Mazdaspeed3 vs. VW V GTI vs. Civic Si

fasterthanyou

"These discussions too often turn into 'this one is better and everything else sucks' (ahem fasterthanyou ) when i think it'd be nice if it was more along the lines of 'why i like this one best for me."'

I'm not saying everything else sucks. I don't have a problem with Honda in general(I actually own one)just with the inferior products they sell in the States under this name.

fasterthanyou

"And again the fact that the tsx is the accord in europe doesn't mean that the accord we have here is inferior."

Are you kidding? Acura TSX and Honda Accord US versions look to you like they have the same quality?
US spec Accord is a monstrosity in its current form.

fasterthanyou

"Reliability just happens to be an attribute that many consumers value. If one disagrees, one can always ignore these reports and surveys. Let's not distort the reports or surveys to suit ourselves."

I'm not saying reliability is not important but 1.5 defects as opposed to 1 defect means ....nothing. I might have "half", or "almost" a defect more in a year?. That makes Lexus reliable and BMW unreliable? That should keep me a way from the most exciting brands? Please... :confuse:

blueguydotcom

This is a GTI thread. The GTI is part of the VW family and is rated at 299 problems per 100 cars.

The funny thing is, I'm leaning toward the GTI. Stop acting like I'm anti-VW. What I'm pointing out is quite simple: I'm not going to mislead people and tell them VW and Honda are step for step on quality. That's simply not true.

Yes VW's GTI is fun to drive. But it should go without saying that it will probably be more problematic than a Honda Civic.

socal2006

Unfortunately, reliability surveys can give wildy different results. They are hardly reliable themselves.

In the JD power survey, Mazda is doing pretty poorly.
However, in this survey of UK and US cars:
link title
Mazda is number one in reliability followed closely by Honda. VW seems to be lagging behind.

Although I may not agree with Consumer Report's methods, I like how they do reliability based on specific models (even trims within models) as opposed to entire brands. That makes more sense in this global economy where cars from the same brands may be built in different parts of the world.

From my general impressions of the various surveys out there, this is what I've concluded:
Honda seems to have pretty good reliability across the board.
Mazda seems to have good reliability with cars built in Japan, and improving reliability with cars built elsewhere.
VW seems to have poor reliability across the board.

This is how I look at these makes. However, when buying, you should look at all the reliability surveys out there, look at how they conduct their surveys and come to your own conclusions.

blueguydotcom

I agree with you. Across the board though, it seems VW consistently lags. That certainly speaks volumes about the make.

fasterthanyou

"What I'm pointing out is quite simple: I'm not going to mislead people and tell them VW and Honda are step for step on quality. That's simply not true."

You are right they are not equal in quality. VW is way better. If you are talking only about reliability between the two than who knows maybe you are right and the Civic will do better due to the antique technology and lack of features and electronic controls. The old, simple technology used by Honda makes for a crappy ride but sometimes works in the reliability department.

d_hyper

Lexus has much more technology and electronics on any of its models, not to mention hybrids, and still is at the top of reliability ratings. Your argument does not hold water. Actually this was not an argument, but rather a rant. :sick:

blueguydotcom

The broken record response. Spin it anyway you like. Look at the resale value of a 2006 Civic SI base with 15k miles and a 2006 GTI 2-door base with 15k miles.

Civic:17,971
GTI: 18,408

The GTI was over 1000 more expensive than the Si but yet it's only worth about 425 more after just 1 year? What will this look like in year 3?!

So perhaps the GTI uses new technology but that comes at a premium for cost, resale value and maintenance.

FWIW, I'd take a 4 door GTI over a Civic Si sedan any day and twice on Sunday.

rorr

"You are right they are not equal in quality. VW is way better. If you are talking only about reliability between the two than who knows maybe you are right and the Civic will do better......"

Amazing the way your mind works. An analogy - one aspect of a vehicle's performance is fuel efficiency. A Prius has better fuel efficiency than a GTI; ergo, a Prius has better performance than a GTI.

Thanks, fasterthanyou; the application of your brand of logic will be very entertaining in the future.....

eldaino

brilliant

eldaino

their products being inferior in america is your opinion. They seems to do better here than they do in europe according to you and all your 'vw rules outside of america' buisness.

And didn't you say there was absolutely no better in any way shape or form a better car under 30k than the gti? If that doesn't insinuate that ANY other car other than the gti is subpar, well you be crazy!

eldaino

actually, styling aside since that IS subjective, if you take a accord ex-leather or an accord v6 leather to an acura tsx, you'd be hard pressed to say they werent at least close to the same level of quality. And for your info, acura still exists as a brand in europe so just because they use the tsx's body as the accord technically doesn't mean that it would still be clad the way it is here in the states.

But like i said, both us spec cars are so close to quality it doesn't really matter. Maybe when the tsx gets redesigned and the accord as well, they will differentiate the two models a bit more and add a bit more 'luxury' to the tsx. You gotta understand that its just techno wiz bang stuff that make the tsx more luxurious over the current accord. They both got the same analog styled guages, well designed soft touch interiors and even if the accord is a bit behind, its not by much, it really isn't.

And how come you have yet to inform us of all your civic type r driving impressions? And if you have even driven the us spec si?

I'm soooo wanting to hear it....

blueguydotcom

Off-topic but that TSX would be a hoot with the RDX's 2.4 turbo. With a 6 speed manual, I'd snap it up without blinking.

fasterthanyou

"mazing the way your mind works. An analogy - one aspect of a vehicle's performance is fuel efficiency. A Prius has better fuel efficiency than a GTI; ergo, a Prius has better performance than a GTI."

I think your example is exactly the opposite of the way I'm seeing things. I am not the one think that one aspect of the car for example reliability can be enough to make me use the word quality. VW means best quality(in its price range) it beats Honda in every single aspect except reliability(I don't really believe that but I feel generous. If for you the word reliability(again I'm being generous in saying that Honda is more reliable)translates in quality than I guess Honda is you car.

Is like you say that a pair of jeans from Walmart are better than pants made by Armani because the jeans can be trashed more. German cars are for people that know where the engine in their cars is. You cannot trash a VW or BMW just like you cannot trash an Armani suit. Is for people that understand that quality needs to be appreciated. For the rest there are Hondas and Toyotas.

fasterthanyou

"And for your info, acura still exists as a brand in europe so just because they use the tsx's body as the accord technically doesn't mean that it would still be clad the way it is here in the states"

Acura doesn't exist in Europe, or exists only under the name Honda.

fasterthanyou

"exus has much more technology and electronics on any of its models, not to mention hybrids, and still is at the top of reliability "

You are misinformed, sorry. Is the marketing machinery and you are one of the victims. Lexus technology is way, way behind Mercedes or BMW.
Hybrids are a different subject. Toyota makes the best hybrids because nobody else thought people want to drive around in cars that look ridiculous and drive like golf carts.

blueguydotcom

Is like you say that a pair of jeans from Walmart are better than pants made by Armani because the jeans can be trashed more.

No the two cars cost about the same as one another. Base to base 1k difference.

German cars are for people that know where the engine in their cars is. You cannot trash a VW or BMW just like you cannot trash an Armani suit. Is for people that understand that quality needs to be appreciated. For the rest there are Hondas and Toyotas.

What? VW = people's car. It's a mass produced automobile, just like Honda. You perceive quality but really you're not comparing Kmart and Nordstrom but rather Target and Walmart. One may be a bit fancier but in the end it's still a discount merchandiser like Civic Si/GTI are economy cars with boyracer aspirations.

blueguydotcom

Why do you keep bringing up off-topic models? Lexus, BMW, MB...unrelated to this topic. Let them alone. We're talking about the economy racers - GTI/Civic Si.

d_hyper

So you know, the goal of technology is to make things perform better and more reliably. If it does not, than it is just a junk science.

thegraduate

You cannot trash a VW or BMW just like you cannot trash an Armani suit. Is for people that understand that quality needs to be appreciated. For the rest there are Hondas and Toyotas.

So, for us worthless peasants, how can we "aspire" to VW ownership? LOL

gogiboy

" wonder how cr gets its relaibility numbers, i figured they'd send something to the owners, but being one of the 'fairly' few new rabbit owners i have not really heard anything from them,..."

Consumer Reports sends out an annual survey covering automobiles manufactured in the last 8 years to their 2,000,000+ subscribers. They also ask their subscribers to rate a variety of other appliances as well as other consumer concerns that will be covered in upcoming issues.

If I recall correctly, they typically get anywhere from 600,000-800,00 responses. Unless you are a subscriber you won't get a survey.

Gogiboy

fasterthanyou

"Why do you keep bringing up off-topic models? Lexus, BMW, MB...unrelated to this topic. Let them alone. We're talking about the economy racers - GTI/Civic Si."

This discussion about reliability got a little out of hand I agree.
About the "racers", after test driving all three I would rate them like this:
1 GTI for driveability(which is what I love mostly about German cars). Translates in power everywhere at any RPM (maximum torque 207 between 1800 and 5100)responsive,easy to drive, exceptional attention to detail,use of high quality materials for both interior and exterior.
Mazdaspeed 3 more of a racer car than the GTI but there is where everything stops. The interior looks cheap, the shifter is not precise(some described it as rubbery),the power delivery is more than weird (power comes suddenly at 3000 RPM up to 4500 and then feels like the turbo is loosing the boost, the noise at speed is unbearable, the suspension is really harsh on less than perfect roads. The car is fun if you drive with the pedal to the floor all the time. Unfortunately that is not possible on public roads. I don't think Mazdaspeed is a bad car but it feels to much like a car that was put together by a few enthusiasts than as being the result of fine factory tuning.
Honda Civic SI is my least favorite. I like to shift but I don't really like to beg the car for power. With 139 pounds of torque the car doesn't move up to 6000 RPM and then just goes a little faster. Is the slowest car in the group and even if is obvious that the power-train could take serious beating without breaking the noise that it makes is something like a little girl screaming. Sounds pathetic to me. If you like Civic in general the SI definitely worth the extra cash, otherwise nothing to write home about. Is a light car with a cartoonish interior and an underpowered engine. The choice of the Consumer Reports reader.

thegraduate

Is the slowest car in the group and even if is obvious that the power-train could take serious beating without breaking the noise that it makes is something like a little girl screaming. Sounds pathetic to me.

The sound thing is subjective, so I won't respond to that, but the GTI and Civic Si have been recorded neck and neck in 0-60 Acceleration, although the Si was quicker on the track. Motor Trend loved both vehicles it seems, but felt they were two different animals. Both ran 0-60 in 6.3 seconds (.5 sec behind the MazdaSpeed3, I believe?)

MT's thoughts on the Si:
Whereas the GTI always feels like it's on simmer--with its peaceful demeanor, softer suspension, and low-end grunt--the Si thrives on full boil, giving off the most steam with the engine screaming near 8000 rpm and the raspy exhaust belting its song like AC/DC. With peak torque (139 pound-feet at 6200 rpm) also realized at high engine speeds, the Si must be kept in VTEC mode (6000 to 8000 rpm) to stay with the torquier GTI.

But keep up it does, ripping off a 0-to-60-mph dash of 6.3 seconds and the quarter mile in 14.9 seconds at 94.7 mph. At the track, the Si was nearly 2.0 seconds a lap quicker, thanks to a front limited-slip diff that effectively puts down power and a suspension that always leaves the Si composed and planted--evidenced by 0.89 g on the skidpad (0.83 for the GTI) and a 26.8-second run through the figure eight (27.2, GTI). Not only does the Si stay flat at the track, it also remains compliant around the city, delivering a taut ride that's nearly as forgiving as the VW's.

Unlike the GTI's electric power steering, whose beauty fades at the track, the Si's comes alive, vividly relaying the front tires' limits around every turn; through town, though, the Si's EPS did feel more artificial than the GTI's. Once acclimated to the Si's brakes, which at first seem grabbier than a baby, you're rewarded with superior feel and power, resulting in the shortest stopping distance from 60 to 0 mph (117 feet) and the deepest braking zones at Willow.

MT loved the GTI too
To say Volkswagen hit the mark with the fifth-generation GTI is an understatement. So improved is the new from the old that the fourth-generation almost deserves to lose its badges. Gone are the staid styling, stale body, and solid rear axle, replaced by a formidable facade, a structure 35 percent stiffer in torsional rigidity, and an independent multilink rear. Moreover, those rear suspenders, in conjunction with a retuned front-strut setup, have vanquished much of the old-gen's uninvited understeer as well as its affinity for lifting a rear wheel under aggressive cornering. At the track (see sidebar), the GTI's newfound nimbleness and stability were appreciated more than free beer.

Grab the thick-rimmed flat-bottomed steering wheel--the best-feeling helm this side of a Ferrari--and the GTI's electric power steering provides clear sensations, turning a run through the canyons into a thrill ride not normally associated with a VW. Steering feel did seem to diminish at the track, however, becoming more numb, as if the electronics were unable to keep up with the action. The four-wheel disc brakes, on the other hand, kept up just fine, although they felt mushier under pedal than the Si's. They were nonetheless stout, halting the GTI from 60 to 0 mph in 119 feet.

Rarely does a 2.0-liter motor feel like a monster, but the GTI's 1984cc engine produces enough gusto that it can easily make a 3500-pound Passat Wagon seem sprightly. In a 3143-pound GTI, that becomes super sprightly. The dash from 0 to 60 mph takes 6.3 seconds with the quarter mile waving bye-bye in 14.7 seconds at 94.8 mph. Those times narrowly trail those of the previous-gen's hot rod, the V-6 R32, which recorded times of 5.9 and 14.2 at 97.6, respectively. The 2.0-liter is so flexible that downshifting becomes almost voluntary, especially at the track, where a drop in gears often bumps peak torque above its 5000-rpm threshold. The six-speed exhibited an easy action that never impeded spirited driving, but next to the Honda's unit, it felt vague and rubbery, and its clutch too light and insensitive.

I think VW has the edge in around-town driveability, no doubt. But the Civic is not to be written off. It's harder edged than the GTI, it seems. The real question is where does the shopper land on the scale?

fasterthanyou

"So, for us worthless peasants, how can we "aspire" to VW ownership? LOL "

LOL This was the funniest comment I read in long time. I can see that the people that post here know a thing or two about cars. Is said that some are giving up on good cars for such a ridiculous reason as reliability ratings.
The truth...there is no automaker today that makes cars that don't run. Whatever your choice is you are going to have transportation. You can buy Suzuki, KIA or Jaguar and they will all take you to work. The only thing that should count is how the car drives and probably how the resale value is going to be(that especially if you keep cars for short periods of time). If you think Honda Civic SI is a better driver than the GTI buy it. But don't buy because "It's a Honda".

gogiboy

"No you don't. The change from an Accord sedan to a 4 door GTI costs me 15 dollars more for 6 months same coverage, same insurance company. However a BMW 335 will cost about 120$ LESS. I know because I was in the market for one. Civic SI 170 more, Mazdaspeed 3 110 more. Safety features reduce the premium drastically. Honda and Mazda lack in that aspect. not the only aspect they lack though"

As I pointed out before--but you chose to ignore--this is your experience and does not reflect the experience of many others. For me (34 year spotless driving record, 50 years old, cars and house insured by same mainstream company) the VW GTI is the most expensive car to insure and much more expensive than the Hondas and Acura I got quotes on. That is my experience. That doesn't make me rule out the VW GTI as a possible new car. It does, in my case, negate your claim that VW safety features trump other factors insurers--at least my insurer--use to assess risk and set rates.

Your statements would hold more weight if you didn't act as if you, and your experiences, were the sole paradigm used by all insurers in their actuarial assessments.

Gogiboy

Gogiboy

thegraduate

I've seen some experiences firsthand that differ with that assumption. They ran, no doubt, but without air conditioning (an electrical problem kept screwing up the condenser at 40k miles). Is that the norm? I dunno. I have one friend with a Jetta they enjoy (2004 model, less than 20k miles so far - 2.0L 115hp 5-speed manual). The other is the New Beetle Turbo with major problems. So, I know that ALL their cars aren't bad, but they seem to have a bad track record relative to other options.

I don't get cars because of the name brand; I've bought from previous experience and the fact that my car hit the best compromise in the class of vehicle I was shopping in.

It doesn't hurt that it recently won an award for best-in-class resale value (I don't have a Civic Si, in case that's what everyone thought - I drive a midsize since I'm 6'4" )

blueguydotcom

Your take on the GTI I will agree with. For the most part. The suspension is far too soft for me. FWIW, my 03 330i with the performance package and my newer e90 330i with sport package feel ridiculously soft - like an old man car's. So with that, you can see I do not favor marshmallowy BMW suspensions or anything softer than that. If i got GTI it will get a thorough redo of that suspension to make the car livable on a daily basis - much thicker rear swear bar, new shocks, springs, lowering kit. It'll take a few grand to make the GTI at least decent on the road. For my fiancee i may go dsg - she can drive stick but prefers auto. Regardless, VW, like all German makes, sports a lousy manual. Really bad. Not GM/Ford bad but awful enough that they make me long for a real manual from Mazda/Honda.

The Mazda3 - general one - I love the shifter (much better than anything short of a Honda). I haven't driven a Mazdaspeed3 but the number of complaints about the suspension being rough lead me to conclude I'll like it. Not a fan of the 2.3 in the mazdaspeed6, so things don't bode well for the Mazdaspeed3 or the lousy gearing they used in the mazdaspeed6.

The Civic SI sedan's suspension was pretty composed. The coupe felt choppy, like skateboard. The tranny in the coupe felt perfect, the sedan - oddly - rubbery, almost VW/BMW cruddy. Power was simply not there. Keep the engine over 4k and it has decent steam but not enough to make the car livable on a daily basis. Pretty lousy interior and the cardinal sin in my book: no xenons.

creakid1

"Drove the 06 GTI in 05 before buying my 06 330i...In late 06 I took out a 4 doot GTI for a few hours..."

The '07 GTI has lowered suspension. Was the 4-dr GTI you drove an '07 model?

Your comment about finding FWD cars such as VW/Mazda superior to the expensive BMW 3-series (both E46 & E90) in driving experience/fun certainly is getting us "little leagues" excited. Please elaborate. Or you were just too lazy to firm up your Beemer?

I personally only find the old Miata w/ LSD & the Focus SVT fun. I also like the manual-steering MkI Jetta/Rabbit GTI.

Of course, only the Miata is reliable.

blueguydotcom

4 door GTIs are 07s. However, the 07 GTI was not initially lowered.

Quite simply a 330i will dust a GTI pretty easily. But the GTI is enjoyable in different ways - lighter, eager engine, smaller, louder, more raw. Different types of cars and not very comparable at all. For what I want right now and for my perspective family, the GTI currently seems like the car to go to - enough fun matched with lots of practicality and some luxury. I've not touched a 335i...I fear the power will be too intoxicating and I'll end up with one.

I have never modded my Bimmers as they were leases. The current one is a 2 year lease. It'd be a pain to swap parts for what would amount to only a handful of months and then what would I do with the parts?

BTW, "Beemers" are motorcycles. Bimmers are cars.

fasterthanyou

"The '07 GTI has lowered suspension. Was the 4-dr GTI you drove an '07 model? "

I have a 2007 GTI and the suspension is not lowered. In fact (unfortunately for the people waiting for this)is not going to be lowered until the 2008 model. GLI comes already with lowered suspension for the ones interested in it.

fasterthanyou

"Regardless, VW, like all German makes, sports a lousy manual. Really bad. Not GM/Ford bad but awful enough that they make me long for a real manual from Mazda/Honda."

I'm afraid I cannot agree with you on this one. Audi has by far the best transmission(if we don't count Porsche which is my personal favorite). The only manual transmission I'm not fond of is the one in the BMW but I think is more the way the shifter looks (tall, a little awkward)than the way it really feels. Of course M models are a different thing . If you like Honda and Mazda transmissions more than the one in the VW than we look for different things. Honda transmission are easy to work with but I personally don't get any pleasure from using them. It might be that I cannot judge the shifter by itself, I probably cannot take it out of context. Anyway I think the transmission in the GTI is great, no complains here. I am not sure that if Honda will make the transmission for the GTI would make it as much fun to drive.
If you would say in Europe that you think Honda has a better transmission than VW, people will lough at you. The same thing will probably happen here if you say the opposite. 90% of Europeans drive stick, about 5% of Americans drive stick. Who do you think is right?

eldaino

they meant lowered from the o6 version. This is true it was in a bunch of press releases that you can read on vwvortex.

I think your whole honda makes good products in europe thing is just a ploy to justify your bashing of their products in general seeing as how you have a pretty poor opinion of the brand in general since the only people who drive them have no interest in taking pleasure in driving.

How come still now response to your type r experience? Or was i originally right when i pointed out that you were comparing the previous generation type r to our previous generation si?

eldaino

agreed blue! that would be awesome! Perhaps for the next gen tsx? Finally make it more competative...and i thought it was a 2.3...?

eldaino

wow thanks gogiboy very interesting. Kinda makes you wonder if subscribers are being that honest and not giving bad ratings on purpose...do they just send a generalized survey or do they, for example, send them one that is specific to their vehicle? Because if they just send out a generalized one for each automobile, people could rate them bad on word of mouth and without any real life experience. I can just see someone giving a vw a bad rating simply because a buddy of theirs says he has problems with it, but doesn't really know if he keeps up on the service regularly.

Kinda sucks being one of the (relatively) few rabbit owners who will never be able to really give testament on how good his car has been for him.

blueguydotcom

If you would say in Europe that you think Honda has a better transmission than VW, people will lough at you. The same thing will probably happen here if you say the opposite. 90% of Europeans drive stick, about 5% of Americans drive stick. Who do you think is right?

I've never seen a person bring up europe so often. Why are you using completely unsubstantiated assertions about Europe in a discussion of these cars?

I think I'm right because it's my money. If the EU wants to buy me a car - and it better be a nice one, not anything sub-80k - then I'll sell out and bow down to VW/Audi/BMW's manuals. Until the EU is supporting my car addiction, I could care less what they might or might not say about Honda Civic trannies.

If you can find a poll of a representative sample of the EU that details how the prefer VW's manuals, that'd be really keen. Best of luck.

BTW, considering your veneration of Europe, have you even been there?

fasterthanyou

"they meant lowered from the o6 version. This is true it was in a bunch of press releases that you can read on vwvortex."

No offense but no change was made or will be made concerning the ride height for 2007 GTI's. Ride height is the same for 2006 and 2007 GTI. 2008 model will have reduced ride height. :shades:

fasterthanyou

"I've never seen a person bring up europe so often. Why are you using completely unsubstantiated assertions about Europe in a discussion of these cars?"

I' ve been on both sides ..that might give me an advantage over you.

"BTW, considering your veneration of Europe, have you even been there?"

Is not veneration for Europe ...I am just acknowledging that the regular guy there knows more about cars than the regular guy here, therefore their decisions about cars are better made.
I've never been there ...I travel everywhere only in my mind :confuse: :confuse:

fasterthanyou

"Or was i originally right when i pointed out that you were comparing the previous generation type r to our previous generation si?"

Nope, I was comparing the previous generation type R to the current SI. Never drove the old SI and from what I've heard I didn't really miss anything.

fasterthanyou

"If you can find a poll of a representative sample of the EU that details how the prefer VW's manuals, that'd be really keen. Best of luck."

The fact that they sell a lot more than Honda there should make that pretty clear.

fasterthanyou

"For me (34 year spotless driving record, 50 years old, cars and house insured by same mainstream company) the VW GTI is the most expensive car to insure and much more expensive than the Hondas and Acura I got quotes on"

You didn't say the insurance was expensive for you only..you advised somebody to run away from a GTI because the insurance is expensive. Expensive for you doesn't mean expensive for everybody just like cheap for me doesn't mean cheap for everybody. If I made it sound like a generalisation than I made exactly the same mistake you did.

fasterthanyou

"Kinda sucks being one of the (relatively) few rabbit owners who will never be able to really give testament on how good his car has been for him."

I think VW's are rated by Honda owners in the States.

blueguydotcom

Is not veneration for Europe ...I am just acknowledging that the regular guy there knows more about cars than the regular guy here, therefore their decisions about cars are better made.
I've never been there ...I travel everywhere only in my mind

Wow. You've never been to Europe and yet you're talking constantly about what Europeans prefer? You never cite any evidence of your claims about Europe. I'd contend your arguments are thus based solely in your mind and have no basis in logic, experience or fact. You're making up facts about Europe and Europeans to bolster your arguments...essentially you're engaging in wishful thinking - a logical fallacy. you want Europeans to prefer VW manuals to Honda manuals but you lack proof or even limited experience to back up the claim.

blueguydotcom

The fact that they sell a lot more than Honda there should make that pretty clear.

Your argument doesn't hold water as it's an association fallacy:

Europeans buy Hondas and VWs mostly with manuals. Europeans buy more VWs than Hondas. Therefore Europeans prefer VW manuals.

There are a million other reasons VW may outsell Honda in Europe. The manual may or may NOT be the key reason.

kmur

"Quite simply a 330i will dust a GTI pretty easily. But the GTI is enjoyable in different ways - lighter, eager engine, smaller, louder, more raw."

Good points. To me, I don't want the fastest car. I want a car that is fast enough. The fastest 0 to 60 time is meaningless when all it will do for me is give me tickets.

I enjoy driving in a "spirited" fashion, but without excessive speeding that will get me in trouble with the law or risk accidents. The GTI (as does the Mini) seems built for this style of driving.

fasterthanyou

"There are a million other reasons VW may outsell Honda in Europe. The manual may or may NOT be the key reason."

So if I follow your line of thinking Europeans prefer an unreliable car that has a crappy transmission(in your opinion, VW) over a super reliable car that also has the best transmission out there(in your opinion, Honda). And 90% percent of them drive stick. You don't see the strangeness in believing something like that? How in the world people that mostly drive manual will choose a car with a bad transmission over a car with a great transmission? You don't think is odd to think something like that. How is it possible for you not to see the real answer, the real simple answer. Honda does not make such great cars.

fasterthanyou

"Wow. You've never been to Europe and yet you're talking constantly about what Europeans prefer?"

That was a joke :surprise:
I thought you noticed the little guys(cars with faces) expressing confusion about your question, they look like this :confuse: and I used two(apparently not enough).
But then I forgot , you don't pay attention to the details, that's why you like poorly made cars like Honda.

blueguydotcom

Faster,

Do you know the preferred engine type in Europe? It's not the 2.0T or a traditional 2.0 even. It's diesel. In europe, something maybe you've read instead of imagined, the diesel reigns supreme. Honda's diesel offerings in europe are...scant.

The increasing demand for Honda’s award winning diesel engine across Europe is demonstrated by a 36.6% increase in sales of its diesel models, which reached 84,427 and accounted for one in four of all car sales.

http://world.honda.com/news/2007/4070117Civic/

1 in 4 are diesel and that sounds like a lot. Well, it isn't. Honda's new diesel is a shift for Honda in Europe. But compared to VW - who owns the diesel market with the TDI - Honda is an also-ran based purely on engine choice right now.

2.0T sales do not make up the bulk of VW sales in Europe as they do here (Passat, Jetta, GTI, A4, A3, TT, Eos).

Do you think, maybe, just maybe Honda's lack of a viable, accepted diesel in Europe might be holding them back? Maybe? Nah, it's all the transmission...

d_hyper

... is only a marketing term. When it counted, Germany couldn't produce a better tank than Russian T-34 or better planes than Russians during WWII.

nschulman3

I know this discussion now involves only the GTI, MS3 and Civic SI, but why do we not even mention the WRX? I had an STI that was stolen and it was too rough for city driving. I now have an 07 WRX TR. I began shopping with the idea of getting a 4 door SI or GTI. I was also interested in the MS3, but was anoyed that no dealer would let me drive it. I thought the SI handled reaaly well, had a teriffic gearbox and was a great value, but the dealers wouldn't budge from sticker. The GTI was my #1 choice at first but I found the gearbox disappointing and didn't care for the handling, which I felt to be sloppy. I finally drove the MS3 and although I loved the power, the power delivery was a little too off-on for my tastes. Additionally, I didn't find the interior to be so great with lots of hard plastics. The WRX is faster than the GTI and the SI and about the same as the MS3. You can't dismiss the AWD which is invisible in everyday driving. The WRX may not look so hot, but it handles well, the new 2.5 engine has terrific power delivery, the interior is functional and comfortable and there are no fancy electronics needed to control wheelspin. It is just a fun and fast car that you can drive everyday. Any opinions?