industry. Why give them any more of your money than you have to? Premium fuel is just a scam.

adrenalinejnky

Everywhere I read it says premium fuel does nothing for your engine unless you own an exotic supercar. So how do you think this will run on regular grade?

jarrod06civic

I have heard that there will be no radio in the DX? IS this ture? What kind of car doesn't have a radio? i thought all cars do

stupidfool

i think they have it, i'm thinking of buying th lx for 16.5g's

307web

The DX has no radio or AC standard, but the dealer can easily install both for a fee. Some people would rather put in their own aftermarket radio, but for most people an LX would make more sense.

snakerbill

The Dx does not have a radio, it has speakers and wires. Seems nuts to me, but that is what Honda said. The Lx is probably the best value, but the Ex is the one to get, its just better, in my opinion, and worth the extra, and it will have a much better resale percentage wise than the Dx, and probably the Lx too. The 15 inch wheels are stamped steel with nasty plastic covers, and the l6 inchers are alloy, and the tires are also different as to their width.

jchan2

You should get the Honda Civic LX. It provides everything you need- Air Conditioning, CD Stereo, Cruise Control, Power Windows, Locks, and Mirrors, Remote Keyless Entry, and All the airbags.

george2kmax

Does anyone know if Honda will have the LX Special Edition model for 2006 that they have in 2005. I test drove a 2005 LX SE and liked the car except for the power. I am considering waiting for the 2006 to come out with the additional HP and I was hoping they would still have the LX SE in 2006.

307web

No. Special Edition and Value Package models usually come out during about the last model year or so of a body style. They never have them on a brand new body style.

george2kmax

Do you know if the LX Model will have the leather wrapped steering wheel and will there be any options for alloy wheels in the LX ?

snakerbill

The biggest reason to get the EX is that it has 4 wheel disc brakes, and the Lx has drums. Not good. Also, I was wrong about the wheels, the Lx has 16 inch wheels, but they too are stamped steel and not alloy, and they have those nasty plastic covers. One just gets more for their cash in the EX than the others, and I think again that you will be much better off when it comes time to trade for another car if you get the EX. There are also other goodies with the EX not available on the LX which you can check out at Hondas Specifications web site.

thegraduate

307web is very likely correct in guessing that no SE model will be available on a first model year run of this car. SE models are generally made to "spice-up" the line-up. They are put in place to draw interest on an otherwise picked-over line of cars. I am not knocking their strategy, as it appears to be working (many SEs on the road here in the south!) but its a filler until the new model is released the next year. They did this with Accord SEs in 2001-2002 before the much improved model (2003) was released. If you can live with 115hp (most people can), go for it! You will get a steal once the 2006 models arrive on lots! :shades:

wco81

What is the price difference between LX and EX?

Also the coupe seems to get better equipment than the sedan like a higher-wattage stereo.

f111d

I know the 2005 has CNG in California, anything on E85 for the midwest? For what what I can find out even the hybrids won't do mulit-fuel?
These manufactures are not really concerned about energy savings, only thier bottom-line!

stupidfool

is the ex ( which is estimated for 18.5g's ) with a standard or optional sunroof, i don't really need a sunroof and don't wanna pay for 1, do yall think that it'll be around the 17's without a sunroof?

the 2005 is 17.8 without sunroof that's a good price

jarrod06civic

Does anyone have an idea how much the automatic tranny will cost as an option? And does anyone know the price increase over the 05 models? I will probably get an LX Coupe, and the 2005 models cost $16,760 (with auto.) i'm hoping the 06 will stay around $17,000 or maybe just a little more.

sms92

Several of you have mentioned slightly worse fuel efficiency on the new civics. I am confused, it looked to me from the various articles that the automatic sedan would have slightly better fuel efficiency. Are you all talking about the si? I am having difficulty getting honda's web site to load so I have been relying on news releases and reports. Are the lx and ex sedans in automatic less fuel efficient than the 2005s?

Thanks.

jarrod06civic

sms92, every article i ave seen says the 06 civic Lx and Ex sedan will be more fuel efficient, rated at 30/40

the 2005 LX w/auto is rated at 29/38
the 2005 EX w/auto is rated at 31/38

so not only is the 06 more effiecent but also more power especially the LX, which used to onyl have 115 horsepower and now has 140!

jchan2

has always been standard with the sunroof.

If you don't want a sunroof in your Civic EX, I'd recommend waiting a few years for the Civic LX Special Edition, which'll typically have the upscale stereo, alloy wheels, and a few other things, except for the sunroof.

Or you could go ahead and ask for a screaming deal on the few remaining 2005 Civic LX Special Editions, which don't have sunroofs.

robrwa123

I agree that the single best reason to get the EX is the added brake power and reliability. Nothing's more aggravating than a car with soft brakes. You'll come to appreciate it more especially as the car ages. And, you'll appreciate the EXtra's you get along with disc brakes!

crazycro

I want to get a copy of Hondas Previous Chat Transcript from 09/01/05 and I can't seem to find it. Can someone please help me I really want to read it.

Thanks in advance.

crazycro

I want to get a copy of Hondas Previous Chat Transcript from 09/01/05 and I can't seem to find it. Can someone please help me I really want to read it.

Thanks in advance.

dudleyr

Yes the automatic sedan gets better mileage - because of better gearing, not because of engine improvements like Honda implied.

The manual sedan gets worse mileage, since it basically has the same transmission and it pulls about 600 more rpm's per mile than the automatic.

dewey

b>What will real-world mileage be like? Honda says the Civic Hybrid now gets about 43.6 mpg in everyday driving - and in their tests that aces the Prius

The above quote from the site below. Would only consider a Civic hybrid with a manual tranny!

http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?DID=RSS&n=274&sid=274&article=9178

claudius753

Honda said the new engine would be 6% more efficient. Lets see here:

05 LX Auto = 29/38, combined = 33.5
6% more would = 30.74/40.28 combined = 35.51

06 LX Auto = 30/40 combined = 35

It seems that the numbers show close to a 6% increase in the Autos, which most drivers will get anyway. Now sure, the 5 speed auto helps the engine out, but the new engine is also pulling more weight than the '05. I think that if you were to take the R18 and the D17, independent of the car, set them both to turn a set rpm, say 2000, the new engine would indeed us less gasoline.

What is likely is that the new engine really is 6% more efficient, and the 5 speed auto is neutralizing the effect of the extra weight.

ludexr

Why does Europe always get the better Civic? Is there any news on a Civic 5dr hatch for US market in the future?
Engine available for Europe type-R is 2.2

http://world.honda.com/news/2005/4050801.html

creakid1

"Creakid1: There is in fact a double wishbone suspension in the rear, though I was personally hoping for a return to the double wishbone all round setup that was featured on the earlier generation civics. Those things were beauties for the intelligent engineering. Now they go with struts as a cheap (though nearly as effective) way to get a balance in handling and ride quality."

My bad, I got the news from Europe, which has the new Civic hatch w/ the Double Wishbone completely deleted front & back. Honda claims that such move increases the cargo area. So I expect the hatch Fit to do the same & sacrifice the ride comfort.

Here's the hatch we might never get:
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/previews/58914/3/images/honda_civic.html

"On the whole, I have a lot of mixed reactions. Take the engine - more powerful, VTEC across the board, larger displacement (therefore a wider torque band) - but it also has lower fuel economy, at a time when gas prices are soaring; in my mind Honda overshot the performance goal and didn't pay enough attention to the mileage factor. It still gets great mileage, don't get me wrong, and the increased power is probably worth it. But at a time when other companies are finding ways to increase both power and fuel economy (BMW, Toyota-Lexus most obviously, as well as even GM's latest four cylinders), Honda's approach of increasing one while decreasing the other simply won't cut it. Any company can create a more powerful engine by doing what Honda did to the civic - increase displacement, give it better breathing, etc. - but it takes thoughtful designing to increase both - designing and engineering that used to be a staple of Honda engines. With this one they seem to have taken a step back. I'm also rather disappointed that the EX will not have a slight increase in power over the DX and LX models. That may come in later model years though, so I doubt it will be a huge loss to Honda...Now it's spread itself too thin. It's lost it's title of best handling economy car when it lost its double-wishbone front suspension. It has now lost the fuel economy war to the Toyota Corolla, which will probably have even better fuel economy in its 2007 year update."

There you have it. The Corolla beats the Civic (& everyone else) in terms of acceleration & fuel economy (see C&D comparison) by offering larger displacement w/ more low-end torque. That's why there's no point giving the EX any extended high end. C&D also tested the EX vs LX version of the '94-97 Accord & found the EX w/ extended high end & sacrificed low end, besides losing fuel economy, actually accelerates slower especially at lower speeds!

BMW's displacement increase from the 2.5 to 2.8 in the late '90's doesn't hurt the fuel economy b/c the increase performance is the low-end & not the high-end rpm. It's even more true back in the mid '80's when their 2.7 beats the 2.5 in fuel economy by offering stronger low end & WEAKER high end.

Honda engines are suppose to be the best, better than Mazda, etc. My Mazda engine in my Focus ST 2.3 sucks in fuel economy while feels weaker than my '98 Corolla 1.8 at low rpms! Why do you think GM picked Honda's V6 for its Saturn Vue?

The new Civic's larger engine shouldn't have sacrifice fuel economy. The culprit must be the increased weight alone for the purpose of side-impact protection.

By the way, the full-Double-Wishbone '00 Civic I just bought 3 days ago doesn't drive anywhere as fun as my '90 Protege LX or '05 Focus ST. It must be the torque-sensing steering assist that numbs up everything. :confuse: Honda's progressive valving on the shocks just isn't willing to soak up bumps in a luxurious absorbing way. I really envy the ride comfort of the '05 Focus SES!

I'm spoiled by my Protege (w/ the comfy Gabriel struts) & Focus. Honda's are still boring to steer, although the ride of my '00 Civic's highly sophisticated suspension might improve a lot w/ Gabriel shocks

peralta

The above quote from the site below. Would only consider a Civic hybrid with a manual tranny!

I guess, the manual tranny would not fair well with 3-stage ivtec if driven by regular people. I suppose it will need a lot of driver involvement. Why not leave it to the computers?

creamyam

Sure, for someone who never drives their car, 20 cents per gallon is not a problem. But for me, I drive 65K per year, it makes a LARGE didfference, and why accept the fuel penalty when there are a lot of cars that use regular that have very high performance, (the Mustang GT comes to mind)

according to Ford the Mustang GT makes 17/25 manual-18/23 auto thats terrible. The Ford Mustang GT has 16 gallon tank. Manual GT gets on average 336 miles on a full tank.
Not sure on the Tank of the Honda Civic Si but the 2005 is 13.2. Honda Civic Si get 22/31. That would average 349.8 miles on a full tank.
okay lets say gas price is 3.00 regular and 3.20 premium (premium as i know is +20 cents) Mustang GT filling a tank= $48, 2006 honda civic si= $42.24
Youll fill up less according to the better mpgs in the Honda. (also saving money)
Honda beats the Mustang in Gas prices and consider reliability. Ford doesnt compare to Honda. I'd take a Honda over a ford anyday.
Driving 65K miles in a Ford will not save you money just wait for the car to break down. Not only that ive never seen a Ford Mustang GT on the Lot for less than 27k. believe me Honda civic Si is the better deal.

wormgambill

i'm looking to buy soon, and considering a '06 civic. new to the forgien car buying as well. can i look for cash incentives or are all the rumors true that forgien car dealers are very stubborn? thanks

jchan2

If you want cash incentives on a Civic, you'll be waiting for 2-3 years.

The first year of a redesign, Honda typically sells out its entire production unit without factory incentives of any kind unless that specific car is a flop, or if Honda just feels like putting down a 199/36 month lease deal.

If you want cash incentives on a Japanese car, I'd try Toyota, Nissan and Mazda. Honda prefers to offer great lease deals (like $199/36 month on the Accord LX) and financing deals (1.9% APR on all 2005 remaining Accords) instead of pure cash. ($500 cash back on any Camry!)

But if your goal is to get a great deal on a Honda, I'd go and look at the leftover 2005 Honda Civics. There are lease deals, there are financing deals and I think Honda might have put down some "Marketing Money" for the dealer (secret cash incentives- that info can be found right here on Edmunds)

If you do want the 2006, here are a few things:
1. You're going to be paying MSRP, slightly more than MSRP (Hybrid) or if you're lucky, just a few hundred bucks less.
2. There won't be any incentives at all. You'll have to arrange your own financing or leasing paperwork.

The 2005 has lease deals and 1.9APR on it the last time I checked...
Correct me if I'm wrong on the MSRP part... I remember the Odyssey was still commanding MSRP into its MMC...

dewey

I suppose it will need a lot of driver involvement

I love involvement while driving a car(unless I am driving a Ford Taurus or Grand Am from a car rental).

Also I know I can get better fuel economy and performance with a stick vs. a slushbox! To each their own, but I do hope I get a option(most likely in Canada there will not be a manual HC since the current model does not have one.

inkyofok

NO one will be paying MSRP on non hybrid. I preordered mine three weeks ago for $500 over invoice (whatever that will be).

Sure the first few days buyers will pay first $300 off, then a week later $500 off then a month later $700-800 off.

The only thing that would alter that trend is a massive shift to small cars which has not happened yet (remember the 05 Civic sales were pitiful).

ON the mpg front. I still predict most expericenced 5 manual drivers will exceed the 5 speed auto on everyday driving plus I am sure the base 140 hp engine will feel and sound very fine for the Civic in EX fashion with disk brakes and lower weight alloy wheels. MPG probably a wash with these cars. The manual has to beat the auto on town. The auto simply has to use energy slushing around and weighting more. It defies laws of energy for the 5 speed auto to be more efficient in town. Now the lower final drive on the auto will most likely yield a 1-2 mgh advantage at speeds over 65 mph, but overall a wash.

Plus the auto will be no fun to drive. It may be nice but not fun.

stupidfool

10 more days till dealers get these beuties

snakerbill

I never compared the Civic to a Ford GT, I only stated that premium fuel is not a requirement for performance. In no way do I think that a Ford GT gets good gas mileage, or that the Ford would be as economical as the Civic to drive over many miles. The point was that no manufacturer needs to require premium fuel to get decent performance and good fuel mileage. Premium fuel just makes the oil and gas dealers richer. With knock sensers and computer control of timing and fuel, the need for detonation protection is moot, and that detonation protection was the only reason that premium fuel was required for some engines. Very few cars have mechanical timing and carburetors today. Also, I noticed that you never said a word about the other car mentioned, the Honda Accord EX V6, which also has very good performance and uses regular fuel. It also gets very good mileage for its size and weight, but the Civic EX should get much better mileage, and that is the reason that I am going to a smaller car at this time. There would be no reason to buy the Civic Si if fuel costs was the concern. My Accord does very nearly as good as the Si with fuel, and runs away from the Si in performance. Check the numbers in Car & Driver or road & Track if you do not believe me.

backy

Premium fuel is apparently the price we must pay to get an a Civic that delivers almost 100 hp per liter--something few naturally-aspirated engines can do, including the V6 in the Accord--with decent fuel economy and emissions. For me, 140 hp in a compact coupe or sedan is more than enough power--especially with a teen-aged driver in the house.

iwantonetoo

I highly doubt that many people will cross shop the Si with the Mustang GT. The GT is a 300HP, high torque muscle car. The Si is a high tech, high revving, low torque sports car. They are after two completely different buyers IMHO.

user1235

reality check: there are huge cash incentives on the 2005 civic right now (for quite some time now). That's why you can buy a new civic for well below invoice. Even edmunds site shows $500 mfr-to-dealer incentives, but the incentives recently have been more then $1000.

I agree though that 2006 will not have incentives anytime soon, unless it's a flop (which is likely) and then only after 6 months or so.

backy

Why do you think the new Civic will be a flop? It has more power than before, better fuel economy (for the majority of buyers, who get automatics), class-leading safety (assuming the crash tests prove Honda's expectations), new styling, better warranty than '05, bigger rubber, and probably driving improvements but there aren't many reviews on that yet.

I do think the new Civic will receive immediate pricing pressure from some competitors that offer comparable safety, equal/better roominess, and comparable or "close enough" economy, at a lower price. That will drive prices down very soon after introduction in most markets. But I expect Honda to stick with their "no rebates" policy as long as they can.

filmnews

The 1991 Mustang GT stock had a 0-60 time in 7.3 seconds and its 1/4 mile time was 15.6 seconds. So, this means that the SI will be very close to this time. The 2002 Acura RSX Type-S runs a 1/4 mile time of 14.8 seconds. This car has 200 HP, not the current 210. So, I think that the Si will run pretty close to a 15.2. I got this number by adding 15.2 + 14.8 = 30.4. 30.4/2 = 15.2. This is a pretty good time. Cars you could win against include Probe GT, 89-95 Mustang GT, Stratus RT, and 1995 GS-T Eclipse. Cars it would lose to include 2002 Eclipse GTS, Neon SRT-4, Acura RSX Type-S, Lancer EVO, and RX-8.

iwantonetoo

So the 2006 Si will be close to the performance of a 1991 Mustang. You've lost me on this one, why compare a new car to one that is 15 years old?

roger227

Hey guys. Sorry to jump in here but you caught my attention. Apparently I've been asleep the last few years so I'm hoping someone can catch me up on the topic of "premium vs pre-detonation" issue.

My (apparently old) thinking - higher compression causes regular gas to self detonate early before the piston hits the top of the stroke, and before the spark plug fires, resulting in knocking. Higher octane stops the pre-detonation and lets the spark plug control proper detonation.
Without getting too long winded, can someone explain the newer methods of using regular gas but avoiding the pre-detonation? :confuse:

Much appreciated.

jchan2

Oops

I forgot that you had sealed a deal for $500 over invoice.

So perhaps it is possible to get a deal on an 06. Just not below invoice.

loudgizmo

Courtesy of our friends at Green Car Congress:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/09/show_time_for_t.html#more

tlong

Most modern engines have electronic controls on their timing. They also have knock sensors. If the engine control unit detects knocking it retards the timing slightly until the knock quits. Since higher octane fuel has a lower vapor pressure and knocks less easily, the timing can be advanced and this provides greater performance.

Contrary to popular opinion, higher octane fuel does NOT have any more power than regular. It is the ability to advance the timing in higher compression engines that allows the engine to run more efficiently.

burk1

Do all 1.6L civics have the vtech or is there some with a non vtech head and if so how can you tell

kagedude

Just read from C&D that the sedan is 140hp/128torque.
My Mazda 3i is 148hp/135torque.
My mom's Hyundai Elantra is 138hp/136torque.

Why can't Honda be little bit more competitive with the powertrain? The sedan has lines of the TSX/TL but the powertrain just doesn't match up with the looks.

jchan2

Some do not have VTEC. (the ones that are not 2006)

You can tell by the trim lines.

DX, Value Package, and LX models are not VTEC powered. (2005 was the last year for the non-VTEC engine in these trim lines)
EX, HX, and Si models are VTEC powered.

All 2006 Honda Civics will be iVTEC powered. But all 2006 Honda Civics will be 1.8L motors too.

Hope this helps. Tell me if I'm wrong about the HX. I'm not sure about it.
happy motoring

burk1

I have a 92 with a d16 but it don't say vtech on the head like most do but it is an si havent had it lng that why i was jst wondering
Thanks

307web

The Civic has better fuel economy and that's a priority for small cars.
Are you actually planning to drag race econocars to prove your car is faster or else why does it matter?
140HP should be plenty with high mpg.