Am I stupid if I don't buy a Civic Si?

[Leonardo]

Originally Posted by DandoX

Either way man get whatever makes you happy, that's all that matters. Numbers and figures and this person said this or that is all pointless, all that matters is what you think and feel about your choice. Which is why this is such a pointless yet totally entertaining thread.

I'm interested in hearing what you end up getting and how you like it.

I agree! This thread inspired my last meme I posted.

[motrek]

Originally Posted by DandoX

Just that your so quick to counter with figures and specs and constantly in a state of defensiveness. I dunno buddy just my impression of you so far. I just imagine you selling your 86 in a year or so and complaing about various things folks have pointed out.

Either way man get whatever makes you happy, that's all that matters. Numbers and figures and this person said this or that is all pointless, all that matters is what you think and feel about your choice. Which is why this is such a pointless yet totally entertaining thread.

I'm interested in hearing what you end up getting and how you like it.

Sorry but researching and discussing figures and specs in order to make a purchasing decision doesn't mean that a person wants to brag about figures and specs. If that's what your mind jumps to... really seems like YOU must be a person who cares about bragging rights.

Also, I don't know what state you live in, but in WA you have to pay sales tax on cars. The idea that I might blow $2500+ on taxes and licensing for a new car just to be disappointed with it and turn around and buy something else... nope. (Maybe some people have that kind of money to burn but it seems like they wouldn't be in the market for a $25,000 car in the first place.) There is zero chance that I will turn around and buy something else a year later.

Also, I test-drove the car. How could I possibly be disappointed with the acceleration of a car that I test drove? You're talking nonsense.

[Leonardo]

Originally Posted by motrek

Also, I test-drove the car. How could I possibly be disappointed with the acceleration of a car that I test drove? You're talking nonsense.

It happens all the time. When the "honeymoon period" with noob-forum-guy's new BRZ is over, (in a few days to a few months) they get on here and spew hate for the car. Nitpicking all the details WE (the collective forum) warned noob-forum-guy about. Then the I told you so's start.... Whatever...

Anyway, I am still happy with mine after 6 years and 76500 miles. I also have a stock drivetrain. It is powerful enough to pass people, accelerate up hill, and get speeding tickets, though I never have got a ticket in it yet. (knock on wood! LOL)


Just don't believe it's something it's not.




No sales tax here in Oregon.


But my property tax.... Ugh.

[motrek]

Originally Posted by Leonardo

It happens all the time. When the "honeymoon period" with noob-forum-guy's new BRZ is over, (in a few days to a few months) they get on here and spew hate for the car. Nitpicking all the details WE (the collective forum) warned noob-forum-guy about. Then the I told you so's start.... Whatever...

Cool. That's not me though. If I make a purchasing decision that I end up not liking, that's my fault, and responsibility. The last thing I would do is advertise to the world that I made the wrong decision. So no worries on that front.

No sales tax here in Oregon. ...

Yup, nice work. They REALLY don't like it here though if you try to buy a car in Oregon to avoid paying sales tax... I believe they even started having a special law and fine for that about 15 years ago...

[DandoX]

Settle down man, no need to get so defensive. Just saying that folks in the past looking for similar aspects have been disappointed later down the line. I hope you enjoy the platform as much as I do.

[HKz]

driving is love, driving is life

[ermax]

Originally Posted by motrek

Yeah, manual can be fun, and it's an extra skill that you can practice and get good at, but on the other hand, why bother. It's becoming more and more of an anachronism. There are a bunch of supercars that you can't even buy with manual these days. I mean, if a dual-clutch setup requires less work and delivers better performance... and the days when you could get significantly better gas mileage with a manual vs. automatic are long gone, that was like 20+ years ago... Yeah, I like manuals and all, but who am I kidding, eventually it's just going to be old men yammering on about how they want to feel like they're "in control" of the car... Still probably going to buy the manual though but now I'm only like 80% on it, haha...

For me the MT is more about fun than performance. It isn’t like the performance of manuals is light years apart anyways. An 80ms shift vs 250ms shift just doesn’t interest me enough to go AT. The only thing that would interest me would be the lazy factor. But not even close to enough to push me to an AT. When it comes to lap times the average driver will find way more time in driver improvement than they could find with faster shifts. It’s feel like people that focus on the shift times are more interested in specs than actual driving.

I just wish all performance cars at least had the option to go AT or MT. I’m totally shocked they dropped the MT on the M3. I guess it’s the Ultimate Driverless Machine now.

[ermax]

Originally Posted by motrek

Maybe I drive in more traffic than you do, or a denser city, or both. I'm often going 20 MPH, a small gap opens up in a neighboring lane, and I want to jump into that flow of traffic. So that's the utilitarian reason.

I totally get this. This describes my daily commute in both directions. At 7am I’m not really interested in downshifting into 1st at 20 to jump into another lane. So I mostly just park in the right lane and watch everyone drive past me. I refuse to be that guy that switches lanes and forces everyone to slow down while they casually accelerate.

[motrek]

Originally Posted by ermax

For me the MT is more about fun than performance. It isn’t like the performance of manuals is light years apart anyways. An 80ms shift vs 250ms shift just doesn’t interest me enough to go AT. The only thing that would interest me would be the lazy factor. But not even close to enough to push me to an AT. When it comes to lap times the average driver will find way more time in driver improvement than they could find with faster shifts. It’s feel like people that focus on the shift times are more interested in specs than actual driving.

I just wish all performance cars at least had the option to go AT or MT. I’m totally shocked they dropped the MT on the M3. I guess it’s the Ultimate Driverless Machine now.

Used to be, people discussed shift times to bag on automatics because automatics shifted slower. Now there are "automatics" that shift much faster so everything's reversed which is kind of a weird situation to me, but I guess I'm getting older and these things are going to happen to me more and more often.

For track driving, I definitely agree with you, there are many more factors vs. how fast you can shift. Actually I think this is an argument in favor of automatics--for 90% of people who drive on a track, I would expect them to get faster times driving automatic vs. manual simply because it's one less thing to worry about and one less thing to screw up. So I would definitely not assume that somebody who chooses an automatic is less "involved" in driving or whatever... maybe they're more involved and more competitive than I am. (I've only ever owned MT cars BTW.)

When I go through the reasons that people used to have for getting a manual vs. an automatic, they've all kind of fallen apart.

1) Cheaper -- automatics are only like $1000 more these days, not a very high percentage of total vehicle cost at all
2) Better gas mileage -- hasn't been true for a long time, at least not to any significant degree
3) Faster shifting -- not necessarily, as discussed
4) More gears -- actually these days automatics seem like they have the same or more gears on average... it's rare to see a more expensive automatic that doesn't have at least 8 gears
5) More control over which gear you're in -- hasn't been true for a while. I just looked it up and even the Kia Rio lets you choose gears manually via the gear stick. And try telling an F1 driver that paddle shifters are an inferior way to shift...

So it seems like the only real reason left to pick a manual these days is because you like it, which is a pretty valid reason, but I think the writing is on the wall. Especially as we all gradually transition to electric cars. So actually I think that's a strong argument for my next car being MT... time is running out before it gets to be a completely ridiculous decision.

[Spuds]

[chaoskaze]

Its just the way you compare thing & how you put it out.

We warned you.

[2Wavy]

Personally I was a huge Honda fanboy before the BRZ. The 2015 Si that was out when i bought the BRZ was kind of a disappointment so I didn't even bother considering it. Once I bought the BRZ, after the honeymoon period, I did sorta have some buyer's remorse for a while because the car didn't feel all that sporty. What I mean is, I didn't really feel like it was all that different than my old 8th gen civic on the street and I started thinking maybe I should have gotten a WRX or something which would have felt faster. After a while though, I started taking this car into the canyons and started doing autocross, and then I really began to appreciate the car. Now I love it, and I don't plan on selling it until I absolutely need a bigger car (or if Toyota decides to make the Supra in manual and price it reasonably). The 86 and BRZ are definitely cars that shine when you're thrashing them, and I don't think a Civic Si would be as balanced and communicative. If you don't think you're ever going to push your car very hard though, I imagine the turbo engine in the Si would make it more fun on the street. If you want the practicality and peppy engine go with the Si. If you want a car that feels more like a racecar but is a little less practical, then get the BRZ/86. Also, if you plan on modding the car, the 86 platform is probably a way better starting point.

[ermax]

Originally Posted by 2Wavy

Personally I was a huge Honda fanboy before the BRZ. The 2015 Si that was out when i bought the BRZ was kind of a disappointment so I didn't even bother considering it. Once I bought the BRZ, after the honeymoon period, I did sorta have some buyer's remorse for a while because the car didn't feel all that sporty. What I mean is, I didn't really feel like it was all that different than my old 8th gen civic on the street and I started thinking maybe I should have gotten a WRX or something which would have felt faster. After a while though, I started taking this car into the canyons and started doing autocross, and then I really began to appreciate the car. Now I love it, and I don't plan on selling it until I absolutely need a bigger car (or if Toyota decides to make the Supra in manual and price it reasonably). The 86 and BRZ are definitely cars that shine when you're thrashing them, and I don't think a Civic Si would be as balanced and communicative. If you don't think you're ever going to push your car very hard though, I imagine the turbo engine in the Si would make it more fun on the street. If you want the practicality and peppy engine go with the Si. If you want a car that feels more like a racecar but is a little less practical, then get the BRZ/86. Also, if you plan on modding the car, the 86 platform is probably a way better starting point.

Great points. If you only really care about drag racing people from light to light then the Twins are not a good option. If you’re the type that drives like grandma until you come up to a turn and then speed up to 100 and then slow back down when the turn is over then the Twins are for you. For me I’ve never found it that entertaining to blast from light to light. I mean it’s fun at first in a new car but wears thin quick. For me it’s all about turns. I also was a Honda guy until I had my first kid and needed a sedan and wanted it to be RWD. I could never go back to FWD now.

[ermax]

Originally Posted by motrek

Used to be, people discussed shift times to bag on automatics because automatics shifted slower. Now there are "automatics" that shift much faster so everything's reversed which is kind of a weird situation to me, but I guess I'm getting older and these things are going to happen to me more and more often.



For track driving, I definitely agree with you, there are many more factors vs. how fast you can shift. Actually I think this is an argument in favor of automatics--for 90% of people who drive on a track, I would expect them to get faster times driving automatic vs. manual simply because it's one less thing to worry about and one less thing to screw up. So I would definitely not assume that somebody who chooses an automatic is less "involved" in driving or whatever... maybe they're more involved and more competitive than I am. (I've only ever owned MT cars BTW.)



When I go through the reasons that people used to have for getting a manual vs. an automatic, they've all kind of fallen apart.



1) Cheaper -- automatics are only like $1000 more these days, not a very high percentage of total vehicle cost at all

2) Better gas mileage -- hasn't been true for a long time, at least not to any significant degree

3) Faster shifting -- not necessarily, as discussed

4) More gears -- actually these days automatics seem like they have the same or more gears on average... it's rare to see a more expensive automatic that doesn't have at least 8 gears

5) More control over which gear you're in -- hasn't been true for a while. I just looked it up and even the Kia Rio lets you choose gears manually via the gear stick. And try telling an F1 driver that paddle shifters are an inferior way to shift...



So it seems like the only real reason left to pick a manual these days is because you like it, which is a pretty valid reason, but I think the writing is on the wall. Especially as we all gradually transition to electric cars. So actually I think that's a strong argument for my next car being MT... time is running out before it gets to be a completely ridiculous decision.

I agree a novice on track could learn quicker in an auto but it has nothing to do with shift times as so many seem to think. Once the driver is beyond the novice phase they could go to a manual and probably still put down the same times. There would still be WAY more time left on the table for driver improvement before 80ms shift times become a serious factor. One thing I love about racing is you can do it for many many years (I started in 1997) and still have lots of room for improvement.

Go with the MT. Like you said it’s on it’s last leg, enjoy it while you can. I’m in panic mode right now. I need to find a car that I can keep for the long haul that will stay reliable. One of my sons who is only 11 is already talking about how he wants me to save one of my MTs for him. Hahaha