Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Honda Civic Sedan 2006



  • I totally agree with you about waiting it out, but I don't really think that it going to happen. In my dealership, they are pricing a 06 Honda Civic LX auto Sedan for around $16,800, including the taxes, tags, and other fees(OTD), all for around $16,800 in PA.
  • micwebmicweb Posts: 1,617
    It could be worse in terms of MT rpm at freeway speed. Take it from me - I had a Scion xA MT that had 4000 rpm at 80, and the the same thing with two VW Golfs (2001 and 2004).
  • micwebmicweb Posts: 1,617
    I read a website that was talking about Euro models vs. American models, in the context of the Ford Focus ST - their comment was that Europeans are willing to pay more for cars in the Civic/Focus size category than we are, because this size car is considered "mid-sized" in Europe - whereas over here in Canada and America, people are unwilling to pay the extra money for more upscale features. I think that website was on to something, there has already been a lot of complaining about the Civic's pricing in this forum and others. Imagine if they cost even more!
  • Regarding fuel efficiency. The new civic does not improve anything over the previous generation as far as MPG is concerned.
    On the other hand, the engine is larger and significantly more powerful. It also propels a significantly heavier car. The new cars engine is also much quieter and refined than the previous civic engine, in fact, it is as quiet and refined as the best 6 and 8cylinder engines in the market. No other 4 cylinder engine in the market is even close in terms of refinement, period. Thus, Honda has maintained or improved the civic propulsion system in the performance and refinement categories without giving up any fuel efficiency. In my book that is no mean feat. The civic was and continues to be one of the thrifties't gas engines in the market while providing levels of refinement and power that other manufacturers only dream about. Another great thing about the new civic is the automatic tranny. It is superbly matched to the engine's output and shift quality worthy of a premium luxury car. The combination of the engine and automatic tranny offers surprisingly sprightly pickup for a four cylinder vehicle. The previous generation auto felt decidedly sluggish in comparison.
    When you drive a civic the only thing that may hint at its pedestrian price is a higher level of road noise than you would expect in an accord, or some other excellent, higher priced family sedan.
    The civic simply blows anything its category away as far as refinement, ergonomics, accommodations and value are concerned; in terms of performance and fuel efficiency it matches or exceeds the best of the class.
    The previous generation civic was among the best compact sedans in the market, the new civic is in a class by itself.
  • The SE (Special Edition) model of the 2006 Accord seemsto be the most cost effective:

    Special Edition
    (All LX features plus)
    • 6-Disc in-Dash CD Changer
    • Steering Wheel Mounted Audio Controls
    • Carbon Fiber Interior Accents
    • 4-Wheel Disc Brakes
    • Electronic Brake Distribution (EBD)
    • 16-inch alloy wheels

    Manual Transmission

    Automatic Transmission

    You mentioned getting them for $19,500 and that they should be obtainable anywehere, But I can't find them anywhere in Houston. Maybe I need to go up to Oklahoma City.


  • yesrohyesroh Posts: 290
    I had a 1992 Civic LX with the same highway rating on it as the new EX (and the old HX...with auto...all three rated at 40mpg highway) and recorded 53.4 mpg on June 29, 1992 on HWY 41 North in Indiana on my way from Evansville up to Chicago with the A/C on the whole way. I also recorded over 50mpg on one or two other occasions.
    I have TRIED very hard to get outstanding fuel economy on my current Accord but it seems the times it happens are when I don't expect it. So I kinda understand what you mean...sometimes you feel you are doing everything right and it just doesn't work.
    When I lived in Virginia and drove west to Indiana, I noticed that once I refueled in western Virginia, my fuel economy improved. It was a noticeable jump...might have been the type of fuel used there, the altitude, something. Little things may affect it.
    There is no agony in driving 55-60mph. We're just programmed to think only the elderly and crippled obey the speed limit. Even the cops don't obey the limit. It's not hard once you decide to take a stand. I just enjoy saving fuel and making all the lousy drivers pass me and burn up their precious fuel. It's also quieter in the car. I tell my friends that unless I need to be somewhere in a hurry, I see no need to speed. It's childish really...we adults don't like to be called childish, but speeding for the sake of speeding is childish. And it can kill too.
  • yesrohyesroh Posts: 290
    why would you want to rev your engine up to 3000rpm? For one, I don't think it will go past 70 miles an hour in top gear unless you do, and if you want to pass at 55 miles an hour or more in any reasonable time, you will need to take it higher than 3000rpm. An automobile engine develops a certain amount of horsepower at a certain rpm. If you don't let an engie rev high enough, you won't get enough power out of it.
  • Since Midnight cowboy is my buddy I will give him a lead as I have decided to wait on buying a civic or accord for now. I have a dealer that sells all Hondas for $416 over invoice in Northern Oklahoma. This has been discussed many times before. I have bought 5 Hondas there over the years. Not always the best price but when new they are. I bought my ODY there when MSRP ruled the day. Cannot violate the rules but you can find on the web if you look for Mark Roberts Motors. Prices are clearly shown on the web site and you will be surprised. They have civics for immediate delivery. EX auto is $18388 plus 49 doc fee. Navi is $19700 as I recall. 2006 SE Accord 5 speed is $19,625 all day long.

    I drove the EX auto and it is the most practical. The 5 speed manual rpm make it run too hard in my book. The auto is boring but my guess is low 40's with my driving habits that some scoff at. Anyway happy car buying.
  • Perfect, the high RPM in 5th for MTX will subconsciously keep my speeds down, thus saving others.
  • crv16crv16 Posts: 205
    Honda had a MANUAL transmission with tall ratios. A theoretical 6 speed manual civic that turned 2300 rpm at 75mph might get high 40's MPGs.
  • yesrohyesroh Posts: 290
    The hybrid would likely get in the high 50's or 60's. The EPA numbers are for comparison only which is why the Civic rated at 40mpg highway gets 46mpg. So in that case, there is a benefit from driving the hybrid.
    I just can't use the trunk. Less than 11 cubic feet and no fold-down seats? Too small for me. I'll get a Prius if I go hybrid.
  • yesrohyesroh Posts: 290
    My old Civic LX 4-door averaged 42mpg the first year, in mixed driving. I know because I always track average fuel economy for the entire first year I have a car. It seated four comfortably, five, not as much, had a larger trunk than the current Civic, and could hit 60 miles an hour in under 9 seconds, could reach 100 miles an hour faster than a Dodge Neon (I never tried that...I saw a comparison test). It was a comfortable car. I can name a few other cars which average 40mpg in mixed driving by EPA numbers, like the old Civic HX (36/44). The old VX (48/55...51.5 mpg EPA, mixed).
    It can be has been done. Manufacturers just want you to think that only the expensive hybrids can get outstanding fuel economy. Not true...
  • Fortunately, Ford still tells the truth.
    My Focus gets abysmal fuel economy.
  • yesrohyesroh Posts: 290
    By the way...just to make another point. Hybrid technology has been around at least since the early 80's, late 70's, probably decades longer, but...back then, as a teenager I used to design cars and I always had these big, powerful cars which were hybrids...kinda like the Honda Accord. They were performance hybrids. I got the idea from reading Popular Science, Popular Mechanics, and some car magazines. My point is there is likely a lot of technology out there which we will not see for decades. I have to hand it to Honda for introducing the hybrid (Insight) back in 2000 when there wasn't a huge demand for high fuel economy. That's what I called leadership.
  • cool...when I was a teenager, I used to look at cars.
    I just want that hydrogen fuel cell-powered bicycle. that would be ultimate in lightweight, portability and efficiency. how about that new rumored Civic diesel? for now though, for trips into Alaska/northern Canada, looks like gasoline is the way to go, though...
  • yesrohyesroh Posts: 290
    Don't get me started on bicycles. The biggest hinderance to advancing bicycles is the UCI governing body which only allows riders to ride 'traditional' bicycles. There are bicycles out there which will do 81 miles an hour without a tailwind or downward slope. The efficiency of a regular bicycle can be improved by about 80% but since there is no demand for a more efficient bicycle that goes outside the norm, the market is pretty slim. I've wanted to get recumbent for years but I compete...I'd need two bicycles. I can't afford it and I need to practice on my racing bicycle to keep my handling.
    Diesel? I drove two diesels in Germany out of the seven rental cars I drove and those two were by far the best ones. They had the most power and the best fuel economy. I averaged 36mpg in my Passat Turbo Diesel on the autobahn, which is also where I did 130 miles an hour (I had to move out of the way of a Mercedes in the fast lane) and was averaging about 100. I loved them both. But the availability of diesel fuel here is a problem.
  • How do you improve a traditional pedal-cycle efficiency by 80%!!!?? Which bicycles will do 81 mph? And how come you can't afford 2 bicycles- they are at most 2k for one, which is about what 4 monthly payments on a car would be? Yes, lack of diesel up here prevents excursions into the country...
  • whoops, just to keep this 'Civic-Focus 'd' umm...would a bicycle fit into the trunk of an 06 sedan without taking off either wheel? hehe
  • In your most recent test-drive, what trim were you driving? I am also 6'5", I weigh 220 lbs, and when I test-drove the Civic last week, it was the LX (automatic trans.) I agree that leg room was acceptable, although there certainly is more of it in the Accord. A compact car that seems to have more legroom is the Hyundai Elantra, although in all other aspects except cost, I think the Civic is a better car. I had to recline the seatback a little in last week's test drive to get adequate headroom, but I do that with virtually all cars.

    Anyway I too was impressed with the Civic. It handled very well, I had no problems taking the car to expressway speeds, although due to traffic I could not drive it faster than 65 mph, where due to a nitwit driver, I had to abruptly test the brakes (which worked very well!) Didn't care for the LED speedometer or the simplistic "door open" light, but those are minor issues. I wish the car had the 60/40 rear seat split though. Engine noise was muffled somewhat by a talkative salesman, but otherwise the car seemed reasonably quiet.

    I also sat in a showroom Civic EX; but I don't think I would fit well due to the decreased headroom. In fact, that car just felt too small.

    I think the Civic LX is a great car that makes my "short list" for my next vehicle. I am also considering the Accord LX (automatic) and would like to see and test-drive the Civic Hybrid before finalizing my decision; this should give time for the prices on the LX to drop a little. (After the drive, I was quoted a price $500 under sticker.)

    If I choose the Civic, it will be my first compact car; I have always driven midsize or large cars in the past.
  • 307web307web Posts: 1,033
    The past Hybrids had problems even getting near EPA estimates where normal cars easily beat EPA at least on the highway.
    I don't know why you would expect this Hybrid to beat EPA estimates when the old ones did not.
  • yesrohyesroh Posts: 290
    At 30 miles an hour on a bicycle about 95% of your power is used to push wind out of the way. The bicycles that set the world speed records weigh more than twice as much as Lance Armstrong's Tour de France bicycles, but have about half the drag. You put a fairing on the bicycle...a cover, shaped like a bullet and you will dramatically increase your top speed and cruising speed. Even a recumbent bicycle, which is a bicycle where you recline as in an easy chair, is fastest than most Tour de France bicycles even without a fairing because the rider sits about a foot or two lower to the ground and has less air drag. It's also safer and more comfortable...but heavier. It would be slower on the hills but most people don't climb hills all the time.
    Check out this site:

    The top speed of the average sprinter in the Tour de France is probably about 40-42 miles an hour and the world record right now for a bicycle is 81 miles an hour. It's all aerodynamics.
    Of course, the world record bikes you see on that site would not be practical for everyday use but you can have a partial fairing which can have a huge effect on speed and still allow you to reach in excess of 60 miles an hour. This is just top speed though...the world record for an hour is over 50 miles on a bicycle.
    Right now my bicycle is $3600 and a good recumbent would probably cost about $2,000. I'm unemployed and not making a lot of money. And I'm not the best bike handler in the world so I'm afraid if I ride a recumbent bike most of the time, I'll feel squirrely on a high-sitting normal bicycle.
  • yesrohyesroh Posts: 290
    My old Civic had 12.4 cubic feet of trunk space. If I took both wheels off it would fit with room to spare, and if I folded down the seat I could do it with just the front wheel off. I prefer the seats up because it keeps all that grease and mess out of the nice interior of the car.
  • It might, until you apply some real world based logic and a basic understanding of the physics involved.

    The AUTO when locked into overdrive is just as efficient as a manual. Its extra weight makes very little difference when cruising (a little extra friction in the tires and wheel bearings). Plus, at highway speeds, the biggest losses occur to wind resistance, so unless you somehow reduce the coefficient of drag on the manual civic, you'd be lucky to see 41 mpg in the EPA tests with the taller gearing.
  • yesrohyesroh Posts: 290
    We'll see...most people don't drive anywhere near the speed limit or anywhere near the speeds used to figure EPA gas mileage and then they complain. Duh...I saw an article in one of the big car magazines back in 2001 where they drove the Honda Insight (a hybrid) and got well over 100 miles per gallon because they tried. I seem to remember them getting somewhere between 110 and 130 mpg.
    I'd have to test a hybrid myself. I don't trust American drivers. From my experience most of them are jerks and have no regard for traffic laws and that's why I'm laughing and laughing about all these people complaining about gas prices. I don't trust their gas mileage figures.

    Sorry...a small emotional outburst there...the drivers in Evansville, Indiana are the worst.
  • I didn't say it couldn't be done by one driver in ideal conditions driving like a granny.

    What I was saying is that Honda could not have increased the Civic's EPA highway number to the upper 40's without dramatic improvements to the coefficient of drag or reducing the size of the vehicle. Or reducing the size of the engine. Or some other drastic measure. Taller gearing in the manual won't have that dramatic of an effect. It will help, but not by that much. A manual is not much more efficient than an automatic at HIGHWAY driving, even if the gearing is the same, because modern automatics lock out the torque converter and behave very much like a manual when in this mode with a directly coupled connection.

    I just get tired of hearing peoples uninformed Wild [non-permissible content removed] Guesses on these forums.

    Plus, your calculations are way off. Every civic that I've driven has had a "fast" speedometer by about 5%, meaning that you didn't get your calculated fuel mileage. Plus, the biggest thing I've seen people do to improve their calculated mpgs is to round up the miles and round down the fuel before doing the divide. You didn't do that, did you ;)

    I agree that the auto industry could do more to increase efficiency. But you have to understand that all of the low hanging fruit has been picked. There isn't an affordable, magic bullet that will improve efficiency by 20%. There are expensive solutions which will yield in the 5-10% range according to an article I read in EE Times. After that, you have to give up something to get more efficiency -- meaining weight, power, profile, and coefficient of drag.
  • yesrohyesroh Posts: 290
    I achieved 40+ mpg on a regular basis with my LX. That 42mpg was combined year in Spokane, Washington, with snow. I was annoyingly accurate...unfortunately it's a bad trait of mine. I don't like rounding off much. I also don't baby a car...I use the power when I have to and when I don't, I don't.
    I think tall gearing would make a big difference and let me tell you why. My first car was a Honda Civic hatch with a 4-speed manual tranny and the Civic CRX HF used the same exact engine, but with a 5-speed manual. The Civic was rated 37/43 and the CRX was 49/54. It had to be the taller gearing. The CRX was lower and 100 pounds lighter but that can't account for a 11mpg jump in mpg.

    I just thought of a magic bullet. What about the IMA system that's used in the Accord Hybrid and in the Honda Odyssey? It shuts off half the cylinders under low-load conditions. Why can't Honda use this on their Civics? It improved highway mileage by 12% on the Odyssey. If you apply this to the 40mpg of the Civic you'd be in the 44mpg range. Will it work on a 4-cylinder? I read somewhere that the new Civic Hybrids would use this system but I haven't seen any confirmation of this.
    Another way the auto industry could reduce fuel consumption is by getting rid of some of the sound deadening and putting more efficient mufflers and headers and so-forth. I'm saying this in general terms, okay, but what I'm trying to say in big-picture is some of the things which make a car quiet and refined will also rob it of power. Free-flow mufflers will give an engine more power, but will make it louder. Sound deadening will add weight. Lower rolling resistance tires (like on the new Civic Hybrid) have been reported to be louder. The larger wheels on the new Civics are likely heavier. A 16-inch wheel has 51% more material than a 13 inch wheel of the same width. A 13 inch wheel would look funny on a car these days, but a 16 incher is overkill if you want lighter weight.
    Calm's only a car. No need to be angry. :)
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,726
    you are thinking of VCM, not IMA, which is the electric motor assist. VCM would be great, but I am not sure two cylinders by themselves could push much of anything at any speed - I bet if they executed it in the Civic, it would almost never operate. As it is, it doesn't operate very much in the Odyssey except during smooth flat highway cruising because of that model's high weight.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • I drove an EX sedan, and had enough headroom. (Did you adjust the seat down?) These is a lever on the side of the seat for this. It may be because of this that you couldnt fit
  • Try over-inflating your tires a few PSI - it'll work, and the tires can handle it.
  • The seat was all the way down, yes. At the point where the seat was reclined, which is about where I had the LX, my head clearance was less than an inch; with the LX I had a good two inches without reclining too much.
This discussion has been closed.