2013 Honda Civic Si Sedan vs 2013 Subaru BRZ

[86silver]

y get a si. this is the way i look at vtec . u get vtec and have to run very little boost. but if i turbo my frs or brz i could run up to 17 psi with the right tuning. i rather have a ton of boost and no vtec then vtec and little boost

[Sellout]

Originally Posted by 86silver

y get a si. this is the way i look at vtec . u get vtec and have to run very little boost. but if i turbo my frs or brz i could run up to 17 psi with the right tuning. i rather have a ton of boost and no vtec then vtec and little boost

So um, how's that working for you, considering that EVERYTHING about a high performance VTEC motor that makes them require low boost is also present in the FRS, except for the giant VTEC lobes which are part of the reason those motors generate astronomical power numbers on low boost pressures...

Not to mention the simple fact that the good VTEC motors have forged internals from the factory and can support some ridiculous power numbers. There are hundreds of high horsepower stock bottom end VTEC motors. There's one stock FA20 generating incredible horsepower numbers.

Don't put the FA20 on a pedestal.

[Lverasky]

get a BRZ/FRS...you can customize more on it.

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by 86silver

y get a si. this is the way i look at vtec . u get vtec and have to run very little boost. but if i turbo my frs or brz i could run up to 17 psi with the right tuning. i rather have a ton of boost and no vtec then vtec and little boost

The B17A in my 1992 Integra GS-R has VTEC on both cams.
8200 rpm fuel cut off
forged internals
oil squirters for piston cooling
9.7:1 compression ratio...


which means it's already good to go for lots of boost.

[FRSfan111]

I love me some good Hondas but I prefer 92-2000. Not feeling the new civics. 09 was the last year I really liked. But any1 that knocks a B or K series is in denial.

[R3d]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Except MPG

I dont know man, I preferred the 8th gen si to the rx8 but I really don't like the 9th gen !

[R3d]

Originally Posted by FRSfan111

I love me some good Hondas but I prefer 92-2000. Not feeling the new civics. 09 was the last year I really liked. But any1 that knocks a B or K series is in denial.

good point but the 2013 is k24 !!o.O with no headers!!o.O o.O

[FRSfan111]

Originally Posted by R3d

good point but the 2013 is k24 !!o.O with no headers!!o.O o.O

My mom has one, it pulls decent but the rpm range is even shorter then my FRS :/ I mis the days of 10k red lines.

[FRSfan111]

Don't get me wrong though, on Honda tech they have stock k24s with big turbos studs and valve springs pushing 4-500hp. They are great engines lol.

[Ammonia]

If you guys think this thread is full of haters, you should have seen the response of my buddies when I traded in my 420whp twin turbo BMW for a stock FR-S.

[FRSBRZGT86FAN]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Except MPG

and reliability

[FRSBRZGT86FAN]

Originally Posted by Coheed

I stomped some SIs at a recent track event in my bone-stock BRZ. Must be the madd driving skills yo.

Mad handling

[iJDMTOY]

I feel as though the 9th generation Civic Si's are more oriented towards fuel economy and emissions standards rather than the performance side of it. The larger K24 engine has more torque which is what the American market wants, easier to drive around the city and makes the butt dyno feel happy. As far as performance wise, it's still a new engine and all, but the integrated exhaust manifold seems like a big limiting factor among other things. All in all, it's built with emissions and economy as priority, not performance.

It seems like Honda has a trend of making a good car, bad car, good car, then bad car again, etc. The 99-01 EM1 was a great car.. the 2002-2005 EP3 not so much.. the 2006-2012 FA5/FG2 was a great car again.. now it's crap again

A more fair comparison would be the FRS/BRZ vs the 2006-2012 Civic Si's instead. Let's take a look at the pros and cons:

FRS/BRZ -

PROS:

Huge ass aftermarket support
Plenty of potential
Definitely a more sporty looking
Interior seems to be more refined and elegant
Handles very well on the track with the right driver

CONS:

Engine issues? (seems like there is a reliability issue from reading about the issues on the forums)
Engine is lacking quite a bit IMO. Struggling to make 200whp is a big negative to me

2006-2012 Civic Si -

PROS:

Engine responds really well to simple mods, easily making 200whp with I/H/E + tune. Up to 240-250 with cams and other supporting mods.
Handles great when setup properly and with the right driver
A lot of space (esp in a four door)
Reliable and fuel efficient even with mods

CONS:

Aftermarket support sucks in comparison with you guys
FWD does have it's limits, it'd be better if they had the K20 in a RWD platform (cough cough Ariel Atom)
Rear suspension design is focused for comfort (I forget the actual name for it, but the shock and spring are not together and are separated)
Looks like any other Civic on the road for the most part

This is definitely a biased opinion as I have never driven a FRS/BRZ (although I want to) on the track or street, but I do one day. I own a 2008 Civic Si and track it often. I want to own both cars and have the best of both worlds to be honest.

[charged86]

Originally Posted by iJDMTOY

I feel as though the 9th generation Civic Si's are more oriented towards fuel economy and emissions standards rather than the performance side of it. The larger K24 engine has more torque which is what the American market wants, easier to drive around the city and makes the butt dyno feel happy. As far as performance wise, it's still a new engine and all, but the integrated exhaust manifold seems like a big limiting factor among other things. All in all, it's built with emissions and economy as priority, not performance.

It seems like Honda has a trend of making a good car, bad car, good car, then bad car again, etc. The 99-01 EM1 was a great car.. the 2002-2005 EP3 not so much.. the 2006-2012 FA5/FG2 was a great car again.. now it's crap again

A more fair comparison would be the FRS/BRZ vs the 2006-2012 Civic Si's instead. Let's take a look at the pros and cons:

FRS/BRZ -

PROS:

Huge ass aftermarket support
Plenty of potential
Definitely a more sporty looking
Interior seems to be more refined and elegant
Handles very well on the track with the right driver

CONS:

Engine issues? (seems like there is a reliability issue from reading about the issues on the forums)
Engine is lacking quite a bit IMO. Struggling to make 200whp is a big negative to me

2006-2012 Civic Si -

PROS:

Engine responds really well to simple mods, easily making 200whp with I/H/E + tune. Up to 240-250 with cams and other supporting mods.
Handles great when setup properly and with the right driver
A lot of space (esp in a four door)
Reliable and fuel efficient even with mods

CONS:

Aftermarket support sucks in comparison with you guys
FWD does have it's limits, it'd be better if they had the K20 in a RWD platform (cough cough Ariel Atom)
Rear suspension design is focused for comfort (I forget the actual name for it, but the shock and spring are not together and are separated)
Looks like any other Civic on the road for the most part

This is definitely a biased opinion as I have never driven a FRS/BRZ (although I want to) on the track or street, but I do one day. I own a 2008 Civic Si and track it often. I want to own both cars and have the best of both worlds to be honest.

we are getting 200whp with intake header exhaust +tune. we also can run e85 with stock equipment. a tuner full blown has a 600whp turbo frs stock block. A few cars popped on the track like 3 due to a little plastic washer on the direct injectors. were talking sport compact sedan to SPORTS CAR. My manager has your car its nice I like it. Honda engines are incredible.