Dunlops: Better wet weather traction Better grip around corners Quieter than the Firestones
Firestones: Longer tread wear
These tires aren't even in the same category. FR690's are All-Season radials and the SP Sport A2's are High Performance All-Season tires. I am a little more aggressive in driving and therefore I favor the Dunlops.
Typical Honda Quality earned a dismal "average" reliability for the 2001 year according to consumer reports. That should be a pretty good estimate as to how bad the car is. I drove an early 01 on a test drive and it kept stalling. I could barely get it back to the dealer. I didn't buy it. I have since drive a loaner 03 LX with under 1000 miles. This car is amazing! Amazingly bad that is. The ride is horrendous with a jounce and pitch from the rear that is nauseating. I also found the doors had to be slammed to close and the center console reminds me of how GM designed cars of the 70s. Just try to reach in there from the driver's seat. You need to be a contortionist to do so. Why anyone would consider this car over the more powerful, but equally fuel efficient Corolla is baffling
Different strokes for different folks, I assume...
I personally don't fit in the Civic's seats. The side bolsters on the buckets are not spread wide enough to feel comfortable, they feel confining and painful to me.
I put Dunlop Sport A2's on my VW Golf (2001), swapping them for Gooyear LS tires. The Goodyear were actually good tires, but I got pulled in by all the "oem tires are bad" hype. The Sport A2's are definitely great in the rain. Their isn't much difference over stock (Goodyear LS's on the VW) on dry pavement.
When it's time to replace the FR690's, I will probably move to 15" wheels at Tire Rack so I have more tire choices - Sport A2's, Bridgestone 950's etc. I will probably go with a set of steel wheels, which they usually sell with their snow tires, because most steel wheels weigh less than more cast aluminum wheels, oddly enough (confirmed by tire rack, and also in the wheel ads of some forged aluminum wheel makers).
As I said earlier, I haven't had any problems with the FR690's that come stock on the current year Civics in dry or wet conditions(and I emphasize current year, in case Honda hammered Firestone to make a better product in the last year or two) so I won't change right away.
I bought a 2003 Civic after driving both it and the Corolla, I thought the Civic was a much nicer car (sportier, quieter, tighter). Now one thing I sometimes think about is that my Civic was manufactured in Japan at Suzuka, maybe their build quality is better than Canada or Ohio. My doors close very nicely thank you!
Without going over the edge, can someone compare the 2003 Civic vs. the 2001 which did seem rather noisy? Ride, hiway noise, handling, etc.? Also, does $199/mo. for 48 mos., no security deposit, taxes, or down payment seem like a good deal for a Civic 2003 LX? Seems like it to me.
I didn't get a chance to drive the 01, but thought the 03 Civic LX's handling made it really fun to drive compared to the Corolla and Protege. The Corolla steering is too light (numb) for me, and one could fall asleep at the wheel. The Civic's ride was OK, not great. The only thing that really bugged me was its high level of road noise on the freeway.
Re '01 vs. '03 - I recently drove a '03 EX coupe and found the ride to be very good--compliant, no trace of rear-wheel hop, solid, good handling.
Re $199/month for a Civic LX - personally, I wouldn't pay almost $10,000 to lease a $14,000 car over four years. Especially when a dealer in my area is offering EX automatic sedans for lease for $139/mo. plus about $2400 total up front--the rough equivalent of about $189/month total. But maybe in your area, $199/month for a LX represents a good deal. Have you run the numbers to compare lease vs. purchase (using Honda's 1.9% financing)?
When I test drove a new 2001 a couple of years ago, I was immediately turned off by how it felt like the engine was inside the cabin with you. It was just very loud. I did not notice that in the 2003 I bought.
the civic is an economy car, and economy cars are expected to have some of the annoyances like road noise, loud engine, etc... having said that, i think the civic is one of the most refined "econoboxes" in the history of economy cars. the '03 has more insulation, so the noise isnt as pronounced as the '01-'02. also, the materials are of much higher quality than last year. i absolutely love the backlit dash display this year.
"civic is one of the most refined "econoboxes" in the history of economy cars"
Wow, you've really bought into the whole Honda is supreme propaganda. I don't argue that it has been a good car, but the last iteration of the Civic has been poorly received by many, especially auto writers who have wondered why Honda took a perfectly good 6th gen Civic and created a 7th gen that is a step back in ALMOST every catagory including reliability.
Oh, the '03 backlit display seems cool at first, but then you realize how the markings for 30, 50, 70mph are non-existant and then it begins to annoy you. I'll stick with the more legible 01,02 displays.
I drove an 02 Civic LX back to back with a new ION, a Corolla, a Jetta 2.0, and a Focus SE. The Civic felt small inside to me (I am 6'3 and a good 250lbs. though), and it also felt slow and noisy to me. The Corolla was faster and a little roomier. I had never driven a Civic before then, and I was a little disappointed.
my '02 civic just hit 10,000 miles, so i called the dealer to get an oil change and ask about the maintainence schedule - was told it would cost $79.95 for the oil change and all the maintainence stuff to be done - i want the car to last so i would assume that "maintaining" the car is my best bet but that's a lot - does everyone else follow the schedule or am i just a fool - wouldn't following the schedule hopefully prolong the life of my car?
That seems very high to me. If your maint sched is the same as mine (mine's an 'O2 Si), then all you need is an oil change, tires rotated, and locks, latches, and hinges lubed. I'd check another dealer. I'm not there yet (<2K miles), but I'd expect the 1st service to run ~$40 (or less) at my dealer. Are you a do-it-yourselfer? Keep your receipt on the oil and filter in case there are ever warranty issues.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but from some of your past posts I get the impression that you do not own a Civic and are not interested in buying one. I remember you saying that you had driven some ('01, '03 models I think), they were bad, and that you couldn't imagine anyone choosing a Civic over a Corolla. If that is the case, what are you doing here? Don't get me wrong, I certainly wouldn't imply that only certain people have the right to join in these discussions - but to say that the Civic is an amazingly bad car, that you can't understand why anyone would buy one, and then a few posts later debate whether or not the '03 Civic's dashboard display is inferior to that of the '01 and '02 Civics is strange to me. Am I to understand that you have nothing better to do than pounce on someone who said something good about a car that you have absolutely no interest in and then debate something as trivial as the dash layout and whether or not the markings for 30, 50, and 70 mph are clear enough? Am I the only one who finds this strange? I mean there are other folks who did not choose a Civic who post here. They provide a lot of useful comparison info relative to the vehicle they chose over a Civic. I know that the Civic wasn't the only car I considered. I chose to purchase a Civic, and I am very happy with it - but I know other people chose other vehicles and are just as happy with their choice. You just trying to save the economy car buying public from the evil Honda propagandists? If you are, hey that's cool with me - the more points of view the better. I just find it interesting.
I bought a 2001 ex-5 speed- sedan in Jan. 2001 (one of the first cars built). I have had no problems with the car. The quality is good ,no rattles, everything is put together well. Gas mileage is good, last summer I got almost 40mpg on a trip. The firestone tires do add to road noise, but seem to wear forever- got 65k on my 97 civic tires. As you will all notice when it comes to trade in time, if you keep your car up , civic values are very good. The only down side I have run into with honda (many times)is their dealer network. It is very independent and in some cases borderline unethical in the treatment of potential customers. But they have good cars, they know it and so thats the outcome.
"in some cases borderline unethical in the treatment of potential customers. But they have good cars, they know it and so thats the outcome"
I have found this to be the case also while visiting a local honda dealer near myself.. the treatment I received was so horrid that I was turned off to honda for quite some time and leased my second Saturn.
I have found the trick is when you walk into a honda dealer, act like you are going to buy the vehicle with in the hour, but want to drive it first.. Than, just say, "I'll get back to you"
Not buying a car because of a dealers attitude doesn't make much sense. You only have to deal with that dealer for 1-2 hours while buying the car but you have to live with the car for a few years. You can even go through carsdirect and not have to deal with the dealer at all.
You do make a good point, however many consumers who are unsure of which vehicle to choose often cross shop. If I go to a honda dealer (as I have before) looking to drive a particular car with in a certain price range to compare it to another brand and am treated with such disrespect for doing so, than I will not do business with that dealer.
I realize that the experience one has with a dealer(s) or salesperson(s) should be separated from the brand itself. For honda cannot be held responsible for rude, inconsiderate, and deceptive practices occurring at its dealers.These same practices can affect any brand, not simply honda.
It makes sense however that as a customer who cross shops, if dealer A is rude and unprofessional, and dealer B which happens to sell a different brand treats the customer like a human being, the customer would opt for dealer b, leaving dealer A losing a sale.
I had a great experience with my 1st Honda purchase, but the second one was very gamey. Typical car sales hooey was my take, the 2nd time.
I think Honda would own the world if the marketing approach were more like Saturn's and they added a cheapo 2 seater to the line - something the size of a Miata or smaller and frill free. LOL, not even AC, PB, or PS. Ah, my daydreaming.
FWIW, shopping the net worked for me in cutting hooey during the initial part of getting my '02 Si. The Honda site has a great dealer locator, and most dealers have good sites with an inventory search. Less than half of the dealers I contacted dealt straight with my quote request made through their site, but that was enough since I could contact beaucoup. NO squabble or haggle, LOL, since I blew off the squabblers and hagglers. Having struck a final deal on the phone, there was some flim flam once I went in; but it was dealable with.
I get you, and I mostly agree. Separating the car from a lousy dealer experience is HARD.
The place I disagree is that Honda could fix this. All it would take is some undercover dealer visits along with the current buyer satisfaction surveys and then making allocation of hot cars contingent upon good customer satisfaction. Think being bottom on the list to get the S2000 when it was new or the Odyssey van wouldn't turn this around quick?
I think dealer attitude will most affect the person who is cross-shopping. Usually when I go to buy a car I know what I want and if I don't like that dealership I will go elsewhere and if we don't like the salesperson we will just leave and come back later. Luckily, we have some pretty good sales people spread out among a few Honda dealers in the area (we buy too many cars) and they know us and know that we don't play those games.
rivertown: Honda sends every customer who buys a car a survey and if their results are low enough Honda can strip their license to sell their product. Same applies to sales people, if they receive low scores they have to go through additional training, performance management, etc. I will guarantee you that the people with bad attitudes do not stay at any dealer for any significant length of time before moving on to the next.
On the recent survey for the Accord we bought they asked us if we had shopped at any other dealers and asked for the reasons we did not buy from them. I haven't seen this before so maybe they are starting to seek this feedback out.
""The place I disagree is that Honda could fix this""
Yes, this is true but change often takes longer than it should.. I wish that Honda's had ding/rust resistent polymer panels, for that would be the only vehicle I would ever buy.
Honda makes excellent vehicles imo, I can't wait until special edition Saturn VUE's are equipted with the honda V6 for it will have an engine and body that will last for 15 years.
In Consumer Reports newest quality rankings, Hyundai is now tied for SECOND place with Honda. Toyota continues to hold the top spot by a measly 1 less problem per 100 cars. Now, how many here are going to be shocked and/or still try to refute Hyundai's newfound quality status?
Interesting article. I happen to own a Honda, but I know that Hyundai has been steadily improving and I did consider the Elantra - but ultimately chose a Civic. Choice was probably mostly due to the fact that I had previously owned an Acura Integra and it ran like a top for 13 years - so chose to buy another Honda product. Of course, the quality rating in the article you provided the link to is for initial quality. Problems reported per 100 vehicles for 2002 models. It remains to be seen how these vehicles will hold up over time - both the Hondas and the Hyundais. However, I would expect that since the build quality of the Hyundais has improved over the past several years that the long term reliability probably has also.
CR also had a chart of how 3 year old 2000 models have held up. Acura was 1st (21 per 100), Toyota 2nd (25 per 100), Lexus 3rd (25 per 100), and Honda 4th (32 per 100). Hyundai was above average coming in just above BMW with 53 problems per 100. The average was 55 problems per 100 vehicles.
Actually, the best reason to buy the Elantr over a Civic is simply: It's a better car. The ONLY advantage the Civic has is fuel economy, otherwise it loses in every catagory. If you drive an Elantra right after driving any trim level of Civic, the Ealntra feels like a luxury vehicle: Quiet, plush ride, more power and so on. If you're still not convinced, just look at the 14" Firestones Honda equips the Civic with compared to the 15" standard Michelins. That right there should sway most people.
Join us tonight, 6-7pm PT/9-10pm ET for another round of automotive trivia and member-to-member chat. Test your skills (or multiple choice guessing ability) against other Town Hall members.
You could say that about any car, including the Civic: look for a used one, you'll save thousands of dollars. For example, there's some great deals available right now in my town on '01 Civics.
Are the civics being built to Honda standards or have they slipped a bit. I was sitting in one and it did not seem as well made as I remember Civics in the past..Maybe I am off base..I got a quote of 15,400 on a 2003 Ex auto..Any imput would be welcome..
Better interior: I agree the '03 Civic has prettier gauges, and the plastic used on the dash panel is quite nice. But based on driver comfort, the Elantra is far superior to the Civic. That's the most important "interior" criterion IMO.
More refined engine: Elantra is DOHC (Civic is SOHC), has more hp and torque (is also larger), and is quieter at cruise than the Civic. I agree that the Civic's VVT technology is more advanced than what the '03 Elantra has. The '04 Elantra will have a VVT engine with reportedly more power and better fuel economy. It will be interesting to see how they compare engine-wise then.
Safer: I assume the fact you are referring to is the IIHS frontal offset crash test ratings, since the NHTSA crash tests on the 4-doors are comparable. For actual injury losses, 1999-2001 models (latest data available), both Civic and Elantra were worse than average for their category, with Civic a little better. This was based mostly on the previous-generation cars however. Elantra does offer standard side air bags and optional ABS on all models; side bags are optional on Civic and ABS is not available on all models.
Resale: Looking at resale percentages, I agree that Civic's resale value is higher now than Elantra's. But the difference is not as great as you might think. For example, Civic EX 4-door holds 59% of value after 2 years, and Elantra GT holds 55-57% (per ALG). Looking at resale value in dollars, applied to real-world purchase prices, there is little difference. I can go through the math if you would like, or maybe we can take this to the Civic vs. Elantra forum so we can get back to talking about Civics instead of Elantras.
I calculated cost of ownership for many cars every year in Feb or March. I did so with a very sophisticated spreadsheet. It contains sale price (not MSRP), sale tax, annual tag fee, insurance, gas, interest rate, tax blackest, inflation rate, and resale after 3 years (resale price from Edmunds and Blue Book) etc. I left out repair costs because I only care of 3-year of ownership which means the cars are under warranty under my ownership.
In the past, Civic always ruled. Only Accent and extremely heavily discounted (e.g. $5-5.5k off MSRP) Cavalier would be able to match Civic in term of 3-year ownership cost. Elantra, even with its low purchase price, couldn’t come close due to its awful resale and gas mileage.
However, thing really changes this year. Civic was beat by both Elantra and Corolla. This is mainly due to the fact that Civic price went up about $700-800 this year while its resale value went down a bit. Elantra, on the other hand, is carrying a lower sale price this year.
With CR changing its tone against Hyundai, Elantra may have a higher resale value in the future. So, Honda must do something if it wants Civic to regain the title of king of value.
OK, I'll check out intellichoice.com and you can take a look at edmunds.com, which calculates the 5-year cost of an Elantra GLS 5-speed with package 2 (cruise, remote locking with alarm) at $.34/mile and the Civic LX 4-door with side airbags at $.31/mile, for my zip code. However, Edumnd's calculations don't take into account the $1500 rebate on the Elantra, which drops its cost to $.32/mile. I don't consider $.01/mile being "clobbered", especially since the Elantra is a better car in most respects than the Civic LX. These differences in 5-year cost of ownership calculations between Intellichoice and Edmunds also shows that there's all kinds of ways to calculate cost of ownership. Like jjpcat, I've done my own calculations and have found that I am a little ahead with my Elantra to date (after 2.5 years) compared to the Civic EX (the Civic I would have purchased had I bought one). But it's different for everyone. For instance, I only drive about 7500 miles/year, most of it in city driving, averaging in the high 20s. If I drove 30,000 miles a year on the highway, where the Civic's superior fuel economy would be more of an advantage, then the figures might be different.
To start an argument. If you happen to think a Hyundai is a better car than a Honda, good for you! I totally disagree but that's besides the point.
And I don't pay much attention to what the various "guides" say about resale value. I just know from a lot of experience that used Huyndais are near impossible to sell. Few people want them and they bring well below the book values.
jjpcat & backy are doing a good job of analyzing cost based on your usage and needs -- an wants.
The cost of ownership looking at historical market value for a used car is like buying a mutual fund or stock based on past performance. What really should matter is what is the car sold today going to be worth 3 or 5 years from now, based on the quality of today's car or the problems they appear to have now. It's not what yesterday's model with good quality or poor quality was worth.
If a current model seems quality now, has longer warranty time frames, and you like the feel, that's what counts. If the car makes me feel good when I drive it and if it makes me happy when I wash it and wax it, it's worth an extra amount per year. If its mileage is a little lower in my type of driving, it's worth an extra cost in fuel to own it.
"especially since the Elantra is a better car in most respects than the Civic LX."
Pure opinion.
"But based on driver comfort, the Elantra is far superior to the Civic"
Again, pure opinion.
I'm not going to start comparing every little aspect of the 2 cars. Me? I'd buy the Civic. Having been in an accident in an 02 SI I KNOW they are safe and don't have to rely on crash tests. From my past experience with Hondas, I am very comfortable with the brand and their reputation. Hyundai is more iffy.
You all can discuss the features, the reliabilty, future resale value, prices, warranties, and so on, but you forgot one major deciding factor which is totally subjective: APPEARANCE!
It doesn't matter how well a car performs, how comfortable it is, how cheap it is, if it doesn't look attractive to the potential buyer, people aren't going to buy it.
Granted, neither the Civic or the Elantra are head-turners, IMO (which is subjective)(I don't want to flame Hyundai people) the Civic just looks better than the Elantra.
I guess Honda succeeded in their quest to create a car for Jennifer. Does anybody know what percentage of owners are women? Civic looks like a chick's car too IMO.
I happen to think the Elantra is far better looking than the Civic 4-door (although I like the 2-door styling). But that's just my opinion, right, so it doesn't count for anything, just like my opinion on the driver's comfort of a car I've driven daily for 2.5 years--just opinion. But I did notice that the editors of C/D rated the Elantra a 10 on a scale of 10 for styling when they compared it to other compacts last fall. They also rated the Elantra 2nd overall, one point behind the Protege. The Civic LX was far back in the pack. So I am not the only person who thinks the Elantra is superior overall to the Civic LX. But as isell says, buy what fits your needs. If you like the styling, comfort level, ride etc. of the Civic, go for it--it's a good little car. I bought two of them and they were great cars.
Comments
Carrie ~ 2002 Eternal Blue Pearl Honda Civic EX Sedan (12,000 miles a running)
Dunlops:
Better wet weather traction
Better grip around corners
Quieter than the Firestones
Firestones:
Longer tread wear
These tires aren't even in the same category. FR690's are All-Season radials and the SP Sport A2's are High Performance All-Season tires. I am a little more aggressive in driving and therefore I favor the Dunlops.
I personally don't fit in the Civic's seats. The side bolsters on the buckets are not spread wide enough to feel comfortable, they feel confining and painful to me.
When it's time to replace the FR690's, I will probably move to 15" wheels at Tire Rack so I have more tire choices - Sport A2's, Bridgestone 950's etc. I will probably go with a set of steel wheels, which they usually sell with their snow tires, because most steel wheels weigh less than more cast aluminum wheels, oddly enough (confirmed by tire rack, and also in the wheel ads of some forged aluminum wheel makers).
As I said earlier, I haven't had any problems with the FR690's that come stock on the current year Civics in dry or wet conditions(and I emphasize current year, in case Honda hammered Firestone to make a better product in the last year or two) so I won't change right away.
Also, does $199/mo. for 48 mos., no security deposit, taxes, or down payment seem like a good deal for a Civic 2003 LX? Seems like it to me.
Thanks,
Don
Re $199/month for a Civic LX - personally, I wouldn't pay almost $10,000 to lease a $14,000 car over four years. Especially when a dealer in my area is offering EX automatic sedans for lease for $139/mo. plus about $2400 total up front--the rough equivalent of about $189/month total. But maybe in your area, $199/month for a LX represents a good deal. Have you run the numbers to compare lease vs. purchase (using Honda's 1.9% financing)?
having said that, i think the civic is one of the most refined "econoboxes" in the history of economy cars. the '03 has more insulation, so the noise isnt as pronounced as the '01-'02. also, the materials are of much higher quality than last year. i absolutely love the backlit dash display this year.
Wow, you've really bought into the whole Honda is supreme propaganda. I don't argue that it has been a good car, but the last iteration of the Civic has been poorly received by many, especially auto writers who have wondered why Honda took a perfectly good 6th gen Civic and created a 7th gen that is a step back in ALMOST every catagory including reliability.
Oh, the '03 backlit display seems cool at first, but then you realize how the markings for 30, 50, 70mph are non-existant and then it begins to annoy you. I'll stick with the more legible 01,02 displays.
Are you a do-it-yourselfer? Keep your receipt on the oil and filter in case there are ever warranty issues.
I have found this to be the case also while visiting a local honda dealer near myself.. the treatment I received was so horrid that I was turned off to honda for quite some time and leased my second Saturn.
I have found the trick is when you walk into a honda dealer, act like you are going to buy the vehicle with in the hour, but want to drive it first.. Than, just say, "I'll get back to you"
I realize that the experience one has with a dealer(s) or salesperson(s) should be separated from the brand itself. For honda cannot be held responsible for rude, inconsiderate, and deceptive practices occurring at its dealers.These same practices can affect any brand, not simply honda.
It makes sense however that as a customer who cross shops, if dealer A is rude and unprofessional, and dealer B which happens to sell a different brand treats the customer like a human being, the customer would opt for dealer b, leaving dealer A losing a sale.
I think Honda would own the world if the marketing approach were more like Saturn's and they added a cheapo 2 seater to the line - something the size of a Miata or smaller and frill free. LOL, not even AC, PB, or PS. Ah, my daydreaming.
FWIW, shopping the net worked for me in cutting hooey during the initial part of getting my '02 Si. The Honda site has a great dealer locator, and most dealers have good sites with an inventory search. Less than half of the dealers I contacted dealt straight with my quote request made through their site, but that was enough since I could contact beaucoup. NO squabble or haggle, LOL, since I blew off the squabblers and hagglers. Having struck a final deal on the phone, there was some flim flam once I went in; but it was dealable with.
The place I disagree is that Honda could fix this. All it would take is some undercover dealer visits along with the current buyer satisfaction surveys and then making allocation of hot cars contingent upon good customer satisfaction. Think being bottom on the list to get the S2000 when it was new or the Odyssey van wouldn't turn this around quick?
rivertown: Honda sends every customer who buys a car a survey and if their results are low enough Honda can strip their license to sell their product. Same applies to sales people, if they receive low scores they have to go through additional training, performance management, etc. I will guarantee you that the people with bad attitudes do not stay at any dealer for any significant length of time before moving on to the next.
On the recent survey for the Accord we bought they asked us if we had shopped at any other dealers and asked for the reasons we did not buy from them. I haven't seen this before so maybe they are starting to seek this feedback out.
Yes, this is true but change often takes longer than it should.. I wish that Honda's had ding/rust resistent polymer panels, for that would be the only vehicle I would ever buy.
Honda makes excellent vehicles imo, I can't wait until special edition Saturn VUE's are equipted with the honda V6 for it will have an engine and body that will last for 15 years.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2003-03-11-cr-picks_x.htm
In Consumer Reports newest quality rankings, Hyundai is now tied for SECOND place with Honda. Toyota continues to hold the top spot by a measly 1 less problem per 100 cars. Now, how many here are going to be shocked and/or still try to refute Hyundai's newfound quality status?
Join us tonight, 6-7pm PT/9-10pm ET for another
round of automotive trivia and member-to-member chat.
Test your skills (or multiple choice guessing ability)
against other Town Hall members.
http://www.edmunds.com/townhall/chat/townhallchat.html
Hope to see you there!
Here are my opinions and a few facts:
I've been in an 02 Elantra and the Civic has a better interior as far as materials and design.
The Civic has a more refined engine.
The Civic is a safer car.
The Civic has better resale value no matter how you look at it.
More refined engine: Elantra is DOHC (Civic is SOHC), has more hp and torque (is also larger), and is quieter at cruise than the Civic. I agree that the Civic's VVT technology is more advanced than what the '03 Elantra has. The '04 Elantra will have a VVT engine with reportedly more power and better fuel economy. It will be interesting to see how they compare engine-wise then.
Safer: I assume the fact you are referring to is the IIHS frontal offset crash test ratings, since the NHTSA crash tests on the 4-doors are comparable. For actual injury losses, 1999-2001 models (latest data available), both Civic and Elantra were worse than average for their category, with Civic a little better. This was based mostly on the previous-generation cars however. Elantra does offer standard side air bags and optional ABS on all models; side bags are optional on Civic and ABS is not available on all models.
Resale: Looking at resale percentages, I agree that Civic's resale value is higher now than Elantra's. But the difference is not as great as you might think. For example, Civic EX 4-door holds 59% of value after 2 years, and Elantra GT holds 55-57% (per ALG). Looking at resale value in dollars, applied to real-world purchase prices, there is little difference. I can go through the math if you would like, or maybe we can take this to the Civic vs. Elantra forum so we can get back to talking about Civics instead of Elantras.
The DX Civic is also their choice for best value under $24,000.
In the past, Civic always ruled. Only Accent and extremely heavily discounted (e.g. $5-5.5k off MSRP) Cavalier would be able to match Civic in term of 3-year ownership cost. Elantra, even with its low purchase price, couldn’t come close due to its awful resale and gas mileage.
However, thing really changes this year. Civic was beat by both Elantra and Corolla. This is mainly due to the fact that Civic price went up about $700-800 this year while its resale value went down a bit. Elantra, on the other hand, is carrying a lower sale price this year.
With CR changing its tone against Hyundai, Elantra may have a higher resale value in the future. So, Honda must do something if it wants Civic to regain the title of king of value.
And I don't pay much attention to what the various "guides" say about resale value. I just know from a lot of experience that used Huyndais are near impossible to sell. Few people want them and they bring well below the book values.
I suppose this could change in the future.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
cost based on your usage and needs -- an wants.
The cost of ownership looking at historical market value for a used car is like buying a mutual fund or stock based on past performance.
What really should matter is what is the car sold today going to be worth 3 or 5 years from now, based on the quality of today's car or the problems they appear to have now. It's not what yesterday's model with good quality or poor quality was worth.
If a current model seems quality now, has longer warranty time frames, and you like the feel, that's what counts. If the car makes me feel good when I drive it and if it makes me happy when I wash it and wax it, it's worth an extra amount per year. If its mileage is a little lower in my type of driving, it's worth an extra cost in fuel to own it.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Pure opinion.
"But based on driver comfort, the Elantra is far superior to the Civic"
Again, pure opinion.
I'm not going to start comparing every little aspect of the 2 cars. Me? I'd buy the Civic. Having been in an accident in an 02 SI I KNOW they are safe and don't have to rely on crash tests. From my past experience with Hondas, I am very comfortable with the brand and their reputation. Hyundai is more iffy.
You all can discuss the features, the reliabilty, future resale value, prices, warranties, and so on, but you forgot one major deciding factor which is totally subjective: APPEARANCE!
It doesn't matter how well a car performs, how comfortable it is, how cheap it is, if it doesn't look attractive to the potential buyer, people aren't going to buy it.
Granted, neither the Civic or the Elantra are head-turners, IMO (which is subjective)(I don't want to flame Hyundai people) the Civic just looks better than the Elantra.
Civic looks like a chick's car too IMO.