2016 Honda Civic Thread (10th gen)

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by yelsew

I would somewhat agree, but that dinky engine is not without some upsides. My girlfriend drive one with the cvt and get prius level gas mileage. Great for putting around town, plus the interior space is enormous compared to cars of the same size, the way the seats fold up and out of the way, its like a van inside.
I'd never buy the car for its power or handling though, and I doubt anyone does.

The Fit is EPA rated 29/36. The Civic hatchback is rated 30/39. Advantage Civic.

Originally Posted by Yardjass

I was gonna say the Fit has the advantage of hatchback versatility but that's basically what the new civic is too. Either way, lets make sure we get it out in the open that the non-si civic also has a pathetic, weak motor. Probably about equally pathetic when you factor in power to weight.

Can't tell if you're joking or not? The base Civic engine is a 2.0 liter 158 hp engine. It's in line with, if not more powerful, than base engines from every competitor. It's more than adequate for most normal driving.

Originally Posted by Tcoat

There are millions and millions of people that don't know what a turbo is much less care if it has one. They don't give a crap if they can get a turboed Civic because they don't want a turboed Civic. Believe it or not most of the car buying public doesn't care how fast a car is.

Yeah I don't care either, and you're trying to take the conversation somewhere it wasn't. I'm just talking about the value proposition of the Civic hatchback over a Fit hatchback. It's true that a base Fit compared to base Civic Hatchback is a $3800 difference. But if you want something "fancy" like allow wheels on the fit that shrinks the difference to only $1800.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Yeah I don't care either, and you're trying to take the conversation somewhere it wasn't. I'm just talking about the value proposition of the Civic hatchback over a Fit hatchback. It's true that a base Fit compared to base Civic Hatchback is a $3800 difference. But if you want something "fancy" like allow wheels on the fit that shrinks the difference to only $1800.

Isn't that the point of conversations to talk about various things? Should we just keep rehashing the same point?
If somebody want fancy wheels on a Fit then they want a fit with fancy wheels not a Civic. They should just get a Civic if they want extras? Not sure how that logic works since then all the manufacturers just need to make one model with 20 trim levels.

[jeffchap]

Back in 2009 I went to a dealership planning to buy a Civic Si. Asked to drive a Fit out of curiosity, as I'd read a lot about them. Guess which one I ended up taking home.



The Fit was simply more fun to drive. I got a Sport with a 5-speed and it was a great car. Sadly, it got totalled by a hail storm and I used the insurance check towards my FR-S. But that little Fit still stands out as perhaps the best overall car I've even owned, especially for the money.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by jeffchap

Back in 2009 I went to a dealership planning to buy a Civic Si. Asked to drive a Fit out of curiosity, as I'd read a lot about them. Guess which one I ended up taking home.



The Fit was simply more fun to drive. I got a Sport with a 5-speed and it was a great car. Sadly, it got totalled by a hail storm and I used the insurance check towards my FR-S. But that little Fit still stands out as perhaps the best overall car I've even owned, especially for the money.

So you were not interested in the Civic even if the price was closer due to fancy wheels?

[vh_supra26]

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=en8NIU5cQHg"]2017 Honda Civic Type R Prototype, Championship White, in SoCal! - YouTube[/ame]

[slow86]

I think it looks awesome. Can't wait to see these on the streets. I'm seriously considering buying one.

[funwheeldrive]

+30k for a fwd Honda?

No thanks

[slow86]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

+30k for a fwd Honda?

No thanks

LOL

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

+30k for a fwd Honda?

No thanks

And yet everyone has hard-ons for tarted up Golfs, Focuses and Imprezas...

[funwheeldrive]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

And yet everyone has hard-ons for tarted up Golfs, Focuses and Imprezas...

I've driven high powered FWD cars before, they are overrated IMO.

This thing must use torque vectoring or some other electronic magic to help with torque steer, right? I'll admit, I don't know much about the car other than its FWD, will cost almost as much as a Focus RS, and it has 20" wheels. I have a feeling the type R will be underwhelming, just like the new Civic Si that was released.

[Yardjass]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Can't tell if you're joking or not? The base Civic engine is a 2.0 liter 158 hp engine. It's in line with, if not more powerful, than base engines from every competitor. It's more than adequate for most normal driving.

Adequate for most normal driving and not slow are two different things. That civic is slow AF, and so are its competitors.

Originally Posted by strat61caster

And yet everyone has hard-ons for tarted up Golfs, Focuses and Imprezas...

All of which are AWD.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

I've driven high powered FWD cars before, they are overrated IMO.

This thing must use torque vectoring or some other electronic magic to help with torque steer, right? I'll admit, I don't know much about the car other than its FWD, will cost almost as much as a Focus RS, and it has 20" wheels. I have a feeling the type R will be underwhelming, just like the new Civic Si that was released.

Honda has a reputation for doing it right with a mechanical LSD in their Type-R cars, but per the article there is some torque vectoring going on in the '15 along with some funky special suspension geometry to reduce torque steer.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...t-drive-review

I'm totally over 'torque vectoring' that's glorified traction control dragging the brakes on the inside wheels, total garbage. I believe that's the primary mechanism Ford (and I know BMW) uses. Not sure about VW...

I think high powered FWD has a place, I think fun FWD does exist. Will Honda finally mix the two? Who knows. Their past type R's have been more balanced offerings from what I've read. Honda lost their edge over 15 years ago, at least they're trying to bring it back from the F1 program to the NSX to a Type-R, and that deserves at the very least an open mind.

Originally Posted by Yardjass

All of which are AWD.

Except the Focus ST & GTI.

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

So you were not interested in the Civic even if the price was closer due to fancy wheels?

Yeah, let's go ahead and compare the previous gen Fit (superior driving car compared to current gen) against the previous gen Civic (one of the worst Civics ever built) Any other asinine comparisons you'd like to comment on?

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Yeah, let's go ahead and compare the previous gen Fit (superior driving car compared to current gen) against the previous gen Civic (one of the worst Civics ever built) Any other asinine comparisons you'd like to comment on?

I am not the one saying that people shopping for a Fit should get a Civic instead. I didn't know that we were going to break it down by year and trim level either. Not to mention I was speaking to a very specific post where he went with the Fit over the Civic. Don't give a shit what years they were.
The point still remains that just because you think the Civic is "better" that does not mean that others agree or want it.