Honda salesman? More like “order taker.” The new Civic Si sedan is guaranteed to sell itself, no “product specialist” needed. After all, the stock version is already a hit. Honda can legitimately claim they’re moving them by the boatload– even if they’re assembled on Ohio acreage. And Si coupes have always done well– even when they haven’t been well done. So, offering a four door variant with a sprinkle of go-faster and look-sharper for a few more bucks is a no-brainer. Say, is that a commission check in your pocket or are you just happy you’re not selling Isuzus?
It’s easy to see why Ma and Pa America have taken to the four-door Honda Civic: it’s easy on the eyes. Well, except for the slightly revised front end, which looks like nothing so much as a Saturn Ion whittled out of a chunk of Vermont cheddar and left to bake in Death Valley. The Si Sedan is further differentiated by the inclusion of the same 17” wheels appearing on the Si Coupe (how economical!), a rear wing (how imaginative!) and some stickers on the rear doors (how economical and imaginative!). Still, better under than over-stated– especially when even the loss-leader generic-cigarette version comes with a sunroof. Oh wait, that’s the windshield.
Comfortalize yourself in the forward chairs– dressed for duty in basic black cloth with red stitching on bolstered cushions– and don’t be surprised if you smile. They’re ass-tastic! You also get Si-specific red instrument lighting and a delicate aluminum shift switch; not much visual jingle for your jangle. You’re still gazing over a foosball table-sized expanse of dashboard with the dreaded dual-zone instrument panel. With the central tach resembling the first-generation Prelude’s, and a secondary HUD-ish binnacle, this seemingly frivolous design feature actually works– if you can get past the idea of a car that thinks its part of NORAD.
Place an amorous horse in the vicinity of a frisky donkey and a short time later you’ll end up with a mule. Think of the Civic Si four-door as the similarly sired offspring of its stock and modified stablemates. Only the Si sedan’s not sterile at birth. For one thing, you get the Si’s 197-thoroughbred powerplant. The 2.0-liter DOHC four redlines at eight-grand, peak power arrives at 7800 rpm, and max torque (139ft.-lbs.) shows up at 6200 rpm. In other words, Honda’s i-VTEC technology is hard at work, trying like crazy to provide oomph down low and whee up high.
Except it doesn’t. The Si’s mill sounds fine, thanks to a growly though thankfully restrained exhaust. But for a car that weighs only 60 lbs more than its two-door sibling, the Si sedan should run a lot harder than it does. Or at least feel as if it’s running harder than it is. Despite a not-entirely-slow zero to sixty time of 8.4 seconds, the four-door seems distinctly anemic.
Credit the hard workers across the hall in the Dept. of Chassis Magic. The Si loves the twisties like a fat kid loves cake. Honda’s boffins installed a larger front stabilizer bar, tweaked the dampers and dropped in a limited slip dif. It’s all to great effect; the Si sedan retains day-to-day composure which, considering the fact that it’s a performance variant, is a genuine bonus. At the same time, the car combines tenacious grip with superb chassis control, allowing fully-committed drivers a rare opportunity to explore the nexus of high G’s and understeer scrub off.
The electrically-assisted steering is a delight, if a touch over-boosted, offering tremendous tactility and reassurance. Speaking of which, 11.8-inch ventilated front and 10.2-inch solid rear discs manage braking duties like Scotty Bowman handled the Montreal Canadiens. And if the Honda S2000’s gear change is the best ‘box on the planet (it is), the Si sedan’s is number two. It’s the low-fat Skippy peanut butter of gearboxes: light, smooth, and tasty.
The main difference between the Si sedan and Si coupe? Nothing much– save the extra portals and a couple of grand (the Si sells for about $20k). In fact, the Si sedan’s practicality is practically inescapable. Keeping the rev needle in the penthouse will cost you at the pump, but not much (23 / 32 mpg). There’s a big ass boot and enough room for four genuine adults. Honda reliability, reasonable resale, and remind me again who can compete at this price point ($21k)? VW GLI? No thanks. Still…
Honda is known for its engines. They’ve given the Si Sedan everything an enthusiast could want but a totally stonking powerplant. At the end of the day, you’re left like a greedy little girl penning a letter to Santa for a corral full of ponies. Will that stop Honda from selling the frugal, fine-handling, sensibly priced Si sedan all day long? Nope. Never mind then.
131 Comments on “Honda Civic Si Sedan Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
Where’s the safety equipment part of the review?! I counted 0 words about them.
My take on the car: ugly rear exterior tailored for american taste, flimsy plastic interior and fat chassis. The euro 3-door is alot nicer.
if they put that engine in a Fit ill be 1st in line.
im not a fan of the styling of the civic though its a bargin for the price. I would probably buy a GTI over this….that is if i wasnt 21 and my insurance rates werent higher then Nicole Richie.
Hopefully, the next facelift on this miniStarTrekmobile will simply be the Japanese version: http://www.autoblog.com.es/fotos/honda/3civic_japan4.jpg
Plus, how economical that would be!
2.0 l zippy engine, four doors, economical and practical. This is what I would buy if I ever came back to America. But for now my Alfa Romeo 147 will have to do.
I agree on the bland styling for the American tastes. I do like the euro Civic better than this one. I’d take the space ship 4 door with the 2.4l Diesel.
8.4 seconds? that’s really slow for an si. can that be right? edmonds says the si coupe is 7.2 secs. that doesn’t sound particularly fast either. can’t say i’m a fan of the styling. the euro civics look so much better. a friend has a 2006 ex sedan and it is really nice inside. very comfy.
While it has a lot going for it, the Star Trek dash, the anemic engine and bland exterior just don’t do it for me. The 2.4l from the TSX would have been a better engine choice as it delivers similar power but decent torque lower in the rev range. Considering the sort of power the MazdaSpeed3 is packing for around the same price the Si can hardly be considered ‘hot’. Warm maybe?
But it won’t matter as its reliable, has good resale value and the Hondaphiles will buy everyone they make.
Why can’t honda produce a real si by doing what hundreds of car thieves and chop shops do and drop a 3.0i 6 speed manual into it. Being rear driven would be nice too.
I’d own one by now, if the insurance quotes weren’t practically DOUBLE what they were for my Miata. The ‘99-’00 generation ruined it for the rest of us. (By being good, admittedly, and by being full of parts that were easily installable in every Civic and Integra out there.)
I think that dash is fantastic…waay cool looking, different, and actually functional too.
That being said, WHY NO HATCH! ARGGGHHHH.
Have you all seen the lovely hatchback? Not For U.S.
Plus, over 8 seconds is pretty darn pokey. What does the fit do 0-60 in? I know the latest Minivan from honda is also quicker than that. Ouch.
Eh….as a coupe, whee! As a sedan, oy! I’d drop the extra cash on a 4dr GTI just for the torque.
And Si coupes have always done well– even when they haven’t been well done.”
Do you I get the feeling you’re referring to my 2003 2-door hatch? ;D
What gear does 60 come in? I know my Mom’s RSX Type S requires a shift to third, but my 2003 (5 spd) comes in full VTEC in 2nd gear. Could that explain the lower times?
For the money….I think I’d take a Mazdaspeed3 and actually beat my Jeep off the line.
I’ve been wanting to drive one of these for some time. But they’re impossible to find at a dealer.
The RSX has a similar engine, but I’ve been holding out hope that the Si’s engine would feel at least a bit stronger in the midrange. Apparently not. But where is the 8.4 stat from? Sounds way too high.
I have sat in the coupe in the showroom. Agree on the seats.
I have driven the regular Civic sedan, and for me the dual level instruments absolutely do not work. If anything, the tach should be in the forward location, because when I’m driving a car hard that has a power peak 200 rpm from the redline, I want to know exactly how fast the engine is spinning. With the Civic’s design, the tach is much harder to keep an eye on than the digital speedometer is.
My site’s page for the Civic, with links to the most popular price comparisons:
http://www.truedelta.com/models/Civic.php
If you call the civic’s engine anemic – what do you call any other normally aspirated 2.0 engines or smaller? This engine outperforms the base 2.2 Ecotec engines and gives the 2.0 s/c Ecotecs a run for their money. This anemic engine makes more than Mazda Miata’s sports car engine and Dodges big block 2.4 liter. Heck Toyota tried to make a powerplant like this and needed Yamaha to do it for them. Now an anemic engine like that graces the Elise. If you also note the Civic Type R engine (a 200hp 2.0 mill) also sits in one of the worlds fastest production cars made – the Ariel Atom. Link
Slapping a bigger and heavier engine into a car seems to be everyone’s resolution – bigger is always better. You take an already traction and turning challenged FWD and stuff another 200lbs up there and it makes the car handle like a pig. Case in point the Scion tC – big Camry 2.4 liter engine stuffed up front.
Here’s a test – take a Caliber R/T for a test drive and throw it around. Next go take Honda Fit Sport and throw it around. The Honda has an “anemic” 1.5 liter engine in it but it lays the smack down on the big block 2.4 liter. Even outaccelerates it (look at C&D sub compact comparisons).
The wonderful thing Honda does is balance the car so it not only can accelerate but also turn. The Civic is one of the best handling economy cars on the road, same thing with the Accord, Odyessy, and so on.
anyone know how to bring a Euro-spec Civic to our shores? The hatchbacks are gorgeous, even the euro Hybrid Sedan has better headlights and tail lamps.
I have no issue with the torque-free nature of the engines in the S2000 and RX-8. But when I drove the Acura RSX, which has a very similar engine, the high-winding, gruntless engine felt out of place in the car. There just was nothing there way too high in the rev range, and even when hitting the powerband the experience wasn’t exactly thrilling. I don’t care about the numbers, I care what the engine feels like, and the RSX engine left me wanting much more.
The RSX has basically the same engine but lacks a limited-slip differential. You are only paying for the name and leather.
That darn Civic dash. I love the Civic sedan exterior, it beats most of the luxury cars, in my view. But when I sat in a Civic sedan and a GTI at an auto show, I felt instantly at home in the GTI and instantly puzzled in the Civic.
Ain’t it fun comparing the two?
Ah…the Civic Si
I think I would just buy a 3 door Hatchback Type R over this, since I live in Europe.
The dash is much nicer on the Euro version too (except on the hybrid version, since that’s the same as this reviewed here without the A4 taillights). Still Star Trek, but with better materials and a slightly different layout it looks a lot better.
…
If only I was a bit older than 21If only vehicular taxes weren’t so high around here.Btw, the diesel is a 2.2, not 2.4. Not that it matters all that much, but still.
At the last car show I went to I thought the SI was one of the few cars that I would spend real money on, and my wife would actually be willing to be seen in. Which is why it is probably what we will get next summer, if I can find one. It brings up the question of motors and why Honda’s are so astonishingly smooth and Detroit can’t seem to get within miles of them. The last couple of times driving some Detroit small boxes (ah, rentals) I was struck by how my early ’90s Honda’s were so much smoother. If nothing else, you would think Ford would have just copied a 1989 Honda engine and slapped a Ford sticker on it.
I do understand the insurance problem, a friend of mine gave up on RSX’s because he got tired of coming out to his car in the morning and seeing the heads gone…..
Dern Europeans and their Type Rs.
This would be one of those instances where a point/counterpoint or a comparison test would be great. I’d love to see Farago and Vogel go back and forth about this car, or grab one of these and a GLI and show the advantages one has over the other.
Just my two cents.
I’d still take a Mazdaspeed3 over it, torque steer or no. At least it has torque.
Something is so disproportionate abou the sedan exterior that it literally makes me almost sick to my stomach when I see them, so I try not to look. Previously I thought the 90’s Caprice was the ugliest newer car I’d ever seen. The Civic sedan is somehow “hydrocephalic” in appearance combined with no body up front and a fat woman’s rear end that I can set my coffee on.
That being said (and the coupe kicks ass, BTW), and although I generally like Hondas, I can’t get past the fact that their dealer salespeople are basically incompetent, inept, and thus undeserving of my cash. Add to that they combine arrogance with incompetence and I take my business elsewhere.
If you can get past the looks of this dog and the idiots you paid top dollar to, it is an okay value proposition.
excellent car, i sat in one recently, but didnt drive it. I have owned high strung honda products before, they are fun.
That being said, i would rather have a hatchback or a small wagon like the GTI or Mazda speed demon. Hatchbacks are very usefull, especially in a small car.
Vogel means bird in Dutch. You know, those feathery beasties…
And… in the Netherlands we get the Type R…Great car. I think Honda is great. Probably my 2nd favourite “regular” brand after BMW.
And I do have to agree with whomever said that the Fit needs this engine. That would be a spectacular car. Offer it at $17,000 and I’m in. Functionality, speed and handling….can’t beat it.
These numbers might be impressive for $15k, but my 10-year-old Dodge Neon commuter is both much faster and gets much better fuel economy. That this is the “fast” version is a joke. I learned to live with a mediocre interior and a buzzy drivetrain, especially with the cost savings, but slow is always slow, and pouring more money into this thing won’t put you in much faster territory. Plus, there are so many truly great used cars at this price point it’s a miracle anyone buys these things. Next.
The 1985 Pontiac dash is a deal breaker for me. I keep my cars a long time and I don’t see getting used to it; lots of memories of Flock of Seagulls and Duran Duran.
The 0-60 time seems like a mistake. Isn’t the stock Civic in the 9’s?
The resale on Hondas is a great selling point, but not [so much] if you drive them into the ground.
But not to worry, it will sell.
Color me a Hondaphile, I suppose. My garage contains a 2006 Civic Si coupe and a 2007 Civic sedan. My wife usually drives the sedan. I would have held out for the Si sedan, but I was impatient (bought the coupe last June) and suspected the sedan may be hard/impossible/stupidly frustrating to find for several months.
I drive around a fair bit for work and wanted something fun to drive, and the Si really fits the bill. I understand the want for more horsepower, as I still lust after the ponies under the hood of Mustang GT. In terms of daily driving, however, the Si is a fine package.
Cruise at sub-6k rpm and you are just piloting another smallish car, albeit one with wonderful seats and an excellent stereo. Run the tach up above 6k, however, and things change. The engine picks up a more aggressive note and the world passes by your more window more quickly. Don’t get me wrong, there is not a great deal of power. And to get the power that is there, you have to wring it out. And therein lies the fun. You don’t just push the right pedal and go. The revs rise and fall smoothly, melodiously. and you have to work at it a bit. The engine doesn’t rattle or wheeze or otherwise complain about the high revs, it just revs. When you grow accustomed to the car and its personality, it becomes easy to turn a short errand into a Speed Racerish jaunt.
For about $20k w/o nav, it’s a really fun ride. And the two extra doors would sure come in handy. Add Honda reliability and resale, and decent mileage, and I would expect the four door to do well.
Comfortalize – Sounds like a word that Damon Wayans’ imprisoned pseudo-intellectual character (Oswald Bates?) would use. Very funny.
I’m generally a fan of Hondas, but the side profile on this one reminds me of a ‘96 Plymouth Breeze. I’m not sure that’s a good thing.
The other problem I’ve had with recent vintage Honda/Acura engine is that they have *lousy* low-end torque compared to the late-80s/early-90s B-Series and D-Series engines.
I had a ‘94 Integra GSR (first of the round-headlight Integras). It was an excellent car (my sister still drives it), but to get at the fun-to-drive factor, you had to drive it like you stole it (hence the popularity with the “Midnight Auto Parts” set?…:-D…)
A big part of the problem is that car size/weight has grown faster than the torque output of Honda’s engines. A K20 engine in a 2300-lb. CRX is world-class. A K20 in a 3100-lb 2007 Civic is anemic.
The interior comes from the Pokeman Design Studio.
Nice little car though.
Cruise at sub-6k rpm and you are just piloting another smallish car, albeit one with wonderful seats and an excellent stereo. Run the tach up above 6k, however, and things change. The engine picks up a more aggressive note and the world passes by your more window more quickly. Don’t get me wrong, there is not a great deal of power.
This made me laugh. “It’s a slow car with nice seats. However, if you rev the crap out of the engine, it’s a slow car, moving faster than it was before.”
Just remember, the Honda minivan Pwns the SI from a stoplight. “Baby On Board” lol.
Aatos: “Where’s the safety equipment part of the review?! I counted 0 words about them.”
Apparently, editorials are limited to 800 words, thus leaving out numbers 801-804: This car is safe.
High revving engine with no torque (sorry, little torque) are best suited for lighter car. I’m not sure this sedans is light enough. The artificially high BHP number comes from the magic of high revs.
Tuned differently, you would have a regular 2.0L that red lines at 6,500 rpm, makes its 140lb.ft maximum torque at 3,800 rpm but only would have ~150 hp. Then again, this would make a Nissan engine in a Sentra, not a Honda engine.
Horses are good for marketing though. Nobody knows what torque is (even though it is what pushes the car)
In any case, I’d be more happy with the base 1.8, which sounds alot more civilised to drive.
$20 k for a car that you have to flog the crap out of the engine to get any performance? And, a 4 cylinder compact sized as well? No thanks.
For $20 k I can get a well equipped brand new Grand Marquis with a V-8 that will flat run forever, and the family will never outgrow, but then I would not be stylish or cool when I do that. Since they don't sell them in Japan or Germany, it must be because North America is inferior.
jaje: “If you call the civic’s engine anemic – what do you call any other normally aspirated 2.0 engines or smaller? This engine outperforms the base 2.2 Ecotec engines and gives the 2.0 s/c Ecotecs a run for their money. This anemic engine makes more than Mazda Miata’s sports car engine and Dodges big block 2.4 liter. Heck Toyota tried to make a powerplant like this and needed Yamaha to do it for them. Now an anemic engine like that graces the Elise. If you also note the Civic Type R engine (a 200hp 2.0 mill) also sits in one of the worlds fastest production cars made – the Ariel Atom.”
I didn’t call the engine anemic, I said the car feels anemic.
And by mentioning the lightweight Elise and featherweight Atom, you’ve proven my point.
The Cory: “This would be one of those instances where a point/counterpoint or a comparison test would be great. I’d love to see Farago and Vogel go back and forth about this car, or grab one of these and a GLI and show the advantages one has over the other.”
Robert? I’m game if you are.
I love Honda’s, but this car has some issues
1. Bleeding edge technology can increase power per displacement, but not much increase in torque. Meanwhile small sedans (like all other vehcles) have gotten much heavier.
Every engine configuration has a “sweet spot” where it works the best. VW has admitted the naturally aspirated 4-banger can’t cut it for performance “small” (3000 lb!) cars, using 6cyl and turbo 4’s.
2. I hate spoilers, I’d rather have a vinyl roof fer-krisakes. Can’t they leave it off and let people decide whethter or not to add this kerapp?
3. Honda had rep. for making no-nonsense cars, the super-sloped windshield and giant dashboard are impractical and violate Honda’s brand image. I live in Phoenix Az and believe me on 118 deg day this windshield will make the interior a living (or dieing) hell.
One more thing
4. No hatch? What is it with American auto-market. If I want to occasionally haul a large package I need to buy a Honda Pilot?! Shame on you Honda.
Ass-Tastic is my new favorite word. Let’s see, how can I work it into my daily conversations without getting slapped…
I’ll see what I can do Lynn.
taxman100–you can get a new grand marquis for $20K?! how much do crown vics go for?
i’ve been wanting a cop car, but if i could get a new crown vic with a till-ford-goes-bankrupt/36,000 warranty for $17K, i’d totally be down.
Civics, at one point elegant and cheap, have been getting uglier and heavier with each new gen since the ‘88 – ‘91 models. This particular car might have great seats, but what about that dash? The steering wheel? The front end? The Chrysler (Or is it Dodge?) Sebring wheels? Honda styling has been in the toilet since they did away with the super-low hood and cowl. Yikes.
Lyn – I was responding to Carguy who called the engine anemic and suggested as always bigger engine. My point was bigger engines in small cars upset the weight especially in FWD. The Elise & Atom are wonderful cars to drive (I’ve had the privilege to have drive both – but the Atom only with the base Lenotractor engine).
Taxman – Yeah I can buy a Mercury Grand Marquis and pimp it amongst geriatrics. And sure it may run forever b/c it’s been in production forever. Now, ever try to drive a Grand Marquis into a turn or ever take it to a road track for a driving school? Now, I’ve driven plenty a Crown Vic rental car (seems hardly anyone buys them in retail) and it’s fun and got power but it has no sport in handling – well for maybe a golden girl.
Mr. Karesh – the base RSX does not have the same engine as the new Civic Si (it does have the same engine as the pervious Civic Si hatchback). The RSX Type S has an older version that is close to the Si’s engine but not the same (as they did more tuning and improved the valve timing and tuned the exhaust to be more sporty.)
taxman100:
Ya the marquis is a nice car but it is SERIOUSLY no fun to drive.
Its about as tossable as the QM2.
Comfy for long highway trips tho, i guess. Lousy milage. If you like this car, you’d LOVE the toyota avalon. Its the Vic/ Marquis done right.
And around here, they arent 20K, except for maybe the lowest stripper with NO options. I looked for my dad.
Nice review… couple comments:
0-60 in 8.4 does seem a little slow. Not that 0-60 is everything, but we are living in an age where there are SUVs that get there in the 7s… and I think the Rav4 V6 gets there in the 6s.
I was also going to comment on the gear box thing, but it looks like it’s already been edited… well done.
jaje: “Lyn – I was responding to Carguy who called the engine anemic and suggested as always bigger engine.”
Ah, my mistake then.
Timely review, and a good one. I need to take one for a drive.
I’ve been salivating over the Si sedan since I first heard about it, you know, like you just spotted a girl you swear you’d jettison your wife for. Then she opens her mouth. Damn. Good thing you waited to hunt down a divorce lawyer.
Epiphany hits: Why would I want to abandon my wonderful Miata for this torque-less bimbo? Not for a long-term relationship, that’s pretty clear.
Sure, the back seat, larger trunk and newer everything would be nice. Good ergonomics, high reliability, maybe even capable handling, and an excellent engine, too.
But, double the insurance rates? (Thanks for the tip, Carlisimo!)
And, “Where’s The Torque?!” A little more force at the moment arm. May I please have some more, Sir?
Maybe this is why I keep visiting truedelta and comparing the Si to the MS3. The Si may be nice, but she just isn’t the full package. The MS3 may not be quite as pretty, but you still yearn just a little bit more to take her for a rumble.
Meanwhile, I’ll run out today to buy my Miata some Maguire’s.
GM death watch, Ford Death watch, DCX suicide watch, then an article about how sweet Hondas are?
What kind of website is this?