Honda Civic vs Volkswagen Jetta

allhorizon · January 2006

but one thing i noticed about both new models, the german jetta looks more japanese than it used to, sort of like a better looking corolla. when i look at the new civic, it conjures visions of a bmw/audi flavor. go figure...

The Jetta has always been the Americanized version of the Golf+trunk. It has never sold well in Europe (where the Golf is #1), but has been VWs prime US export car. Thus, the MkV Jetta was designed with the American market and tastes in mind, only. Believe me, the target group was not Civic purchasers, even if these two cars are quite close in many aspects. This time around, VW also did not specifically target the youth segment (hence the "all grown up" line).

Clearly, for some people, in comparison, the Civic has all they need at a lower price. Vice versa, the Jetta offers a different package that appeals to a certain target group despite its higher price. Some of these customers don't ever want to be seen in a Civic, others just like the Jetta's interior and solid feel, low-end torque, or other details of a specific Jetta model.

Argue as much as you want, there is no "logical" or "objective" way to rate one car over another apart from simple numbers and statistics, which only cover part of the story. Do people buy a house solely based on numbers, such as the energy rating of the water heater?

To those who reiterate the Civics better reliability in extreme terms (like, VWs need periodic engine replacements): look at the actual published differences. To many people, the difference in long-term reliability is not enough to influence their purchasing decisions. Others loath the idea that a car could even fall a few percentage points behind the best. People have different needs, desires, and priorities.

Last not least, the new MkV GLI/Jetta (and Golf/GTI and A3, which are based on the same platform and share most mechanical components) are winning quite a number of rewards and comparisons. So they can't be all that bad. A few that come to mind:

- February 2006 Car & Driver (Mazdaspeed 6, Acura TSX, Honda Accord EX, Pontiac G6 GTP and VW Jetta GLI)

- Edmunds' comparison against Acura TSX: http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=107677

- GTI in New Zealand:
http://www.aa.co.nz/Section?Action=View&Section_id=373&Story_id=2828

- GTI topgear car of the year

- GTI in Germany:
http://www.autobild.de/test/neuwagen/artikel.php?artikel_id=10355&article_seite=- 5

- Jetta and A3 (and Passat) among 2005 IIHS Top Safety Picks

- A3 NY Times "Best of 2005"

- A3 Car & Drivers 2006 10 best list

- 2006 Wards 10 Best Engines for 2.0TFSI

thegraduate · January 2006

Perhaps this discussion would be better divided up (although there are already so few participants, I doubt they would last) into:

Jetta 2.5 vs Civic EX (Basic forms of the cars, w/o many options keeps the price of the Jetta down)

Jetta TDI vs Civic Hybrid (2 Appproaches to high-mileage)

Jetta GLI vs Civic Si (similar performance, although big
price diff)

I will be happy to start one of these discussions (I would like the si vs GLI debate, I believe), if any of you are interested.

pat · January 2006

Please don't - let's keep all of that right here. We can't support discussions broken out like that for all the vehicles being compared on this Comparisons board, at least not at this time. Perhaps in the not-too-distant future ...

robert51 · January 2006

Civic Si's are selling well over MSRP while GLIs are being discounted well under MSRP. So the real world price difference wouldn't be that much at this time. Maybe a grand? GLI has scored well in magazine tests but my god, that styling. My guess is Americans didn't take to sport sedan that looks like a RAV-4. VW has blamed potholes and (most recently) bumper regulations for the styling snafu but Honda managed to pen a fantastic car for the U.S. market that doesn't look like crossover vehicle. For that reason alone I'm waiting until next summer to buy the Civic Si personally. The madness should have cooled by then.

ctalk · January 2006

Someone posted this on the C&D forums. I haven't read the whole comparison yet, but here are the rankings of the Civic and Jetta:

1. Civic EX automatic
2. Jetta TDI automatic
3. Jetta 2.5 automatic
4. Civic Hybrid CVT

alpha01 · January 2006

CR also tested the Civic EX 5M, which ranked ahead of the EX 5A, due to its 3 MPG overall efficiency advantage as well as better acceleration.

~alpha

clg6000 · January 2006

Hey--for all those who believe that people don't compare these two cars--I did. I have been looking at Jettas versus Civics for the last three months. I think the problem here is that both Honda and Jetta are trying to shift market segments for the Civic and the Jetta in '06. Clearly, the Jetta is moving after the Gen Xers now looking for family cars, increasing some the size, improving safety, and adding some interior style; Honda has taken the Civic from boring vanilla sensible standard to something a little more exciting.

I used to own a '97 Jetta and loved driving it--until I was in an accident and it was totalled (passenger side was *completely* destroyed by the way--vast improvements have been made to Jetta safety in the last decade). Looking for a new car, I thought I'd like to drive something as fun as the Jetta, but more reliable (I paid a lot to fix my poor used Jetta). I never would have considered the older style Civics, but when I saw the '06s, I thought, "Hey that's not too bad". I drove both--the Jetta edged out the Civic based on acceleration and road feel (both manuals) but the Civic was surprisingly sportier and more enjoyable than I expected.

I toyed with the idea of Civic Hybrids, then TDI Jetta, and decided that both are not worth the extra purchase cost for me vs. getting a very efficient standard gas engine.

In the end, it was price that did it for me--I got a great deal on a Civic EX manual, for about the base sticker price of the VE Jetta. Sure, I don't heave heated seats, leatherette, and satellite radio like I would in the Jetta Package 1, but I also saved $3,000 bucks, and won't have to pay as much in gas, and probably half as much in repairs. I've only sacrificed a small amount of driving enjoyment (I love driving the Civic, just wish it was a bit more solid-feeling), and some of the VW brand label cool factor.

I never would have considered a Golf (too small, unsafe), or an Accord (too boring and pricey), or a Passat (very nice--basically an A4--but out of my budget). And I think a lot of people are in my position.

I'd love to get another VW--maybe a TDI--but I can wait until the price drops and they're a little more trouble free.

There's my two bits. To sum up, when asked what car I used to own by a Honda salesman during a test drive, I told him, "a Jetta", and he said, "Well, that's funny. Usually, you have VW drivers and Honda drivers, and they don't really mix too much". I think that was true in the past, but after '06, the lines will keep blurring.

allhorizon · January 2006

I never would have considered a Golf (too small, unsafe)

I know this forum primarily compares the Jetta with the Civic - just to clarify: the new MkV Golf and Jetta are the same platform and the same size (Jetta minus trunk). In fact, I believe the Golf has slightly more rear headroom because of the shape of the roofline. I am certain that they will have similar safety ratings, as well - at least if they test the 4-door Golf/GTI with rear side curtain air bags.

The new GTI is already in many showrooms, and the 4-door GTI and Golf are slated to be available in July.

thegraduate · January 2006

This forum has been dying for a while...with nearly two weeks, it seems everyone has moved on to bigger and better things.

thegrad

eyc51k · January 2006

Here's something to add:

As I have said in the past I owned the 06 Civic and now driving an 06 TDI package two dream car....seems Honda thinks I still own my 06 Civic and sent me a Safety Recall: 2006 Civic Accelerator Pedal Inspection and ODS Control Unit Replacement. Seems this is serious and could cause a wreck as per this notice from Honda. To verify I am not full of it go to www.safecar.gov or call (888)327-4236

GEE, I wonder why my JUNK VW has performed perfectly getting close to 50 mpg for almost 6000 miles so far and has not been recalled...hmmmm

midnightcowboy · January 2006

The VW failures start around 10,000 miles and then happen every 2-3 weeks after the initial failure. All cars even Fords are good for 10,000 miles. It is when you get more than 10,000 miles the failures start happening.

And if safety notices bother you don't worry, VW likes to save postage becuase they know you will be stopping by soon anyway.

H'mm isn't the biggest loss on a car when you first drive off the lot ? If you have already traded-in a 2006 it seems that either money is of no concern or a 50 mpg average would be extrapolated to almost ZERO.

LOL,

MidCow

mesh · January 2006

I ended up cross shopping the GLI with the SI after test driving a new MX5 Miata. The Mazda was so much fun but so impractical, that I was hoping that the SI could be a more practical alternative. After reading the December '05 Automibile article "Escape from Suburbia," I was really hopeful that the Honda would not only make the ideal second car, but also be cheaper than the VW. I am sorry to say that that is not how it turned out.
I test drove the SI today and found it to have a noticeably lower quality interior than the GLI, an incredibly numb and heavy steering, an awkward windshield view, and worst of all, a hanging engine speed that made shifting smoothly, both up and down, difficult. I heel-and-toed to second and the engine hung up at over 3500 rpm's and wouldn't come down. I subsequently kept my foot on the clutch and braked through the turn, rather than accelerate through it, as the engine would have prefered.
I have received a quote for a GLI with DSG, Packages 1 and 2, spoiler, and splashguards for about invoice. I don't think I can pass it up. I saw a new GTI toady and didn't like its abreviated look.

600kgolfgt · January 2006

Just received the March 2006 issue of Car and Driver which has a head-to-head comparison between the 2006 GTI and 2006 Civic Si. Looks like VW is two-for-two in the comparison tests. C&D ranked the GTI #1.

As an owner of three JUNK VWs, all I have to say is - Chalk up another one for the JUNK... :shades:

Let others drive their "perfect" Hondas...

thegraduate · January 2006

How much did the GTI cost? More than 20k I bet. I'm still waiting on my issue of C&D!

600kgolfgt · January 2006

>How much did the GTI cost? More than 20k I bet. I'm still waiting on my issue of C&D!

The price as tested was around 28K for the fully loaded leather interior, dual zone climate control, DSG model.

My local VW dealership received 5 GTIs - ranging in price from 23K to 27K, and so far they sold four of them - with several more customers entering the showroom by the time I left (had my car in for an oil change) - so I have a feeling #5 won't last on the lot for long, either....

BTW - If you purchase the GTI (or GLI) with those fancy teardrop wheels, be advised that they are equipped with summer performance tires. The ones with all-season tires have the multi-spoke wheel design...

thegraduate · January 2006

Well then, its a good thing the VW won...At 28k, its more competitive with the Subaru Impreza WRX with more power than either Civic or Golf, and AWD to boot! I'd be willing to bet that the Civic, at around $20k is more often compared to a Cobalt SS, Saturn Ion Red Line, ad nauseum, than a car costing $5k-8k more.

03accordman · February 2006

My comments on the CD comparo:

The Civic scored in most driving related tests; the GTI socred in most comfort/convenience/rear seat accomodation areas. This was supposed to be a performance car test. Even the sub title is "Grace and handling finish second to a fast and practical box"

They gave the handling crown to the Civic.

Some results from the CD test:

0-60: Civic 6.6, GTI 6.7
skidpad: Civic 0.91, GTI 0.87
Lane change (slalom): Civic 69.1, GTI 63.6 (yes, the civic beat the GTI by almost 6mph)
Braking: Civic 197, GTI 171
Gotta have it factor: Civic/GTI tied at 21
Fun to Drive: Civic 25, GTI 21 (surprised?)

Some quotes for the test:

"Although the GTI didn't achieve the Si's handling marks, it didn't have any trouble staying in the Honda's rear view mirror on our test route" - So much for a driver's car

"The GTI ends up being able to do just about everything the Si can do, but it does it without the grace of the Honda"

"The extra body motion also makes teh GTI feel as if its center of gravity were about a foot higher than the hunkered-down Civic's"

"It doesn't have the graceful and impressive handling of the Si, but it gets the job done"

This gen civic is never going to win any CD comparison; that's because they completely hate the instrumentation. That's it.

The GTI scored in areas of rear seat accomodation, practicality, interior fit and finish (always a VW strong point) and the excellent gearbox.

I would recommend all to read the comparo and come up with their own conclusions.

03accordman · February 2006

There was a 5000 dollar price diff between the two cars. This price diff remains pretty much the same whichever way you option them.

powerbarsk8 · February 2006

As a SI '06 owner, I salute Honda's intense concentration on its engine and ergononmics, instead of just piling on the weight and sweeten up the interior as VW does all the time (it doesn't even care about the electronics). Just this morning, I followed a latest model white VW Jetta with smoked read-end from its tail-pipe, now that is a turn-off, now VW doesn't even care about its exterior... :sick:

allhorizon · February 2006

Clearly, if you look at the C&D performance numbers, the Si is ahead of the GTI. Is the difference significant enough to matter in daily driving? That is something only the individual consumer can decide.

If you like to play the numbers game and tend to prefer the fastest time, even if only my a small margin, the Civic clearly is the winner.

If you are less worried about a tenth of a second in 0-60 times, things look different. Now, the GTI seems comparable to the Si on the performance side. On the other hand, in the every-day-driver/design/feel/luxury category, most people would rank the GTI quite a bit higher. There is no absolute measure - I suggest you test drive both and decide for yourself.

I have not decided between the 5-door GTI and A3, yet, and I know I am not alone with that. That may be a good indication of where the GTI is located. I can tell you for sure that very few people cross-shop the Si with the A3.

As to the $5000 difference, just look at the standard equipment and actual street prices, and then decide for yourself. Don't get scared by costs people tell you or MSRP. Both cars are advertised at high dealer mark-up in some areas, currently. In other areas, the GTI is available close to invoice. If you are in an area where the GTI currently does not sell close to invoice, just wait a few weeks. I am sure you can get a good deal, eventually.

600kgolfgt · February 2006

Can you post the top gear acceleration times (i.e. 30-50mph)
for the GTI and SI as well? Those are more indicative of real-world driving...

thegraduate · February 2006

You normally drive in 6th gear at 30mph? Geez, my Automatic Accord won't even go to fifth gear until 42 mph, and then its at 1,200 rpm! Maybe you should be in a diesel, you sound accustomed to chug-a-LUGging the engine. Not good for it.

03accordman · February 2006

I know what you are getting at; I did not consider that difference in this test because the Civic is a stick while the GTI is an auto; the number for the Si is high because of it actually being kept in top gear, while the auto in the GTI downshifts as soon as the gas pedal is floored, like any typical auto. You could get a real comparison only when you compare both with a stick.

CD has commented on this before when they test a stick v/s an auto.

03accordman · February 2006

If you see my post, clearly I am not talking about numbers only. CD clearly picked the Civic as the handler of these two cars, and I would assume that people buying this category look for handling prowess more than anything else. Apart from that, a 6 mph slalom difference is nothing to scoff at.

Let me assure you, the price of these two cars will never be close and I am sure all prospective buyers understand that and make a decision knowing fully well what they are paying for.

600kgolfgt · February 2006

You normally drive in 6th gear at 30mph?

Those aren't my stats (30-50mph & 50-70 mph). If you have a problem with those stats, talk to C&D...

Cars with good bottom end torque should have no problem driving at 30mph in 6th gear (VW's peak torque starts in the neighborhood of 1800 rpm). My 2003 Wolfburg Jetta's peak torque starts at 1950 rpm.

>Maybe you should be in a diesel, you sound accustomed to chug-a-LUGging the engine. Not good for it.

You sound accustomed to winding the engine into the stratosphere to get anywhere, so maybe you are in the right car :shades:

03accordman · February 2006

see my post above on the 30-50 & 50-70 times before you get all excited.

xkiddx13 · February 2006

I'm going to have to go with the Civic. mainly for overall performance and up keep you might spend less for the jetta at first but overall your going to pay for it in the end with all the repairs and maintenence on it, volkwagon is known for there cars needing alot of work.
anyone that i know that has bought a jetta, says its the first time and last time they ever buy one. as for the civic with honda's quality there are more and more repeat customers.

midnightcowboy · February 2006

03Accordman:

There are people that purposefully do not want to understand the implication of 30-50 & 50-70 times in top gear (5th or 6th) in a manual shift transmission.

And those people normally drive slushmobiles and toute the only performance number that is relatively close or better than all other manual-shift performance numbers. It is called "grasping at straws" when someone assumes that a manual shift driver will not downshift a couple of gears for 30-50 acceleration and will normally downshift at least one gear for 50-70 acceleration.

A shifting man,

MidCow

P.S.- While C&D, R&T, MT, AW still continue to post 30-50 and 50-70 times they COMPLETELY MEANINGLESS unless the transmissions are the same type both AT or both MT

allhorizon · February 2006

If you are a shifting man, you will surely appreciate that the DSG transmission in the new GTI and GLI can shift faster than any human, doesn't contain a slush box (but two simultaneous wet clutches, instead) and thus doesn't lose any power or waste any fuel.

This transition will also hold your gear, under normal circumstances and/or if you decide to do so, unless you punch the hard switch on the accelerator, so it's "top gear" acceleration times are just that.

Away from simplistic arguments, it boils down to what kind of driver experience you appreciate. VW allows you relaxed, low RPM driving with torque available here and now, anytime (i.e., from 1800 to 5000 rpm, and top horse power also over a wide range of rpms). Honda means business above 5000-6000 rpm, and simply feals like an econobox at anything below that. Like it or not, there are many drivers out there who appreciate the serene driving experience that vast amounts of torque in the 2000-4000 rpm band have to offer.

thegraduate · February 2006

You sound accustomed to winding the engine into the stratosphere to get anywhere, so maybe you are in the right car

Umm, stratosphere? It redlines at 6,500 rpm...not exactly stratospheric. Trust me bud, if I was interested in hot-rodding i'd have gotten a manual tranny; instead, I have to drive in town daily, and the more practical choice was the 5-speed auto. You can check on my posts in the mileage boards...I drive to where I get 3-5 over EPA listed city/hwy numbers in my car... Usually not revving above 3,000 rpm; unless I feel like stretching its legs. It feels like a sprinter next to the Jetta's dog of a 2.5 (the Accord's closest 2.4L competitor). Torque figures are virtually the same, mileage numbers are much better on the Accord, even though to get the peak torque the revs are higher. No real tradeoff in my book. You have your cake and save gas too!

midnightcowboy · February 2006

allhorizon said:

"If you are a shifting man, you will surely appreciate that the DSG transmission in the new GTI and GLI can shift faster than any human, doesn't contain a slush box (but two simultaneous wet clutches, instead) and thus doesn't lose any power or waste any fuel. "

Yes, I fully understand DSG is better performance. I just like pushing in the clutch and shifting gears myself. Som e automatics are faster than me and DSG surely is. But I have way more fun and enjoyment in a car that I shift with a gear shiift and cluthc. I have been doing it for over forty years and old habits die hard.

MidCow

600kgolfgt · February 2006

> Trust me bud, if I was interested in hot-rodding i'd have gotten a manual tranny; instead, I have to drive in town daily, and the more practical choice was the 5-speed auto.

I drive on the highway, so I take the 1997 Jetta 2.0 with the 5-speed manual (it's definitely not a sprinter - well not until I drop a supercharger in the engine sometime in the near future). When my wife and I drive in the city, I take my sprinter in the form of a 2003 Wolfsburg Jetta 1.8T (weekend car) with the 5-speed Tiptronic (the only reason being that I wasn't about to teach my wife how to drive a stick at this point in my life - she drives a 2003 Passat to work). In fact, every other car that I've owned was a stick until the 2003...

> Usually not revving above 3,000 rpm; unless I feel like stretching its legs. It feels like a sprinter next to the Jetta's dog of a 2.5 (the Accord's closest 2.4L competitor).

You and I are in definite agreement about the 2.5 - it is a dog. I would have made that engine a turbodiesel, IMHO...

allhorizon · February 2006

If you see my post, clearly I am not talking about numbers only. CD clearly picked the Civic as the handler of these two cars, and I would assume that people buying this category look for handling prowess more than anything else. ...

Let me assure you, the price of these two cars will never be close and I am sure all prospective buyers understand that and make a decision knowing fully well what they are paying for.

I disagree. There are tens of thousand of GLI, GTI and A3 buyers every year for whom handling is very important, and they base their decision on it - just not at the cost of driving a car that (in their opinion) lacks aesthetic design and creature comfort, and that (in the case of the Si) needs to be revved to 6200 rpm to reach an abysmally low torque that is exceeded by 50% in the GTI, GLI, 2.0TFSI Jetta, or A3 at a low 1800 rpm. The latter allows you the kind of serene, relaxed, yet powerful driving reminiscent of old V8s or modern V6s...

As to the street price, from my view they are close enough, comparably equipped.

thegraduate · February 2006

Good for you, you have one of the best looking VW ever made in my opinion (Jetta Wolfsburg ed.). I loved driving the 1.8T VW i drove, but can't figure out why they dropped something so unfinished feeling in the standard Jetta. If I were you, I'd keep the 2003 until sometihng a little better comes along...I love that car.

600kgolfgt · February 2006

>My comments on the CD comparo:

The Civic scored in most driving related tests; the GTI socred in most comfort/convenience/rear seat accomodation areas. This was supposed to be a performance car test. Even the sub title is "Grace and handling finish second to a fast and practical box"

They gave the handling crown to the Civic.

Some results from the CD test:

0-60: Civic 6.6, GTI 6.7
skidpad: Civic 0.91, GTI 0.87
Lane change (slalom): Civic 69.1, GTI 63.6 (yes, the civic beat the GTI by almost 6mph)
Braking: Civic 197, GTI 171
Gotta have it factor: Civic/GTI tied at 21
Fun to Drive: Civic 25, GTI 21 (surprised?)

Some quotes for the test:

"Although the GTI didn't achieve the Si's handling marks, it didn't have any trouble staying in the Honda's rear view mirror on our test route" - So much for a driver's car

"The GTI ends up being able to do just about everything the Si can do, but it does it without the grace of the Honda"

"The extra body motion also makes teh GTI feel as if its center of gravity were about a foot higher than the hunkered-down Civic's"

"It doesn't have the graceful and impressive handling of the Si, but it gets the job done"

This gen civic is never going to win any CD comparison; that's because they completely hate the instrumentation. That's it.

The GTI scored in areas of rear seat accomodation, practicality, interior fit and finish (always a VW strong point) and the excellent gearbox.

I would recommend all to read the comparo and come up with their own conclusions.

=============================================================

I read the comparisons (I'm a Car and Driver subscriber), and there are some discrepancies in the way you read the performance test results. Here are the actual test results (and anyone can get the March 2006 Car and Driver and try and refute these results):

0-60: GTI - 6.6sec Civic Si - 6.7sec
0-100 Civic Si - 16.8 GTI - 17.0
0-120 Civic Si - 27.1 GTI - 28.0
1/4mi GTI - 14.9 @ 95mph Civic Si - 15.1 @ 95mph
5-60 GTI - 6.9 Civic Si - 7.5
30-50 GTI - 3.3 Civic Si - 11.3
50-70 GTI - 4.3 Civic Si - 11.5

Top speed - Civic Si - 130mph (redline limited)
GTI - 128mph (governor limited)

Braking - GTI - 171ft. Civic Si - 179ft.
Roadholding - Civic Si 0.91 GTI - 0.87
Lane change - Civic Si 69.1 GTI - 63.6

That makes it GTI - 7, Civic Si - 5

Your thoughts?

allhorizon · February 2006

Let me try this again, in a very subjective manner. In reality, these are two quite different cars that appeal to different drivers.

Si:
- front LSD
- slightly lighter
- better handling for autocross purposes
- 2-door sedan, exclusively, for now
- design that appeals to a limited fraction of customers under the age of 22 or so
- not suitable for long drives

GTI/GLI/Jetta 2.0TFSI/A3:
- by all objective measures, similar performance numbers compared to the Si, including skid pad, with appropriate tires
- 50% more torque than what the Si has anywhere starting at a low 1800rpm - favorably compares to an old V8 or a modern V6
- choice of hatchback or sedan (available in the GLI)
- 3 doors or 5 doors available (5 door GTI in July)
- lots of creature comforts, if desired
- design (between the Jetta 2.0TFSI, GLI, GTI, and A3) appeals to broad consumer base of all ages
- very relaxed long-distance driver

thegraduate · February 2006

I gotta say, I don't think you are talking about any more of a limited fraction appeal with one versus another, especially when you talk about styling. The Civic has a much better looking exterior, IMO, but that is just one's opinion. I also find the regular coupe Civic good-looking, so I don't base my judgements on the Si's wing and wheels. I also find that the nose'heavy look of the Volkswagen is not my taste, though it may be others. My dad was asking me why someone had "put a truck grill on the the front of that new Jetta"...he then realized it was a GLI and was supposed to have that. The VW isn't bad looking, but it's just a bit too awkward and bug-eyed for my (and my father's) taste. Mom thought they had redesigned the Corolla when she saw a Jetta 2.5. That doesn't bode well for a car that can easily reach $30,000. i have no doubt that it has better steering feel than the Civic, nor have I ever said otherwise, but I am led to believe that when someone who doesn't know a lot about cars looks at the Jetta on the street, they may not bother to give it a second look, since the Corolla has been out since mid-2002.

(BTW, I mention the Jetta a lot here...it is a Jetta vs Civic Forum...the Civic/Golf forum is elsewhere).

03accordman · February 2006

"I read the comparisons (I'm a Car and Driver subscriber), and there are some discrepancies in the way you read the performance test results. Here are the actual test results (and anyone can get the March 2006 Car and Driver and try and refute these results):

0-60: GTI - 6.6sec Civic Si - 6.7sec
0-100 Civic Si - 16.8 GTI - 17.0
0-120 Civic Si - 27.1 GTI - 28.0
1/4mi GTI - 14.9 95mph Civic Si - 15.1 95mph
5-60 GTI - 6.9 Civic Si - 7.5
30-50 GTI - 3.3 Civic Si - 11.3
50-70 GTI - 4.3 Civic Si - 11.5

Top speed - Civic Si - 130mph (redline limited)
GTI - 128mph (governor limited)

Braking - GTI - 171ft. Civic Si - 179ft.
Roadholding - Civic Si 0.91 GTI - 0.87
Lane change - Civic Si 69.1 GTI - 63.6

That makes it GTI - 7, Civic Si - 5

Your thoughts?"

So where are the discrepancies in the results I posted, except for the Braking distance typo for the Si (179 ft against the 197 I posted)? You have added a few parameters, but I don't see any incorrect numbers posted ny me.

On the GTI - 7, Si -5 score, I am not sure how you counted them. Let me list them from your own post:

You have stated 11 parameters, let me list the winning ones by car:

Si:
1) 0-60: GTI - 6.6sec Civic Si - 6.7sec
2) 0-100 Civic Si - 16.8 GTI - 17.0
3) 0-120 Civic Si - 27.1 GTI - 28.0
4) Top speed - Civic Si - 130mph (redline limited)
GTI - 128mph (governor limited)
5) Roadholding - Civic Si 0.91 GTI - 0.87
6) Lane change - Civic Si 69.1 GTI - 63.6

That makes it 6 for the Si

Now GTI:
1) 1/4mi GTI - 14.9 95mph Civic Si - 15.1 95mph
2) 5-60 GTI - 6.9 Civic Si - 7.5
3) 30-50 GTI - 3.3 Civic Si - 11.3
4) 50-70 GTI - 4.3 Civic Si - 11.5
5) Braking - GTI - 171ft. Civic Si - 179ft.

That makes it 5 for GTI

So the score according to your posted results is:
Si -6, GTI -5

I am also counting the futile top gear 30-50 and 50-70 times. I say futlie because the Si is a manual and the GTI is an auto(explained earlier, the DSG in teh GTI lets the tranny kick down as soon as the pedal is floored while the stick in the Si let it be kept in top gear by the CD testers)

Anyway, I am not a numbers only person; I have only responded since you posted total score incorrectly.

midnightcowboy · February 2006

allhorizon said - "50% more torque than what the Si has anywhere starting at a low 1800rpm - favorably compares to an old V8 or a modern V6"

Let me venture to say, you have never owned a Honda VTEC or even extensively driven one, IS THAT CORRECT?

If you don't like a fun shifting car that highly interacts with the drive , then yeah a Honda VTEC is probably not for you. By the way since you are talking about torque you would porabably low a Peterbuilt!

The have gobs of torque at idle clear up to red-line at 2,400 RPM

Cheers MidCow - Proud brand new owner of a new 2006 S2000 low torque 4 Cyl 2.2L Honda.

thegraduate · February 2006

I think you need to take a look at 0-60 numbers...there is an issue there (6.6sec and 6.7sec...who got what?) I don't have my issue handy (i'm not home right now) to look it up.

Does it really matter though? The 5-60MPH give a better idea at what car is suited for what. The GTI has the low-end advantage, but the Si makes up for it later in the rev-range. The Civic is the better handler in the real world (lane-change number is pretty drastically different at 6 mph.) Brakes are close to the GTI, but the GTI has the upper hand...

Take this to the GOLF board. Perhaps the host can provide a link to it for you...(A little help, pat?)

03accordman · February 2006

"I disagree. There are tens of thousand of GLI, GTI and A3 buyers every year for whom handling is very important, and they base their decision on it - just not at the cost of driving a car that (in their opinion) lacks aesthetic design and creature comfort, and that (in the case of the Si) needs to be revved to 6200 rpm to reach an abysmally low torque that is exceeded by 50% in the GTI, GLI, 2.0TFSI Jetta, or A3 at a low 1800 rpm. The latter allows you the kind of serene, relaxed, yet powerful driving reminiscent of old V8s or modern V6s...

As to the street price, from my view they are close enough, comparably equipped."

So what do you disagree with? In my post I said I assume that handling is an important criteria for buyers of both these cars and you agree it is.

As for aesthetic design, it is subjective; in my opinion the GTI is not a great aesthetic design what with its truncated side view as well as those cart-wheel type alloys. I like Civis better. As for comforts, again that is a decision made by each one of us; I wouldn't say that the Civis lacks creature comforts, would you?

As for revving the engine up to get to the power band; I am sure just like there are thousands who like more power at low revs, there are thousands others who love to rev to 8k rpm to get that VTEC "rush."

03accordman · February 2006

Oh, I got it now!!! Blame my eyes.

However, I am pretty sure the Civic got 6.6 to the GTI's 6.7, though I would like to confirm that once I get back home to my CD issue.

Sorry 600k.., I will check that up and post those times.

600kgolfgt · February 2006

>Good for you, you have one of the best looking VW ever made in my opinion (Jetta Wolfsburg ed.). I loved driving the 1.8T VW i drove, but can't figure out why they dropped something so unfinished feeling in the standard Jetta. If I were you, I'd keep the 2003 until sometihng a little better comes along...I love that car.

Thanks for the kind words... I normally keep my vehicles at least 8-10 years, so I'm holding on to this one for dear life...

The amount of passion VW and Honda owners have for their cars proves that these cars are still the standard bearers for their class - ones that other manufacturers have been emulating for years - and still do... :shades:

600kgolfgt · February 2006

No problem...I missed that myself until I picked up my C&D issue one night while in this forum... :shades:

pat · February 2006

>> I will check that up and post those times.

Let's not and say you did.

We're talking about the Civic and Jetta here, okay?

pat · February 2006

Hey, congrats on a terrific new ride!!

allhorizon · February 2006

Cheers MidCow - Proud brand new owner of a new 2006 S2000 low torque 4 Cyl 2.2L Honda.

Hey, congratulations to your new car - sounds like you are going to love it!

What can I say - I just love small and flexible engines that have a lot of torque down low, and a wide powerband. I just love the fact that you can triple your speed, yet stay in the same gear and have power all the way. And I am not shift lazy at all - I drive a steep, very curvey grade every day where staying in the ideal range requires constant shifting between 2nd and 3rd. (That's actually a good VTec question: in what gear do you accelerate out of a tight, uphill curve when you are going ~20mph?) On the other hand, I find engines frustrating that develop anything close to their max power right when you have to shift.

Let's agree that people have different preferences, no need to bring Diesel trucks into play...

allhorizon · February 2006

So what do you disagree with? In my post I said I assume that handling is an important criteria for buyers of both these cars and you agree it is.

That's almost what you said. You said "I would assume that people buying this category look for handling prowess more than anything else". It's the latter part I disagree with, and what distinguishes these cars, in my opinion. The Jetta/GLI is a different package, one which approaches the handling prowess of the Civic (and in some categories is its equal, or marginally better), but that, to at least some buyers, has other things to offer that the Civic does not have. And before you get your piece-by-piece comparo spec sheet out, I would be the first to agree that many of the perceived differences are subjective and of aesthetic nature. :shades:

thegraduate · March 2006

midnightcowboy · March 2006

Nope! It is just that their Jettas are in for repairs and none of the Jetta owners could find any convenient Internet connections to respond :P .

Jetta are very good when the are good, and bad when they are bad such as relibility. Buy a VW or Audi ( i had one and learned) and you will make a lot of new friends ( VW service manager, VW technicians, VW service desk personnel). But htat isn't all that bad when I drove up or was towed in they would fill out all of the paperwork and didn't have to ask me my name of anything, wow automated work order.

Cheers,

MidCow

Honda Civic vs Volkswagen Jetta

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles