2016 Honda Civic Thread (10th gen)

[mazeroni]

Originally Posted by darthpnoy1984

The car will still sell regardless because it's an Honda, stealership are already asking 10K over MSRP.

Eh, I think there is a market saturation point and we hit it. Both Ford and VW set very, very low numbers for the R and RS.

I just searched KBB and there are 14 brand new 2017 Golf Rs within 200 miles of me.

There are 52 Focus RS models within 200 miles (this has to be wrong....) Of course, several are listed at $47K, which ain't happening. But yea, something has to be wrong unless they really aren't selling. If that's the case, talk about fire sale at the end of the year.

If Honda wants to list the Type R at $35K-40k, I think they need to set expectations low. Like 1K a year low. But I can't see it being in super high demand.

There are a lot of vehicle options in this price range. Part of me thinks that people have a hard time pitching a uber hatch to their significant other and instead wind up with a German sedan or crossover.

[unhappymeal]

Originally Posted by mazeroni

Eh, I think there is a market saturation point and we hit it. Both Ford and VW set very, very low numbers for the R and RS.

I just searched KBB and there are 14 brand new 2017 Golf Rs within 200 miles of me.

There are 52 Focus RS models within 200 miles (this has to be wrong....) Of course, several are listed at $47K, which ain't happening. But yea, something has to be wrong unless they really aren't selling. If that's the case, talk about fire sale at the end of the year.

If Honda wants to list the Type R at $35K-40k, I think they need to set expectations low. Like 1K a year low. But I can't see it being in super high demand.

There are a lot of vehicle options in this price range. Part of me thinks that people have a hard time pitching a uber hatch to their significant other and instead wind up with a German sedan or crossover.

All fair points, but the Golf R, like the STI, is a regular production model. The RS was also confirmed for at least two years at a volume of something like 3,000 - 5,000 per year for North America.

Honda has taken the opposite approach and explicitly stated it will be limited production with a target of around 1 per dealership.

[DAEMANO]

Honestly, I don't understand spending $40k on a non-sports car platform that goes faster than their current "sport" models. Certainly the performance levels are adequate for the asking price, but so much money and engineering spent to get a FWD sub-compact still nets a FWD subcompact (no matter how relatively quick it is). We've seen plenty of instrumented track tests of these cars and they still end up NOT being giant killers, so why bother?

I mean...
$26k 86/BRZ + $14k in mods nets a better sports car
$20k used S2000 + $20k in mods nets a better sports car
$40k used Cayman, Boxster, Alfa 4C, Corvette, Camaro, Mustang, M3, and Elise are also all better sports cars.

I get it, they're supposed to be fun, but so are their non-extreme model variants. You'd really have to be a Honda/Ford or Hot Hatch enthusiast to want one of these. Otherwise, why?

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by DAEMANO

$40k used Cayman, Boxster, Alfa 4C, Corvette, Camaro, Mustang, M3, and Elise are also all better sports cars.

I get it, they're supposed to be fun, but so are their non-extreme model variants. You'd really have to be a Honda/Ford or Hot Hatch enthusiast to want one of these. Otherwise, why?

Why? The idea of a modest practical car that you can thrash and be decently fast in is appealing. If it wasn't we'd all be driving MX-5s as it's just a better sports car than the 86 for similar money. Even back in 2012 you could pick up a used NC for way less and make it faster for $30k than an 86.

None of your suggestions except the M3 have 4 doors, and all four of these hot economy cars will have lower running costs than the bimmer or any other fast German 4-door.

So if you don't want to significantly modify your car, have a $40k budget, want 4 doors, and want the fastest car in budget, boom, nothing else matches right now. Maybe a used Chevy SS or one of the few remaining on dealer lots (a few dozen in my area when I looked a few weeks back), but reliability hasn't been terribly hot on those, so you'd really have to like Chevy and the idea of an LS sedan to take the plunge.

As for the idea that the market is saturated I disagree, the Civic would be top of my list with the Golf having undefeatable traction control, the Focus overheating on track and being mostly FWD anyway, and the STI still using the EJ engine (probably because the FA20DIT hasn't really ironed out the kinks yet).

The Civic, despite the unproven engine and brake based 'torque vectoring' is the fastest 4-door under $40k that seems the most track & driving experience focused. Maybe it'll have some flaw I'm not expecting, I could be proven wrong, but I'll be keeping my eye on this down the road to see how it holds up, could be a fun grocery getter and track/autox taxi/support vehicle.

[Cole]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Why? The idea of a modest practical car that you can thrash and be decently fast in is appealing. If it wasn't we'd all be driving MX-5s as it's just a better sports car than the 86 for similar money. Even back in 2012 you could pick up a used NC for way less and make it faster for $30k than an 86.

None of your suggestions except the M3 have 4 doors, and all four of these hot economy cars will have lower running costs than the bimmer or any other fast German 4-door.

So if you don't want to significantly modify your car, have a $40k budget, want 4 doors, and want the fastest car in budget, boom, nothing else matches right now. Maybe a used Chevy SS or one of the few remaining on dealer lots (a few dozen in my area when I looked a few weeks back), but reliability hasn't been terribly hot on those, so you'd really have to like Chevy and the idea of an LS sedan to take the plunge.

As for the idea that the market is saturated I disagree, the Civic would be top of my list with the Golf having undefeatable traction control, the Focus overheating on track and being mostly FWD anyway, and the STI still using the EJ engine (probably because the FA20DIT hasn't really ironed out the kinks yet).

The Civic, despite the unproven engine and brake based 'torque vectoring' is the fastest 4-door under $40k that seems the most track & driving experience focused. Maybe it'll have some flaw I'm not expecting, I could be proven wrong, but I'll be keeping my eye on this down the road to see how it holds up, could be a fun grocery getter and track/autox taxi/support vehicle.

Would still take a WRX. Or go through the trouble of getting an SS up here in Canada. Fairly certain they weren't sold here.

IMO, it's a tough pill to swallow to buy what is basically a fast Civic for 35-40k. But, the flip side to that, is I bought an FRS when I could have got a 35/70z, Genesis, Mustang, Camaro, etc for around the same price point.

I wonder if I could afford a Porsche's maintenance schedule. I should look into it a bit more. A used cayman would be sweet, but I already hate the lack of room in the FRS, and the only reason I really tolerate it is because of my work truck.

[DAEMANO]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Why? The idea of a modest practical car that you can thrash and be decently fast in is appealing. If it wasn't we'd all be driving MX-5s as it's just a better sports car than the 86 for similar money. Even back in 2012 you could pick up a used NC for way less and make it faster for $30k than an 86.

None of your suggestions except the M3 have 4 doors, and all four of these hot economy cars will have lower running costs than the bimmer or any other fast German 4-door.

So if you don't want to significantly modify your car, have a $40k budget, want 4 doors, and want the fastest car in budget, boom, nothing else matches right now. Maybe a used Chevy SS or one of the few remaining on dealer lots (a few dozen in my area when I looked a few weeks back), but reliability hasn't been terribly hot on those, so you'd really have to like Chevy and the idea of an LS sedan to take the plunge.

As for the idea that the market is saturated I disagree, the Civic would be top of my list with the Golf having undefeatable traction control, the Focus overheating on track and being mostly FWD anyway, and the STI still using the EJ engine (probably because the FA20DIT hasn't really ironed out the kinks yet).

The Civic, despite the unproven engine and brake based 'torque vectoring' is the fastest 4-door under $40k that seems the most track & driving experience focused. Maybe it'll have some flaw I'm not expecting, I could be proven wrong, but I'll be keeping my eye on this down the road to see how it holds up, could be a fun grocery getter and track/autox taxi/support vehicle.

Don't let the MX-5 fanboy-ism into this discussion

You missed my point. It's not about doors, its about the chassis. No matter how much go-fast you put on a Civic, it's still a FWD Civic chassis (same goes for the Ford & Golf). They're all inferior sports car experiences to the ones I noted previous. $40k worth of Civic doesn't seem to add up.

If a person want' a practical car that's still fun a standard Civic S or Si makes a lot more sense. You could buy that AND an fairly recent MX-5 for the cost of the Type-R (as well as a ticket to Clubmiata.com)

Lastly, as noted above if a person wants a practical car that goes fast, for $40k there are many better options (WRX/STi, Dodge Charger, Alfa Guilia Base, Pontiac G8 GTX, or even a Modded EVO). Not trying to convince anyone. But Extreme Hot Hatches are a value/performance statement that I don't get.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Cole

IMO, it's a tough pill to swallow to buy what is basically a fast Civic for 35-40k.

Originally Posted by DAEMANO

You missed my point. It's not about doors, its about the chassis.

The trick is traditionally Honda doesn't label their cars as "Type-R" just because 'it's a bit faster'. If that's how you look at this car then yeah, it absolutely makes zero sense. Honda has a reputation for their serious sports cars to deliver serious reliable track performance, hell I bet some regretful C7 Z06 Corvette owners would jump at the chance to go a full track day at 10/10ths despite having a 'superior chassis'.

But that's like looking at an M3 and going, "why not just buy the 340i?" Honda puts as much effort into their Type-R's, maybe even more than M or AMG put into their packages, setting it next to modern TRD, NISMO, or STI is a joke. That's what the Si is for after all.

As for the rest and the competition, everybodies situation is different. I know if presented the option I have zero interest in a sedan when a hatch can be had for the same price that will put just as big a smile on my face.

When clean MT Panamera's hit $40k is when this argument becomes a moot point and a clear winner emerges.

[Cole]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

The trick is traditionally Honda doesn't label their cars as "Type-R" just because 'it's a bit faster'. If that's how you look at this car then yeah, it absolutely makes zero sense. Honda has a reputation for their serious sports cars to deliver serious reliable track performance, hell I bet some regretful C7 Z06 Corvette owners would jump at the chance to go a full track day at 10/10ths despite having a 'superior chassis'.

But that's like looking at an M3 and going, "why not just buy the 340i?" Honda puts as much effort into their Type-R's, maybe even more than M or AMG put into their packages, setting it next to modern TRD, NISMO, or STI is a joke. That's what the Si is for after all.

As for the rest and the competition, everybodies situation is different. I know if presented the option I have zero interest in a sedan when a hatch can be had for the same price that will put just as big a smile on my face.

When clean MT Panamera's hit $40k is when this argument becomes a moot point and a clear winner emerges.

Instead of an M3, I'd get a 135 and call it a day. Or I'd actually get an E60 M5 and do burnouts everywhere.

[funwheeldrive]

With the Civic type R you also get the exclusive factor. Whoever is buying this car is probably already a Honda fan.

I imagine this car will hold its value well.

[Coaster]

Not bad for a FWD. "class of the field."
17.30.
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUhKhQP4PBo&t=1557s"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUhKhQP4PBo&t=1557s[/ame]



At 10.00.
Clubsport S
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxthzMs_M-M&t=671s"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxthzMs_M-M&t=671s[/ame]

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by unhappymeal

All fair points, but the Golf R, like the STI, is a regular production model. The RS was also confirmed for at least two years at a volume of something like 3,000 - 5,000 per year for North America.

Honda has taken the opposite approach and explicitly stated it will be limited production with a target of around 1 per dealership.

Not saying you're wrong, but where/when did Honda state that? Not only does that sound a bit suspect, it also sounds pretty stupid for Honda to dump so much R&D money into a Civic model that is more exclusive than a new NSX. Seems unlikely.

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Why? The idea of a modest practical car that you can thrash and be decently fast in is appealing. If it wasn't we'd all be driving MX-5s as it's just a better sports car than the 86 for similar money. Even back in 2012 you could pick up a used NC for way less and make it faster for $30k than an 86.

None of your suggestions except the M3 have 4 doors, and all four of these hot economy cars will have lower running costs than the bimmer or any other fast German 4-door.

So if you don't want to significantly modify your car, have a $40k budget, want 4 doors, and want the fastest car in budget, boom, nothing else matches right now. Maybe a used Chevy SS or one of the few remaining on dealer lots (a few dozen in my area when I looked a few weeks back), but reliability hasn't been terribly hot on those, so you'd really have to like Chevy and the idea of an LS sedan to take the plunge.

The Civic, despite the unproven engine and brake based 'torque vectoring' is the fastest 4-door under $40k that seems the most track & driving experience focused. Maybe it'll have some flaw I'm not expecting, I could be proven wrong, but I'll be keeping my eye on this down the road to see how it holds up, could be a fun grocery getter and track/autox taxi/support vehicle.

Who is saying the SS has reliability problems? That chassis has been around for a while, and the LS engine is bulletproof.

Originally Posted by Cole

Would still take a WRX. Or go through the trouble of getting an SS up here in Canada. Fairly certain they weren't sold here.

IMO, it's a tough pill to swallow to buy what is basically a fast Civic for 35-40k. But, the flip side to that, is I bought an FRS when I could have got a 35/70z, Genesis, Mustang, Camaro, etc for around the same price point.

I wonder if I could afford a Porsche's maintenance schedule. I should look into it a bit more. A used cayman would be sweet, but I already hate the lack of room in the FRS, and the only reason I really tolerate it is because of my work truck.

Yeah, I would also probably prefer a WRX. Or a new Alfa Guilia (lease only - lol). Or an SS.

Porsche maintenance schedules aren't that crazy, or expensive. You probably could.

Originally Posted by strat61caster

The trick is traditionally Honda doesn't label their cars as "Type-R" just because 'it's a bit faster'. If that's how you look at this car then yeah, it absolutely makes zero sense. Honda has a reputation for their serious sports cars to deliver serious reliable track performance, hell I bet some regretful C7 Z06 Corvette owners would jump at the chance to go a full track day at 10/10ths despite having a 'superior chassis'.

But that's like looking at an M3 and going, "why not just buy the 340i?" Honda puts as much effort into their Type-R's, maybe even more than M or AMG put into their packages, setting it next to modern TRD, NISMO, or STI is a joke. That's what the Si is for after all.

As for the rest and the competition, everybodies situation is different. I know if presented the option I have zero interest in a sedan when a hatch can be had for the same price that will put just as big a smile on my face.

When clean MT Panamera's hit $40k is when this argument becomes a moot point and a clear winner emerges.

Panameras are boats. You don't want one.

[unhappymeal]

Originally Posted by DAEMANO

Honestly, I don't understand spending $40k on a non-sports car platform that goes faster than their current "sport" models. Certainly the performance levels are adequate for the asking price, but so much money and engineering spent to get a FWD sub-compact still nets a FWD subcompact (no matter how relatively quick it is). We've seen plenty of instrumented track tests of these cars and they still end up NOT being giant killers, so why bother?

I mean...
$26k 86/BRZ + $14k in mods nets a better sports car
$20k used S2000 + $20k in mods nets a better sports car
$40k used Cayman, Boxster, Alfa 4C, Corvette, Camaro, Mustang, M3, and Elise are also all better sports cars.

I get it, they're supposed to be fun, but so are their non-extreme model variants. You'd really have to be a Honda/Ford or Hot Hatch enthusiast to want one of these. Otherwise, why?

The point is to have a brand new car, with a warranty, that punches well above its price point, while still being a very practical daily car. There's no doubt that these cars will be extremely fast on tracks. There's also no doubt that many of the setups you listed above are better pure sports cars.

At the end of the day, there will be a handful of people for who these cars truly make sense, hence the tiny production numbers.

[unhappymeal]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

The Civic, despite the unproven engine and brake based 'torque vectoring' is the fastest 4-door under $40k that seems the most track & driving experience focused. Maybe it'll have some flaw I'm not expecting, I could be proven wrong, but I'll be keeping my eye on this down the road to see how it holds up, could be a fun grocery getter and track/autox taxi/support vehicle.

Small correction, but the Type-R is coming with e-Helical LSD and not brake based vectoring.

[unhappymeal]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Not saying you're wrong, but where/when did Honda state that? Not only does that sound a bit suspect, it also sounds pretty stupid for Honda to dump so much R&D money into a Civic model that is more exclusive than a new NSX. Seems unlikely.

Honda rep at the Toronto Auto Show. I will have a better idea of how many are coming (at least for Canada) later this year when it starts showing up on the internal Honda Finance system.