2013 Subaru BRZ vs 2012 Honda Civic Si HFP

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by SnapOv3st3r

Imo...yes, people (average consumers) are still inclined to purchase OEM shocks and brake pads moreso than tires.

Aside from all this, the FR-S ran .3 tenths faster than the HFP SI on this same track.

oh dont get me wrong, im not saying that i think the civic is a better car. even with more professional drivers with a simple more consistent course i dont think .1 sec is enough to say anything difinitively. my only point was that people were arguing on a slippery slope. i dont know who in their right mind would take the current civic over a brz in an environment like the one they reviewed on. i could see them coming to that conclusion if they evaluated that the civic was so much more useable on the street or the practicality or mpg or something but i dont care about tenths of a second i care about fun and right now i dont know that there is a car on the planet that can do that cheaper than the frs (maybe miata but the no roof thing is a killer at the track)

[SnapOv3st3r]

True that. Plus sitting a Miata for me, probably wouldn't go so well.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by SnapOv3st3r

True that. Plus sitting a Miata for me, probably wouldn't go so well.

to be honest, its not that different than the frs. i think the roomiest are either the new ones then the original ones. i dont fit in the nb, i fit in the na with my shoes off and i can squeeze into the nc thanks to the adjustable steering wheel. the upcoming gen really has me curious though

[SnapOv3st3r]

Originally Posted by fatoni

to be honest, its not that different than the frs. i think the roomiest are either the new ones then the original ones. i dont fit in the nb, i fit in the na with my shoes off and i can squeeze into the nc thanks to the adjustable steering wheel. the upcoming gen really has me curious though

Actually, now that I think of it, I have sat in one. My thighs hit the steering wheel.

[GNS]

Originally Posted by industrial

Saw one on the road today. And I was reminded that...



This car is ugly. Really ugly. Looks okay from the front 3/4 angle in all the glamor photos, that's about it. And seriously, I'd have to question anyone who cross shops these two cars. If you are willing to make sacrifices for a car that's "good in the winter" and "practical"... WRX? MS3? GTI? Soon to dominate the market, Focus ST? $27k Civic SI? Really???

The 2012 Si is how the regular Civic should be. The Si version should have gotten a 2.0T or 2.3T engine making at least 250hp/260lb-tq. Ditch the VTEC gauge, ditch the awful 'sport cloth' fabric they're using (which I can see fraying and turning into nasty little spiky bits over the years), and tweak the suspension more.

It's hilarious to compare the 2012 Si vs the FR-S or BRZ, despite the latter two having less utility, they're purpose built machines whereas the Si is just a bean counter's compromise.

[ayau]

i'm not exactly sure how this thread is already 6 pages. the civic is the faster car stock for stock. period. the numbers prove it.

once you start throwing in some aftermarket parts (tires, sway bars, etc etc), the brz/frs/86 will slowly become the faster car. however, for the purpose of this test (stock vs stock), the civic is the winner. there's no reason for people to be all upset over this video.

in japan, toyota sells a completely stripped down 86 with even skinnier non-performance tires. if we compared that with the civic, the civic would perform even better.

the great thing about the 86/brz/frs is that we all know that the tires are the weakest link, but they're great for amateur drivers because the limits are relatively low. most 86/frs/brz drivers won't track their cars, and the stock tires give them great mpg and pretty decent grip. however, for those interested in tracking, one can pay $700 for a set of star specs and easily drop a couple seconds off their times.

[TuxedoCartman]

Originally Posted by ayau

i'm not exactly sure how this thread is already 6 pages. the civic is the faster car stock for stock. period. the numbers prove it.

once you start throwing in some aftermarket parts (tires, sway bars, etc etc), the brz/frs/86 will slowly become the faster car. however, for the purpose of this test (stock vs stock), the civic is the winner. there's no reason for people to be all upset over this video.

in japan, toyota sells a completely stripped down 86 with even skinnier non-performance tires. if we compared that with the civic, the civic would perform even better.

the great thing about the 86/brz/frs is that we all know that the tires are the weakest link, but they're great for amateur drivers because the limits are relatively low. most 86/frs/brz drivers won't track their cars, and the stock tires give them great mpg and pretty decent grip. however, for those interested in tracking, one can pay $700 for a set of star specs and easily drop a couple seconds off their times.

^ This. Everything said here is true.

Stock vs. "stock", the BRZ is just a wee bit slower than the Si HFP. Okay... so what? This might matter a hill of beans to those who autocross or race stock class, but to the rest of us it's no big deal. A change of tires alone puts the RWD siblings ahead, so I wonder what else can make a difference? I mean, the FR-S/ BRZ have a lot of room to grow given some mild modifications; modifications I've found the car to respond very well to, in fact. But what about the Si? How maxed out is that car?

See, in this way, I see these as two COMPLETELY different vehicles, aimed at two COMPLETELY different buyers (even if you put aside the whole "FWD vs. RWD" angle). The people who buy a Civic Si HFP will likely never modify their vehicle that much. I mean, what's the point in spending the extra money for a beefed up suspension and bigger wheels if you're just going to yank them out for some Advan's and coilovers? By comparison, though, the RWD siblings are practically begging for you to modify them from stock. I'd argue the "one trim-level" approach of Scion's is done partly with aftermarket modifications in mind.

So yes, the BRZ lost. Straight up admit it. But honest journalism would dictate a rematch between the standard SI vs. a BRZ, or the hypothetical future BRZ STi vs. the Si HFP.

[Coheed]

Put the same tires on the BRZ, and it should smash it outright. Even though the civic is underrated on power slightly, and the BRZ is overrated on power slightly imho.

I have confidence in FWD and the capability. Even though many people shun it. I've smashed many AWD and RWD cars on the track in my humble sentra. Never gets old. But the BRZ should have no trouble with proper tires.

This track race would be even better with race rubber on both.

[industrial]

Originally Posted by ayau

i'm not exactly sure how this thread is already 6 pages. the civic is the faster car stock for stock. period. the numbers prove it.

once you start throwing in some aftermarket parts (tires, sway bars, etc etc), the brz/frs/86 will slowly become the faster car. however, for the purpose of this test (stock vs stock), the civic is the winner. there's no reason for people to be all upset over this video.

in japan, toyota sells a completely stripped down 86 with even skinnier non-performance tires. if we compared that with the civic, the civic would perform even better.

the great thing about the 86/brz/frs is that we all know that the tires are the weakest link, but they're great for amateur drivers because the limits are relatively low. most 86/frs/brz drivers won't track their cars, and the stock tires give them great mpg and pretty decent grip. however, for those interested in tracking, one can pay $700 for a set of star specs and easily drop a couple seconds off their times.

That is the bone everyone is picking. People read the article and say things like "the SI is faster around the track than a BRZ lol!" Is the HFP package really stock? When the WRX came out in 2002, there was a $3000 wheel/tire package available from the dealer that radically changed how the WRX performed. Would it be fair to use that in a comparo?

[FT_Monk]

Who cares if the Civic is .1 second faster at that track. Which one would you rather drive?

[rice_classic]

I was *this close* to buying the 2010 Csi (previous body style) before the 86 went on sale and then poof, decision made. I like the Civic Si but not the 2012 one. This is big statement from me because I've been a "Honda-guy" all my life and I've never owned anything else (except for my tow vehicles; Ford and Isuzu), so the fact I dropped my search and bought a 1st year car in the FRS means a lot. Either way... Doesn't matter, it's all just 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

They are both fun, efficient, sporty cars for the proletariat; and that's good for all of us.

What's ironic is that as a Honda person I've been accusing Honda of "becoming Toyota" for the last several years as a pejorative statement. Now I own a brand new "exciting Toyota" because there's nothing at the Honda dealership I want. I never thought I'd say that.


Fatoni; the next time you visit Seattle shoot me a PM. We can visit the track then I'll buy the beers and we can talk about "shoes".

[SnapOv3st3r]

Originally Posted by ayau

i'm not exactly sure how this thread is already 6 pages. the civic is the faster car stock for stock. period. the numbers prove it.

once you start throwing in some aftermarket parts (tires, sway bars, etc etc), the brz/frs/86 will slowly become the faster car. however, for the purpose of this test (stock vs stock), the civic is the winner. there's no reason for people to be all upset over this video.

in japan, toyota sells a completely stripped down 86 with even skinnier non-performance tires. if we compared that with the civic, the civic would perform even better.

the great thing about the 86/brz/frs is that we all know that the tires are the weakest link, but they're great for amateur drivers because the limits are relatively low. most 86/frs/brz drivers won't track their cars, and the stock tires give them great mpg and pretty decent grip. however, for those interested in tracking, one can pay $700 for a set of star specs and easily drop a couple seconds off their times.

Did you completely over look the fact the FR-S ran faster than the HFP SI? Stock for Stock...

The HFP SI ran .1 tenth of a second faster than the BRZ. The FR-S ran .3 tenths faster than the HFP SI.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by SnapOv3st3r

Did you completely over look the fact the FR-S ran faster than the HFP SI? Stock for Stock...

The HFP SI ran .1 tenth of a second faster than the BRZ. The FR-S ran .3 tenths faster than the HFP SI.

it is worth noting that that was a different day and with numbers that close im not sure they would count for a head to head comparison. that being said, im here on the frs forum and not on a civic forum

[SnapOv3st3r]

Originally Posted by fatoni

it is worth noting that that was a different day and with numbers that close im not sure they would count for a head to head comparison. that being said, im here on the frs forum and not on a civic forum

It was to state that on any given day, the FR-S/BRZ will run faster or slower than the HFP SI. Rather than the way ayau tried to post it (HFP SI is faster), as a blanket overall conclusion. That's the problem with some people. They try and take .1 tenth and be like...."Oh No Hands down the HFP is faster...etc", like that's the conclusion. And completely overlook the FR-S lapping even faster by even more. It's not even necessary to even change tires, because it can get it done with the OEM rolling stock. And this isn't a dyno where ambient temps can skew results. A track days time is lost or gained more so on the drivers lines and inputs to the vehicle, not the ambient temps outside, unless they are Drastically different, which looking at the vids, this isn't the difference between Summer heat, and Winter cool.