Honda Civic Si Automatic

coupe2

Does anyone know why Honda does not offer by now a civic si coupe or sedan with an automatic trans?

shipo

I've heard several:
- An automatic transmission ruins the sporty image of the Si brand
- The automatic that fits that car can't deal with the power of the engine
- The automatic hurts the performance of the car

Which is the truth? Don't know, however, I surely wouldn't want to own an Si with a nasty slush box. :P

Best Regards,
Shipo

coupe2

Thanks Shipo for the info. Subaru WRX...Eclipse.GT.Mustang GT...can make an auto...and it doesn't hurt their image at all. A six speed auto...would be awesome for people like me who prefer the auto...if Honda can't make it ...shame on Honda.

shipo

Obviously opinions differ, however, that the Mustang and the WRX have an automatic available means that for many individuals (me included), their prestige is seriously jeopardized. :P

By the way, the Si isn't the first performance version of an otherwise pedestrian car that has been available only with a stick. The original version of Audi's Quattro system comes to mind, and while the list is relatively short, that isn't the only example. As I understand it, when Audi initially developed the second generation Quattro system, it was automatic only, and the cars languished on the dealer lots. Dedicated Quattro drivers wouldn't touch it and eventually forced Audi to bring the stick back.

Best Regards,
Shipo

shipo

"Thanks Shipo for the info. Subaru WRX..."

This just in, the 2008 Subaru WRX STI is only available with a stick and a proper clutch pedal under the dash. ;-)

Best Regards,
Shipo

rv65

Torque converters can't rev over 7,000 RPM. The Si is simply too high revving to have an auto transmission.

drmbb

Then how does Mazda put a six-speed automatic in the RX-8 (redlines at 7500rpm)? Or what about drag racers revving over 10,000rpm with auto tranny's? I thought the only limit was heat generation and having enough transmission cooling capacity.

cz75

Honda probably doesn't want people who aren't skilled enough to drive a stick in their halo car for the USDM Civic line. Nevermind that an auto probably wouldn't be the best choice to take advantage of a car that makes all its power near redline.

coupe2

I agree...an automatic makes sense..especially with an si sedan...Oh well....guess I have to buy the eclpise with a 5 spe ed auto...

mishaa

Does not make any sense to me. People who buy Si love to have control over their cars, and often drive them close to the limit.

I personally don't want an auto to change gears on me and trigger a loss of traction while I'm in the middle of taking a corner...

Mustang owners obviously are more into straight line acceleration, so auto option is absolutely valid and does not surprise me here, and WRX is probably just trying to please American market...

For the record - I own 92 and 03 Si, and used to own 84 JDM one...

shipo

"...and WRX is probably just trying to please American market..."

Of course, the new Subaru Impreza WRX - STI is only avaliable with a 6-Speed manual. No nasty slushboxes need apply. ;-)

Best Regards,
Shipo

mishaa

I did not check this myself, and used info available in this thread - shame on me

and good for Subaru

shipo

I'm thinking that you were half correct as the base 224 hp WRX is still available with an automatic, it's the 305 hp STI model that is manual transmission only.

Best Regards,
Shipo

coupe2

Just drove an SE-V6 Eclipse...auto..5 speed....by Si~

shipo

...the status of the Si remains intact. ;-)

jmer

I am planning on buying a car in the next few months and loved the Si I just test drove. Most new ones I have seen on lots are mid to high 23s once the dealers tack on all the fees. I've heard you can get them for just over 20 or 21 though. Does anyone have any recent experiences?

I was also looking at used to possibly save a few K. Although its a Honda, the concept of buying a one year old Si makes me a little nervous because I have to wonder why it was already traded in- not broken in correctly, ridden too hard, etc. Is it worth buying an 06 or 07 with 20K for $19k from somewhere like Carmax/Honda dealer or for that difference is it better to just go new?

Also, I saw a few used ones that have leather seats. Is it worth looking into or does it take away from the way the seats grip you when going around a curve?

cz75

Learn to drive... a stick. It is easier than waiting for tow trucks and the Mitsubishi dealer to fix your car.

mdta

I drove stick almost all my life; until my nagging wife ordered me not to buy new car with stick.

Some snobs laughed when BMW introduced 4 doors M3.

There is a maket for people who are forced to drive auto. but is still longing for the taste. Just like light beer.

kork13

Personally, I would never buy an Si (or any other sport-type car for that matter) if I were forced to have it as an automatic. You just can't have the fun with an auto tranny as you you would with a manual. With the exception of the beater car I had in high school, I've always driven standards, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

In general, if you care about the image of the Si and getting full use of its performance, then you'll absolutely go for manual. If you want the name and image but don't care about the performance as much, then an auto would be fine. (this goes for any car, not just the Si, of course... mustangs, BMW's, whatever)

In the way of comparison... Automatic transmissions are specifically designed for economy and ease. They are designed to keep the engine within the most efficient range, no matter what. However, if you want to use a car's full performance, you can't do that... using the performance capabilities is inherently inefficient. While I'll admit that some trannys have made progress toward allowing for more performance use, a) this defeats the purpose of autos b) it still limits your performance (relative to what you could do in a manual) c) it's difficult to switch between the 'normal' and 'sport' modes. I gauge this from a test drive I did in the auto VW GTI. While their double-clutch system works very well, there were still usable regions of the tach that still went ignored. Additionally, in order to change the tranny to the 'sport' mode (to allow me to bring it above 3k rpms), you have to stop the car and then change it :sick: . Flash forward to my Si, and anytime I want to suddenly switch from driving like normal to having fun, I just stand on the pedal and enjoy. Easy as that.

This is just me, but really, I can never be convinced that an auto tranny belongs in any sporty car on the road. It just defeats the purpose of having that sportiness, or keeps you from utilizing the full capabilities of the car.

spikepark

Well, it definitely makes sense to me for Civic to offer an automatic version of the Si Sedan in 2009. Check out the competition:
http://www.nissanusa.com/se-r/

Nissan offers the Sentra Se-R (race inspired) in both manual- the Spec-V with 200 HP and in automatic with 177 HP.

Why doesn't Honda take a similar path and develop a less powerful automatic Si- with say 175 HP. I'm sure that it would draw a lot more people in- especially with the regular Civic only offering 140 HP.

shipo

I simply don't understand why folks don't just learn how to drive a car with a real transmission. I mean, come on, Honda transmissions are some of the easiest to clutch and shift manual transmissions ever built, and I've got to tell you, if my 73 year old Mother-In-Law can drive a stick well enough to appreciate my old 530i 5-Speed (she had a ball driving it by the way), then anybody can do it.

Best Regards,
Shipo

rv65

Apparently there are no plans for a civic Si automatic. Sorry but the K20Z1 is just too good for an automatic . It would probably be detuned and wouldn't rev so high due to the torque converter.

tiger72

"Obviously opinions differ, however, that the Mustang and the WRX have an automatic available means that for many individuals (me included), their prestige is seriously jeopardized."

I seriously agree with this statement. What's the point in having a performance car if you want to leave all of the control to the tranny? Just because other manufacturers defile their performance cars with an auto doesn't make it a good idea.

tiger72

"Why doesn't Honda take a similar path and develop a less powerful automatic Si- with say 175 HP."

If you're willing to take that big of a performance hit just for an auto tranny, why not just take the Civic EX?

cz75

Another thing to note is that the WRX is gutless with an automatic because of the powerband. An automatic mustang wouldn't be that big an issue if you were going to set it up as a drag car.

spikepark

Because, the regular Nissan Sentra is 140 hp just like the regular Civic.

The Sentra Se-R is 177 hp in auto. and 200 hp in manual.
The Civic Si is 198 hp in manual and could be 175 hp in auto.

Makes sense to me.

tiger72

What's the point of the Si badge if it's just a 30hp boost? Just put a new intake and exhaust on the EX, hrow an Si (or Type R) sticker on the car and bam, you've got what you're looking for: an underpowered "performance" car.

shipo

A slammed Civic with fake badging? Yeah, what a totally cool idea! :P

thegraduate

A lot of people are overlooking the fact that the other performance cars mentioned have good horsepower, but also have a pretty good torque band as well. In the Civic Si, the power really doesn't pick up until 6,000 RPM. To utilize that properly, you really need to shift it yourself.

The Sentra that has been mentioned has what amounts to a Nissan Altima powertrain. It's larger in displacement, and offers much more usable power, without the race-car experience of the Civic Si. An automatic is ok there, because around town, it'll still feel punchy. A Civic Si has only 139 lb-ft of torque, and would feel little different from the mainstream 1.8L Civic with an auto left to rev under 4000rpm, as most people drive. The torque peak in the Civic is over 6,000 RPM, with max horsepower coming at 7,800 RPM. You need a manual tranny to utilize that power properly.

spikepark

Thank you Graduate- finally a real explanation of why Honda will probably not make an automatic version of the Si.
Others that have posted comments to my Si vs. Se-R comparison should take some pointers from the Graduate.

Thanks for the detailed explanation.

tiger72

I thought what he posted was fairly obvious already, and I figured anyone interested in a Civic Si would already know that a high-reving engine (like Honda engines) would lose all its fun with an auto tranny.

spikepark

Fair enough.

thegraduate

Well, I was basically responding to posts like #20 that recommended Honda do something like the Sentra and offer an automatic, maybe with reduced peak power.

The Sentra wouldn't lose all the fun because it has a lot more low-RPM power to play with, and automatics typically find the highest gear they can comfortably perform what the driver's foot expects. With a Civic, if running down a two-lane road in a "fun" way (i.e.: fast), and you let off the gas, the an automatic will go back to lower-RPM versus the high-RPM you were doing when you gunned it down the next straightaway. From that low RPM, the Sentra will still have some punch, while the Civic would be left waiting for the downshift to get it back "on-cam" and making its high-revving power.

With a manual, you can leave the Civic on-cam while not actually using the gas pedal, and will be immediately ready for the next big acceleration burst.

spikepark

Great explanation. I own an 06' automatic Civic and a friend of mine owns an automatic Sentra Se-R and I definitely agree with what you are saying.
I guess it is time to move to the manual Si when my lease is up.

kenlw

some of you seem to be be ignoring the fact that just because you COULD get an automatic you can still get a manual if you wanted. It's not an either/or situation. It's called an option....

btw, some folks can't "learn" to drive a manual. They have no right arm.

cz75

I knew someone who drove one with his prosthetic.

thegraduate

We're just explaining why they aren't very plausible with this extreme powertrain tuning. I'm not ignoring a thing.

kenlw

my comments weren't directed at you in particular, it's just the way the forum is set up... but 2L or 1.8L, it's still a 4 cylinder civic for pete's sake. Some folks would gladly trade "performance" for a bit of power.

even tossing 25-30% with an auto, the 2L would still give you more power than the 1.8L (with auto). It's just that simple. Even tho personally i am perfectly able to use a manual and have in years past, my present needs just don't warrant a manual. (Driving 60-80 miles a day in Houston traffic isn't exactly cut out for performance of any type! ...endurance, yes, performance, no....)

Granted, the lack of torque at useable speeds would remain a handicap for most normal drivers, there's just no getting around the fundamental shortcomings of a high-rpm, low torque power plant for most urban drivers, manual or auto. Altho the auto would exacerbate the problems, it would still provide a bit more power for those that want it.

thegraduate

A more plausible engine for this car, if you wanted an automatic, would be the 2.0L from the Acura CSX (in Canada).

2.0L i-VTEC I-4

155hp at 6,000 RPM
139lb-ft at 4,500 RPM