By on March 13, 2014

2014-honda-civic-si-coupe-06

Honda’s admirably quick refresh of the less-than-perfectly-admirable ninth-gen Civic has been extended to its most desirable variant.

2014-honda-civic-si-coupe-08

Summer tires are a $200 option, with navigation an additional $1,500. Or you could buy two more doors for that two hundred bucks, depending on your willingness to carry your Tweeps around. A 2.4-liter i-VTEC DOHC engine provides 205 hp and 174 lb-ft of torque, so the Civic Si won’t likely win any dragraces with the rest of the forced-induction hot-hatches. Choose your battles carefully.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

228 Comments on “Revised 2014 Civic Si Starts At $23,580...”


  • avatar
    CJinSD

    When Car and Driver tested a 2012 Civic Si sedan, it was actually quicker than any stock Focus ST or GTI that they’ve tested on US soil. Mazdaspeed 3s and some WRXs are faster, but the Mazda is out of production. Euro versions of the others are faster on Euro fuel, but that isn’t particularly concerning. Street racing is pretty silly anyway. The Si makes sense for people that keep their cars and enjoy naturally aspirated engines. At least for the moment, there is a choice.

    • 0 avatar
      Travis

      It makes how much more power than a 1997 Integra Type R? Honda can clearly do much better. They just choose not to.

      • 0 avatar
        raresleeper

        Well sure they can. They’re keeping the price down.

        If Honda adds another 50 horsepower, then you ‘ll be financing another $10K on your note.

        By the way, where can I find the same summer tires that are offered on the Civic Si?

        I paid $1K for my Bridgestone Potenza RE040’s about a year and a half ago. $200 for a set of performance summer tires is chump change and well worth it, IMHO.

        • 0 avatar
          Travis

          Keeping price down? 207 or whatever HP out of a 2.4 is nothing special these days. It’s part for the course for a completely pedestrian 4cyl that pushes the boundaries of nothing.

          That is Honda of Today. Honda of Yesterday would’ve given this little car at least 240hp.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            Peak power numebers don’t really mean a whole lot when we’re talking about an NA 4 banger. I’m much more interested in how much power is under the curve, and what that curve looks like. I’d take less peak power over a broader RPM range than a few more peak HP in a narrower range like the early VTEC cars were known for.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            Agreed.

            Another lame a$$ Civic R Type from Honda.

            Ugly as sin? Check.

            Underpowered? Check.

            Hideous dashboard? Check.

            Overpriced by several thousands of dollars? Cneck.

          • 0 avatar
            tedward

            danio

            Normally I’d agree with that statement 100%, but I find myself getting all excited by the prospect of a really peaky NA motor now that the option is completely gone. Turbos are definitely faster, but now that everyone credible has them I look back on the Si’s as a uniquely different experience from other vehicles (much as I view the RX’s.)

          • 0 avatar
            krayzie

            The have positioned the Civic Si as a competitor to the Golf GTI. DC2R type of track oriented trim no longer fits their business model. They have stopped catering to the enthusiast that wants at least an 8000rpm redline and now just another mass market copy. This is why Honda has lost its mojo and they don’t even realize it.

        • 0 avatar
          Preludacris

          That’s gotta be just the price difference between the normal tires and summers (and I bet they’re not as nice as your RE040s).

        • 0 avatar
          Scoutdude

          Sorry but 50 HP wouldn’t cost an extra $10K if they priced it as an option I could see $1K and that price giving Honda a huge profit margin.

          They are keeping the base all-season tires so the reality is that putting it as an option at $200 likely has a huge profit margin for Honda.

          • 0 avatar
            djsyndrome

            Name another car where a 25 percent increase in horsepower only costs a grand.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            For 23k you can get 300+ HP in the pony cars, considering this is an economy car, with fwd, its pretty easy to expect 23k to be at minimum mid trim level with leather, with at least 250hp.

            It shouldn’t need an extra grand simply to have decent numbers.

          • 0 avatar
            APaGttH

            @djsyndrome

            Camry SE – bump to 3.5 V6 is about $5K

            Genesis Coupe bump to 3.8 R-Spec is $3K

            Hyundai Sonata bump to 2.4 SE is $4.2K

          • 0 avatar
            Quentin

            Hummer, in order to not get garbage gear ratios in the Mustang, you have to buy the performance package that puts it around $25k. It still has junk seats at that point, so now we are at $27k for the sport seats.

            Those 300hp pony cars weigh at least 600lbs more than the Civic. The pony cars still have a power to weight ratio advantage, but some people actually appreciate a light, tossable chassis. The pony cars can handle well, but it is more beating the road into submission with super wide tires and very stiff suspensions. There is just a completely different dynamic there that someone who chooses an Si over the ‘value by the pound’ pony cars.

          • 0 avatar

            > There is just a completely different dynamic there that someone who chooses an Si over the ‘value by the pound’ pony cars.

            Outside of bigger engines and tires you can’t use anyway the pony cars don’t really have much over the typical sedan. Dragging away from the light gets old pretty fast.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            My 1st new car was a 2004 Honda Civic EX 5 speed manual with a 140 horsepower motor that had better steering, brakes, damping, suspension geometry, exterior quality and interior quality/fit-finish than this pile of $hit.

            I would not ne the slightest bit surprised if it could, despite being down 60 hp, hang with this one, and rape it in the corners.

            The icing on the cake is that it was the closest thing to a front wheel drive BMW 3 series before or since.

            With the exception of the new Accord,’which at least suggests that Honda has the stuff fit for a comeback, Honda/Acura really do have their heads up their a$$es.

            I mean…look at that dash. It looks as if the car has already been in a head or frontal offset collision.

          • 0 avatar
            mnm4ever

            @Dead – OK, I know that your shtick is to post shocking and insightful critiques, and usually I agree with you, but this one made me laugh.

            I have in my driveway right now a 2003 Honda Civic EX coupe which is identical to your first car, it only has 40k miles on it too, and has just received brand new tires, brakes, all fluids and a tune up. And it cannot “hang” with even our 2013 Civic LX with a CVT, let alone the Si. A unich has more chance of raping than that Civic. Is it a nice car?? Oh, yeah, for sure, a great little car, it likes to be revved, but the steering, handling, and braking leave a LOT to be desired. A FWD 3-series? ha, not in 2004 it wasn’t. It’s nothing even compared to the earlier Civics, the 1993-95 models were excellent, the 96-98 were a little less nice, and the 99-00 Si was the pinnacle of performance.

            The 2013-14 Si has a higher quality interior than any of them, by far, even the terrific 93-95 generation. It far outhandles the 2003. Braking isn’t even close, the new one can easily out-brake the 2003, and acceleration isn’t even close. I also think the 2003 is one of the ugliest Civics ever, but to each his own. I would be happy to let you come over and test drive our Civic to refresh your memory, and we can probably arrange a back-to-back comparison with a new Si.

            Now I would agree that the 99-00 Si is a better handler, the steering and suspension design was simply better, it had terrific feel. But that was gone by 2001. The engine was a screamer at 8k RPM, but everyone complained that it was gutless, so Honda fixed that. And 7k RPM is still way more than the turbo competitors can muster. Does the 99 look better? Oh he11 yea, much cleaner. But styling is subjective and has changed, IMO none of the modern cars look very good, and I happen to like the Si sedan (not the coupe though). And it isn’t even much bigger or heavier than the 99, considering the increase in interior room and safety. And the new Si outperforms the 99 Si in every single performance category, even while being “too soft”, which is really the main complaint of every review. All it takes is a set of dampers, maybe roll bars and you can fix that. It’s not like its hard to find tuner parts for Hondas, the dealer will even sell you a HFP suspension kit and install it.

            Oh, and the GTI is closer to a FWD 3-series than any Honda.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          I’m not up on how these cars were designed but it wouldn’t surprise me if 50hp or close could easily be cranked out of the 2.4 motor. You’ll pay for it in fuel economy and engine wear but from the OEM standpoint i don’t know if it would cost 10K per car.

          • 0 avatar
            raresleeper

            If Honda has an a-ha moment and suddenly decides to offer the J-Series 6 in a revamped Si- 10 large might be a tad high, sure.

            But yes, expect a hefty premium for that kind of an increase in power.

            And I doubt it would be just a thousand additional dollars for a Civic of that caliber.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I honestly don’t know but I do know fan boys are into mod chips for a reason. Whether said chips actually can give you even close to 50 or more usable horsepower is the $64,000 question.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            A chip might give you 50 hp in a turbo engine, at least for a little while. Getting 50 hp out of this engine would probably require the head and cams from a K20Z3. That wouldn’t cost Honda much, but the resulting engine wouldn’t meet their durability standards without going to an expensive forged crank and other pricey changes.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        Well, to make much more power without compromising drivability, they’d have to start turbocharging.

        The 2.4 can’t rev as fast as the old 1.8 or 2.0 because with its longer stroke piston speeds get too fast.

        I don’t really think the Si is an ST or WRX competitor. It’s cheaper and less high-strung than those cars. It’s a tweener — in price, performance, and drivability, in between a $20,000 regular compact and a $26,000 turbo compact. Unfortunately tweener status isn’t good for its reputation.

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          It is good for insurance rates and no longer being associated with lowlifes though. Being a favorite of car thieves and people that think they need to race at every stop light wasn’t good for the brand with people that actually buy new cars. People that live in their parents’ basements hate what Honda has done over the past fifteen years. Meanwhile, Honda’s three core models combine for about a million retail sales a year. I see quite a few Civic Sis from the previous two generations on the road here. The vast majority of them are stock, and that shows they’re being bought by adults instead of being toys for the developmentally arrested or rebuilt theft recoveries.

          • 0 avatar
            Lorenzo

            Those are very good points. Honda apparently expects to sell more than a few of them, as opposed to a halo performance model.

          • 0 avatar

            Well said. I would only add that I just don’t need more HP than this thing has; I don’t even need as much as it has. Great steering and handling are more important to me than excessive HP.

          • 0 avatar
            Synchromesh

            I beg to differ. I never lived in my parents’ basement and I don’t intend to. I have a college degree, support myself, blah blah blah. A few years back I was in Civic Si’s target market. I loved my ’00 GS-R – what Honda used to be. Then I drove the 2007 Si and realized that it is only marginally better than my then-current GS-R with design going back to early 90s. There were also several drawbacks such as those awful a-pillars that killed the view. That was the day I said to myself I won’t be buying a new Honda until they start making them like used to.

            They might have won the sales of people who buy beige toaster cars but they managed to lose most of the enthusiasts along the way. And that’s not good.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            What’s not good about it? Look at how BMW’s sales have taken off since they stopped making cars for people who care about driving. At least Honda didn’t have to start making disposable gin palaces to grow their market, and it isn’t like anyone else took up the mantle of making old Hondas. I’ve driven most of the competitive set. They all have strengths and weaknesses, none of which resemble the cars of Honda’s past that were usually set upon by apes too soon anyway. I’ll take my $780/year full coverage insurance over the envious glares of street racers any day. I have an almost daily reminder of what I didn’t choose when I drive my 8-speed, two-ton, gimmick-filled, supercharged, ephemeral company car. It makes me appreciate my Honda every time I have a chance to get behind the wheel.

          • 0 avatar
            IHateCars

            Agreed. My 48 year old brother bought one, he wanted a sporty, affordable and reliable car that he could drive to work every day and hoon on the weekends. It’s a great little car, if I could fit in one, I’d seriously consider it.

        • 0 avatar

          Si is a competitor of tC, and it has a better hoursepower thanks to higher redline (205 at 7000 vs. 179 at 6000). If only this engine revved to 11,000 rpm…

        • 0 avatar
          Loki

          Except the Focus ST MSRP starts at just $600 more than the Civic Si.

          • 0 avatar
            mkeenly

            I didn’t even consider the Si when I got the Focus ST. These cars aren’t even in the same class, and a comparison between the two makes no sense.

            Honda as a car company is really in trouble. They’re just beating their same old cars with boring sticks.

          • 0 avatar

            “Honda as a car company is really in trouble.”

            With the enthusiasts.

            As long as the company can keep selling pedestrian cars to an audience that values a pleasant and reliable commuting experience over enthusiast pretensions, you can expect the company to maintain its present course.

            As for the Acura brand, that’s a bit of a different story…

          • 0 avatar
            jayzwhiterabbit

            Except the Focus is still and forever damned by it’s cutesy-curvy, American throwaway styling. Plus the always less-than-stellar Ford reliability issues….

          • 0 avatar
            Russycle

            But the Honda will cost you about zero in maintenance. I like the new Fords, but their track record isn’t great. With everybody else going turbo, I’ll take a hard look at a 4-door si next time I’m shopping.

      • 0 avatar

        they can and they are, they might just not sell it here. Europe is getting a Civic Type R Turbo hatchback – 2.0L DI with 280+bhp.

    • 0 avatar
      brenschluss

      Having driven a ’13 ST and ’13 SI within a short span of time, this sounds weird to me. Nice as the NA throttle response is, it just didn’t have nearly the same get-up-n-go as the ST, which also happens to sound growly and fun.

      Now, which one would I trust to be worry free for many years? I give you one guess and a hint: not the Ford.

      • 0 avatar
        raresleeper

        ST is a great value, but I’ll pick Honda over the Blue Oval for overall longevity.

        • 0 avatar
          CriticalMass

          The last Focus, and likely the last Ford, my family will ever own is the one that swallowed it’s valve seat. Apparently not a rare problem, Ford’s response to all concerned was, “Oops”. Fool me once…..

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-honda-civic-si-sedan-instrumented-test-review

        The ‘street start’ 5-60 time was as fast as the Focus ST’s 0-60 time and the Civic’s 0-60 time was three tenths quicker. That it was as quick without a clutch drop as the Ford was with one suggests that the Civic’s engine is pretty flexible with a flat torque curve.

        • 0 avatar
          whynot

          Nowhere does your link talk about the Focus ST. In fact C&D was able to get faster numbers out of the Ford:

          http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2015-volkswagen-gti-vs-2013-ford-focus-st-final-scoring-performance-data-and-complete-specs-page-4

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            Read my above post. Those aren’t US cars and they aren’t using US gasoline. In tests on US soil, Car and Driver’s best ST has reached 60 in 6.3 seconds.

            http://media.caranddriver.com/files/2013-ford-focus-st-vs-2012-volkswagen-gti-comparison-test-car-and-driver2013-ford-focus-st-vs-2012-volkswagen-gti.pdf

            If someone brings over a euro-spec ST and 98 octane unleaded to run it on, it will be quicker than a Civic Si sedan on 93 octane.

          • 0 avatar
            JuniperBug

            That Europe gets better gasoline is a common misconception. As mentioned by eamiller, they just use a different octane rating system (RON vs (RON+MON)/2). The actual octane available is very similar.

          • 0 avatar
            Russycle

            Juniper, I’m guessing the US corn lobby isn’t forcing Europe to add alcohol to their gasoline.

        • 0 avatar
          eamiller

          98 RON gasoline is typically equivalent to US 93 R+M/2 rated gasoline. The additive packages may be different, but probably not in a significant way in regards to power.

          You may have a point about engine tune, but it probably isn’t a big difference.

        • 0 avatar
          Fordson

          Theoretically, with an expert driver who always has the car in the correct gear and is willing to take it to redline in each gear, an Si is as fast as a Focus ST or GTI.

          If those stipulations are not followed rigorously, it’s slower.

          A 2013 Si dynos at least 125 lb/ft from around 2300 to around 6700 rpm, and peaks at just under 150 from 4500 to 5500. Yes, it’s flat. And pretty low.

          These comments in this thread about how there is another 50 hp to be found in the 2.4L NA engine, easy!…Honda knows there’s not. They are moving toward introducing a turbocharged engine for their high-performance Civics, because they know that an engine that needs to be at 5k rpm minimum to make power is not going to meet upcoming fuel economy demands, and also they are unwilling to continue giving away 100 lb/ft of torque to every one of their competitors.

          • 0 avatar
            raresleeper

            Why not just stuff a J-Series in there? Say, the 290 horse MDX variation?

            That could be the injection that the Si needs. Problem solved (sans the weight of the motor up front IF it fits in the engine bay).

            But again, that couldn’t be offered at the same pricing the current Si’s are priced at. Honda would make damned sure that you pay a premium for a super-human Civic.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Sis have very good handling for front-drive, transverse-engine cars.

            Putting in something as heavy as a J series would completely wreck their handling.

          • 0 avatar
            rpn453

            Why would you need to be an expert driver to choose the correct gear for your intentions, and why would anyone be unwilling to approach the rev limiter during hard acceleration?

          • 0 avatar

            > Why would you need to be an expert driver to choose the correct gear for your intentions, and why would anyone be unwilling to approach the rev limiter during hard acceleration?

            Generally for an auto car which is what most everyone drives to be in that rev range the pedal has to be mashed down.

            Mashing the pedal down makes the car go really fast, faster than people who buy auto cars (ie everyone) are comfortable with.

            So they just end up mashing it halfway-ish, so that top end power isn’t useful.

            Even among the racer wannabe manual crowd it’s very rare much skill comes with the pretense.

        • 0 avatar

          > The ‘street start’ 5-60 time was as fast as the Focus ST’s 0-60 time and the Civic’s 0-60 time was three tenths quicker. .suggests that the Civic’s engine is pretty flexible with a flat torque curve.

          Quite ironic when someone limited to bench racing tries to call others out for wannabe street racing.

          A high revving engine is only worthwhile for actual racing which is rarely feasibly in everyday driving.

    • 0 avatar
      Charlie84

      Admittedly, one must compare across years, but the Civic Si is slower than either the GTI or Focus ST around VIR:

      http://www.caranddriver.com/features/lightning-lap-2013-hot-cars-hot-track-hot-laps-feature-lightning-lap-2013-complete-lightning-lap-times-2006-to-2013-page-10

  • avatar
    Travis

    Dat horsepower.

  • avatar
    burgersandbeer

    The Civic is growing on me, though for the SI I hope those V-tech stencils near the rear wheels are removable. That is not OK for an adult driven car.

    I’m not a fan of the interior design, but even that is growing on me a bit. It looks better in person than in pictures. Sometimes I walk by one and think I could live with it and it might even be a practical design, but then I see pics online and think it is a modern interpretation of a 90s video game.

    And not as powerful as the Focus ST and the GTI, but theoretically not as expensive either. I say theoretically because I think Ford dealers will work with you on the ST.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      The boy-racer i-VTEC logos, fortunately, are stickers and peel off easily.

      • 0 avatar
        Jack Baruth

        And you can send them to me for my Accord.

        • 0 avatar
          dal20402

          Wouldn’t you be bugged every time you saw “DOHC” and realized it was wrong?

          • 0 avatar
            WheelMcCoy

            >>Wouldn’t you be bugged every time you saw “DOHC” and realized it was wrong?

            I’ve read everywhere that the first and single most important upgrade is the tires. Not true! It’s the stickers and badges. I’d drive a DOHC iVTEC V6 manual Accord any day. :)

            This Civc Si doesn’t really appeal to me, but surprisingly, the stickers don’t bother me at all. I like them. What I don’t like are the housings for the fog lamps, They look like pincers that belong on the Predator.

          • 0 avatar
            Russycle

            Damn you McCoy! I didn’t even notice the fog lamp housing, now it’s really bugging me.

  • avatar
    anti121hero

    Considering how much this weighs, it looks like a jeep cherokee could beat this thing

    • 0 avatar
      SayMyName

      Were an automatic available in the Civic Si, the real race would be to see which transmission failed first.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        One set of fragile transmissions from 1998 to 2001, in large six-cylinder cars, and this is what we get in 2014. Come on, the Honda transmission joke is totally played out.

        • 0 avatar
          Macca

          Just to be clear, that 1998-2001 time frame you reference was the time frame Honda recognized in the 2006 Odyssey transmission class action lawsuit. A cursory check online reveals continued Odyssey transmission woes reported up to 2010 – apparently Honda changed transmissions in the Odyssey in 2007 to a beefier Ridgeline-esque version.

          Further investigation online reveals that the Civic, Odyssey, Accord & Pilot all have documented transmission woes as recently as ’03-’04 and of course it also effected the CL, TL & MDX.

          Granted, most of those cases are still a decade old. But knowing someone who went through four transmissions on a CL – I know they’re done with Honda even if that is ancient history. Clearly they’ve maintained a great deal of brand loyalty throughout this period, and I’m not suggesting Hondas are bad cars by a long shot.

          This meme might be worn out, but it might be recent history to many owners.

          • 0 avatar
            Synchromesh

            Actually there were some issues with 2006+ Si transmission. Something about popping out of gear on 3rd iirc. I think that might be the original reference here.

          • 0 avatar
            geeber

            I thought that the post-2004 Odyssey transmission woes were caused by the torque converter, and could be cured with a software reflash.

          • 0 avatar
            CapVandal

            I have a TL-S that has the sketchy transmission. However, I always had it serviced at the ‘stealership’.

            They replaced the transmission twice before I even noticed a problem. Both time, I went in to pick it up after routine service and they gave me nice loaners for the couple of days it took to replace it.

            If I had to pay for it or argue with them over this, I would never buy another Honda product again.

            Porsche should have done the same thing with their intermediate shaft bearing problem. The aggregate amount of angst this caused the owners is an order of magnitude worse than the Honda transmissions. You would never know it reading Porsche forums, but a hell of a lot of intermediate shaft bearings have a lot of miles on them and have not failed. For owners that have a strong emotional investment in their cars, the possibility/probability of a blown engine can be unbearable.

            Everyone has their stories, but there is a tendency with cars, like poker, to never forget a bad beat.

          • 0 avatar
            frenchy

            It wasn’t just automatics either. I used to be a big Honda fan and had an 01 Civic with a manual transmission. It broke two gears when it had 40k miles on it. A quick internet search showed that it was a very common problem. Thankfully I had just bought it CPO and it was covered under warranty. That was my last Honda, they don’t make anything I want anymore.

          • 0 avatar
            mnm4ever

            Well let’s take a quick poll… How many people got burned by crappy Honda’s vs. crappy Fords?

        • 0 avatar
          George B

          Honda didn’t just have a bad batch of automatic transmissions. They have an inherently weak design relative to the competition at Aisin, GM, ZF, etc. Honda automatic transmissions do not use planetary gears. Instead they use conventional gears on parallel axes like a manual transmission combined with clutch packs. The Honda design puts higher loads on bearings as gears try to push apart and the clutch diameters are smaller to fit the available space. On top of these weaknesses, Honda used an internal filter that wasn’t removable. These accumulated automatic transmission weaknesses are not enough to cause much trouble in a Civic with proper maintenance, but they will show up in heavier Hondas with a V6 engine.

        • 0 avatar
          mkirk

          says a Honda Fanboy who likely still gripes about how bad US cars are because his parents had a Chrysler Cordoba back in ’77 that was a “real POS.”

          This is a mediocre product when compared to the competition in a lot of ways and certainly not special in the manner the old cars that wore the Si badge were.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            LOL, try again. I drive a Pontiac G8 and previously owned two Fords.

          • 0 avatar
            mnm4ever

            So exactly how is it “mediocre” compared to the competition? What competitors are so superior in every category that they make the Si fall right off the radar?

            Not to mention, I believe this Si outperforms every other US market Si we have had in the past, not even just Civics. I really don’t understand all the hate.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          I think it was 2000-2004. I had a co worker who put 234K on an MY98 no trouble, and another going into this third transmission in on a MY02.

        • 0 avatar
          anti121hero

          I’ve got a friend who’s somewhat of a Honda aficionado and he doesn’t have much good to say about their automatics. Their on par with any other manufacturer, but he said any of their cars with a standard is guaranteed to last much longer

    • 0 avatar
      mnm4ever

      It weighs less than the Focus and the GTI, and it is larger than both of them. The Fiesta ST is lighter but also much smaller, and notoriously light even for it’s class. What did you expect?

  • avatar
    otaku

    Seems like all they really did to the exterior of the coupe was make the front end a lot uglier. I mean, are those fog lamps or tumors embedded in that bumper?

  • avatar
    NewLookFan

    Were they trying to make the front of the car ugly? If so, they succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. Did they sub the design out to Lexus? Too bad, I might own one otherwise. I know, once behind the wheel you can’t see the gruesome face, but still.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      But inside you have to look at the dash that looks like it has melted in the sun or was drawn by someone that couldn’t see straight.

      • 0 avatar
        NewLookFan

        Yes, so true. But ask Honda, they’ll tell you that we’re the only 2 people who don’t like that gimmicky dashboard.

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          There are lots of people that can’t appreciate something just because it works better. I doubt anyone would suggest you’re alone in this failing. OTOH, Honda has sold over two million Civics with this dash, a figure anyone in the market other than Toyota would love to have achieved over the past 8 years.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            The bi-level instruments portion does not work better, not by a long shot at least not if you are someone that likes to be able to see all of the pertinent info. Also making it look like it is melting does not help functionality one bit.

          • 0 avatar
            NewLookFan

            If the bi-level dashboard was such a compelling design feature, every automaker would be copying it by now. They’re not, thankfully.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            I drove an ’06 Civic with the bi-level dashboard and really wasn’t bugged by the layout at all. I *was* bugged by the poor resolution of the hash-mark fuel gauge (as I am now by my Forester’s similar fuel gauge).

          • 0 avatar
            GeneralMalaise

            But wait… mine’s bigger. It really is.

            Looks like a pretty nice car to me. I’ve owned Hondas and Fords . Honda is synonymous with quality… Ford, not so much.

  • avatar
    deliverator

    I like my 2008 Civic Si. No real problems, and I like the 8000 rpm redline. I have taken it autocrossing, once, and the instructor showed me its potential. That was fun. I really don’t mind putting premium gas in. It would be cool to have more gadgets but actually the relative simplicity of the car is growing on me. I did test drive a brand new 2012 Si once, before I bought this one, and I don’t recall getting the vtec transition effect coolness like mine has. The display of how much power you’re making was sort of cool.

    Either way, I will admit it kind of feels like a car not really designed for grown-ups. Though I’m 34 and I’ve seen other older guys driving them once in awhile. Overall I’m happy with the car. Though the transmission does have the less-than-perfect synchro shifting thing, which is really frustrating at times, but it never pops out of gear. Also doesnt have the obvious rev-hang the newer ones have.

  • avatar
    darex

    Still paying zero attention until they bring the hatch here. I don’t do sedans.

  • avatar
    LeeK

    Ok Honda, time to drop the VTEC sticker on the flank. Nobody is impressed.

    • 0 avatar
      Macca

      Haha, good point. There’s always an expiration date to when you can advertise a feature with a sticker on your car. It’s like a 80’s/90’s car with an “ABS” or “Fuel Injected” sticker. Seems goofy now that those features have proliferated.

      • 0 avatar
        Quentin

        The thing is, most companies don’t do variable valve lift. Variable valve timing is common, but lift is still quite rare. It is just starting to find its way into things like the Corolla Eco and Fiat Multiair engines as far as non-luxury, non-sporting goes.

        • 0 avatar
          Macca

          Nissan has had variable lift (dubbed VVEL – variable valve event & lift) on their venerable VQ37 engine since 2007 in the Infiniti G37 (and later used on the 370Z when it debuted in 2008). Their 5L V8 also has VVEL.

          BMW has had their Valvetronic variable lift since 2001 and Toyota has had their VVTL-i since around 2000 in lowly cars like the Yaris and now has another updated technology called Valvematic.

          Nearly a half-dozen examples over the past 15 years doesn’t seem terribly exclusive to me.

          • 0 avatar
            djsyndrome

            Toyota’s (Yamaha’s) 2ZZ was a screamer over 6200 rpm. Drove one for eight years, still miss it every day.

    • 0 avatar
      GeneralMalaise

      True. I owned an ’04 Si and those stickers sucked. Competent li’l car though.

  • avatar
    hubcap

    If you’re in the market for an ST, GTI, WRX etc. you owe it to yourself to at least go and drive a SI. It might have the power numbers of those cars but it’s performance is close and IIRC it even bests at least one of the hot hatches.

    That combined with its price (I believe SIs come fully loaded) and long term reliability make it an attractive option.

    • 0 avatar
      deliverator

      Si’s don’t necessarily come fully loaded. For example in MY 2008 you could get heated seats and leather on the high end normal Civic, but htose were not offered for the Si. Navigation was extra. You’re paying for the engine and transmission, that’s what you’re paying for. I like it.

    • 0 avatar
      toxicroach

      I test drove the SI twice like 5 years ago. I truly don’t get why it is treated like a sports car. It was slightly better than a regular Civic. Wooo.

      It’s marginally better. The amount they want go get a 6 cal Mustang or Camaro.

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      The lack of a hatch means it doesn’t get a look in with the hot hatches. I don’t do sedans, especially small ones. Utterly pointless. Plus the usual utter lack of torque. I don’t want to have to wind the crap out of the thing to make progress.

      All cars are reliable these days – time to stop harping on that one.

  • avatar
    laphoneuser

    I’m assuming that this engine still requires, or “recommends” premium fuel. Am I the only one that won’t buy a car with this pre-requisite?

  • avatar
    mnm4ever

    I like these cars, we have been looking at a leftover 2013 Si sedan with nav that so far is discounted to $22k for my wife.

    The Si needs to be revved to make power, but when you do they are surprisingly quick, they just don’t feel as strong compared to the turbo competition. And the newer ones with the 2.4L have largely solved the low end torque issue, but still I realize it isn’t going to feel as fast to the B&B that insist that every car needs 50 more HP or it sucks.

    There are 2 main benefits over the turbo competition:
    1. Honda reliablity – Save the comments about the V6/auto issues, in almost all cases the Civic is bulletproof, even the Si.

    2. Economy – You can drive it normally and still meet or beat the EPA numbers on these cars. You really have to baby a turbo to do that, at least in my GTI that’s the only way I can do it.

  • avatar
    Short Bus

    I like it. If I were in the market I’d consider it to be a potential replacement for my GTI.

  • avatar

    Far for me to intrude on the Sajeev’s turf, but I saw this photo on the same page with Lamborghini Aventador and a Benz of some kind (an SLK, perhaps). All three cars featured EXACTLY THE SAME front end element: twin scoops or “scoops” under the bumper. It was quite striking. The cars are fairly dissimilar: Civic is a common folk transport, Aventador is a supercar, and the Merc was some kind of luxobarge.

    • 0 avatar
      cargogh

      My first thought exactly: Civic’s gone Aventador.

    • 0 avatar
      Sam Hell Jr

      Dan Neil had an interesting discussion about grille and intake design in his Cherokee review. Short version is that smaller, cooler modern ICE designs don’t need the kind of higher-mounted intakes which lends itself to distinctive design.

      http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304680904579366752795455262

  • avatar
    DrivenToMadness

    “Civic Si” is kind of a brand onto itself, so I’m actually curious how many new Civic Si buyers are repeat buyers (the Honda loyalists).

    • 0 avatar
      WheelMcCoy

      >>“Civic Si” is kind of a brand onto itself, so I’m actually curious how many new Civic Si buyers are repeat buyers (the Honda loyalists).

      I do know regular Civic buyers are loyal and repeat buyers. Civic Si — that’s an interesting question. I’d guess they’d move on to an Accord or perhaps a different brand — Mazda? BMW? Probably not Acura.

      Yes, “Civic Si” has name recognition. As does Accord. I just had a scary thought. Hondas still have names for most of their line up. But if Acura, who dispensed with the names Integra and Legend in favor of letters, got into Honda marketing, would we see HCX (Civc) and HAX (Accord)? :P

  • avatar
    05lgt

    The 86 is weak because MX-5. This is weak because WRX. I wish someone would push these 2, I’d love to see the next incremental improvements that are waiting for challenges.

  • avatar
    cwatwell

    Love my ’08 Si 4 door, 135K miles so far with the original clutch. 28 MPG on winter premium, 30 MPG on the good stuff. The VTEC kick reminds me of my wonderful ’88 5.0 LX Mustang. I wish that my AC worked better, and the steering rack issue is a pain, but I would definitely buy this car again.

    • 0 avatar
      Short Bus

      What’s wrong with the steering rack?

      • 0 avatar
        cwatwell

        The rack groans when the car is at rest or barely moving and I turn the wheel. The message boards are full of complaints about the Civic steering racks, and the Accords too iirc. My Honda dealership was familiar with the issue when I brought the car in, and recommended a complete rack replacement for a mere $1,500. But one of the mechanics there band-aided it for me with some adjustments and additional lube in strategic places. That took care of the problem for 30K miles, but now the groan is back. I’m afraid to take it to the dealer again because they probably fired the poor guy for pushing me away from a full replacement! The AC problem is bigger because it’s intermittent. It will blow cold air like the Antarctic, then switch off the compressor for no good reason and blow outside temperature air. It also happens when I have the defroster on. I’m cruising along with a fog-free windshield, then the compressor kicks off and the fog starts creeping up the windshield. Of course the conditions can’t be replicated at the garage. They’ve replaced switches, recharged the unit, nothing helps. Still like the car though.

  • avatar
    kvndoom

    I like it! AND the radio is Crutchfield friendly! win, win, win!

    Hell, I liked the looks of the 2012/13 as well. 2012’s (the bastard year) are going for ridiculously low prices on the used market.

    If for some reason the family budget can’t afford a V6 Accord coupe come 2016, this might just fit the bill. Or a tC, just so I can have the practicality of a hatch with the sleek looks of a coupe.

    The Scion tC has the WORST insurance in this segment. And it’s far from the fastest, which boggles my mind. Anecdote obviously, but I don’t ever remember seeing a tC being hooned.

    As mentioned, I’d have to remove the VTEC stickers and SI badge, to greatly reduce the attention of cops and F&F wannabe’s.

  • avatar
    cargogh

    It is only 9″ shorter than an old 740 wagon. I wish Honda would out a smaller version, even it is based on a fit: but that will be another SUV. And no hatchback here. It really makes the Fiesta ST the one I’d consider, especially if it were available in a 3-door.

  • avatar
    doublechili

    I’m 52, and I bought a 2007 SI 4dr sdn new and am still driving it. I’ve never had a car close to this long since I usually get a hankering for new wheels after just a couple of years. I still enjoy driving the SI every day. The handling is great. The 6 speed MT is outstanding and a blast to work.

    I’ve had higher HP torque-monsters in the past, and this car is not as flat-out powerful or fast as them. However, it’s actually more practical and also way more fun to drive. How? The NA 4 cyl engine is awesome. While it doesn’t blow you away with power, especially in the low end, it has ample practical power for public roads, actually just the right amount. You just have to work it a bit, which is actually the fun part.

    If you want to drive it tamely you can and you don’t feel frustrated like you’re holding the car back** – it’s probably a lot like a regular Civic here. But if you want to open it up you just work your way up in the power band and then stay there, which requires a bit of technique (way more than merely smashing your right foot down as in some other cars). And when you get up in the band it’s like you just did a rolling engine swap (including the sweet engine sound). It’s a car that’s fun within the speed limit, and a blast just a little over.

    I’ll get a new car at some point, but I’ll have to give serious consideration whether I want the engine dynamics to be different since I love this thing so much. I understand the Mazda RX8 had a similar feel, but that’s not an option. And I’ll want another sedan, preferably a bit bigger (preferably a wagon), and a MT is a must. Good luck to me with that.

    **I understand the fascination with HP and 0-60 times – count me in. But isn’t it a certainty that driving a very powerful car in daily traffic will be a somewhat frustrating experience? When do you ever get to push the car? With a daily driver there’s something to be said for having more real fun in a car without the instantaneous, seemingly unlimited power. I assume at least some of the hot hatches have that fun quotient. I’d consider the new WRX but would have to test drive it to see how the engine feels.

  • avatar
    WRC555

    Type-R with SH-AWD, if Honda is really serious about a performance halo car.

  • avatar
    myheadhertz

    I just happen to have a 2000 Civic Si block on an engine stand in my living room. The Si designation didn’t mean much after 2000.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    Car and Driver described the Si’s road noise as “cacophonous”, which alone would probably be enough to push me into a GLI or GTI, given how I’d use the car. Don’t recall much praise for the steering, either, which used to be a Honda strong point.

    Otherwise, a pretty appealing car for the price. The refreshed interior no longer feels like a Cobalt, by most accounts the engine is a gem, and it will be reliable, and that backseat will certainly haul the kiddos. The back wing and VTEC badges add too much boy-racer for my tastes, but the overdone wheels on a GTI give me the same impression.

    • 0 avatar
      burgersandbeer

      Part of the 2013 refresh for Civics, and I assume for the 2014 Si as well, is improved NVH. Apparently the VTEC badges are just stickers, so you can give those and the rear wing the heave-ho.

      Michael Karesh had unkind things to say about the steering as well. Despite that, I think the Civic Si is at least worth a test drive to find out for myself.

  • avatar
    catachanninja

    My buddies got an SI, fun little car but the first thing we did when I got my altima was race them over about a three quarter mile stretch, advantage was altima

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      Either your Altima is a V6 or your buddy really, really doesn’t know how to drive.

    • 0 avatar
      30-mile fetch

      That’s not surprising. If you want to outrun the Japanese V6 midsizers in a sporty compact, you’d better have a WRX, Speed3, or EVO.

      Unless Dad has some anger issues or job stress to blow off on the commute after dropping the kiddos off at school, I’m not sure what most v6 midsize drivers do with all of the horsepower. I’d get myself in real trouble, with 270hp it would be far too easy to use the deserted center turn lane to quickly whip past the car always going 10 under the limit in my town.

      • 0 avatar

        > Unless Dad has some anger issues or job stress to blow off on the commute after dropping the kiddos off at school, I’m not sure what most v6 midsize drivers do with all of the horsepower.

        Srsly. With an auto the only way to access the power is mash the gas and quickly get into reckless driving territory. Who the hell does this?

  • avatar
    troyohchatter

    I never thought that the true appeal of a Honda’s driving experience was power anyway. Thank goodness you can still get the driving experience that Honda was long ago known for.

    You do have to go to your Mazda dealership, but it is available.

    • 0 avatar
      Dan

      Mazdas? Dead electric steering, thigh thick pillars, a beltline that stops where the headrests start, they’re as modern as everybody else in all the ways you wish they weren’t.

      They’ve still got the Honda gutlessness and road noise though.

    • 0 avatar
      WheelMcCoy

      >> Thank goodness you can still get the driving experience that Honda was long ago known for. You do have to go to your Mazda dealership, but it is available.

      I was thinking the same. :)

      Hondas of yore were fun, affordable, fuel-efficient, good looking, and had great gear boxes. The same can be said of Mazdas of today. BTW, every review I’ve read, including Alex Dykes of TTAC, mentioned that Mazda steering was pretty good.

      Anyway, this modern Civic Si doesn’t do anything for me. But Honda seems to be on the right track with their manual Accords. The V6 coupe is particularly exciting, but perhaps not so affordable or fuel efficient compared to the 4 cylinder.

  • avatar
    Ryoku75

    I don’t mind the 207hp if it means more torque and more usable power, its certainly better than the two digit figures of early Civics, but they don’t matter, just the Gran Turismo crowd Type Rs with flashy spoilers and engines unsuited for the regular driving.

    My only question is this, how many times are they going to face-lift this thing?!!!

  • avatar
    wmba

    The previous Civic coupe always struck me as a non-entity. As in no styling at all. Being driven by strangely hunched forward drivers. So this one adds the usual frightened frog front end and a huge body strake. Whoopee. That’ll sell a million.

    The regular Civic is the biggest selling car in Canada; everyone has one, and it sure isn’t an inspiring drive. Yawn. What is the USP of this Si thing again? Ah yes, an lsd. Should have one in the Accord V6 Coupe too, that’s what it’s missing.

    Honda, the company that makes very well made cars but with always some obvious flaw, from color choice to transmission choice, to non split- folding rear seats, to weird styling or dashes or wacko infotainment units. Just enough to prevent me buying. They’re a strange outfit with rigid customs.

    On the MotoGP side they seem to have cheesed off a lot of former fanboys who were once proud to own every product type Honda made. An acquaintance of 35 years refused to discuss anything Honda with me recently, crapping over their whining about spec ECUs in racing. Like a lover spurned, he won’t hear anythig good about them, and the MotoGP website comments are similarly vitriolic.

    Run by folks whose collective ear is not close to the ground and oblivious to the fact as well. They still think they’re cool.

  • avatar
    mnm4ever

    So what we have here is a non-turbocharged FWD sporty coupe and sedan with an excellent gearbox, decently tuned engine, very entertaining handling, completely livable fuel economy and excellent reliability and build quality. It is offered ONLY as a stick shift, doesn’t have oversized cartoon wheels, includes a sunroof, and the only options are high performance tires and a nav system that come as standalone options without a bunch of stupid required packages. It is offered in real actual colors, has a roomy interior with a usable back seat, and can be bought all day long for under $23k. And of course, the B&B complain.

    • 0 avatar

      Of course. It’s as if all the lovers of manual gearboxes never actually buy any real cars.

      • 0 avatar
        mnm4ever

        I respect Honda for thumbing their noses at the whiners who prefer an auto… let em buy the EX. The Si is like a club for hardcore manual fans, I am pretty sure no Si has ever had an auto. Another reason I always liked girls who drove them, you know they can drive stick.

        • 0 avatar

          > The Si is like a club for hardcore manual fans, I am pretty sure no Si has ever had an auto.

          It’s quite likely they didn’t want to bother with a bespoke auto capable of those rpms.

          Otherwise it’s actually pretty stupid. Offering it in auto doesn’t subtract from manual sales and makes the car palatable to 90% of the driving population.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            Does the auto from the TSX not fit?

          • 0 avatar

            > Does the auto from the TSX not fit?

            I think the tsx redline is ~7k, not 8k? It’s prolly a main reason why the s2000 was manual only, too. The rx8 for sure had much lower power in the auto version due to that limit.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            @ajla

            From what I was told by the Acura salesman the 2.4/auto would not fit in top trim ILX, so this bodes for Civic because well ya know…

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            The SI 2.4L only revs to 7000RPM now too. AFAIK, it’s the exact same engine as the TSX.

            I’m guessing it just doesn’t fit because even if Honda wanted to keep the “purity” of the SI by not offering an auto, going manual only in the 2.4L ILX almost certainly hurts it in that class.

            Then again, I remember being told many times that a 3.6L/6A W-body Lacrosse was not possible but GM figured out how to put it in the Impala.

          • 0 avatar
            mnm4ever

            It is no more stupid that manufacturers not offering a stick when one is already designed for the car, or offering the stick only on the lowest trim models. And it does detract from manual sales, because the stupid dealers will not order them that way, and you end up in the same boat as the Accord Sport or Mazda6, finding a manual version is like looking for a unicorn.

            I like that the Si is still purely for enthusiasts, you learn to drive a stick or you don’t get one. Even if they only do this because they don’t want to design an auto to work with the engine. :)

            Oh and the more I thought about my comment, I think I am wrong. I am fairly sure the Prelude Si was available with auto. But still, mostly all sticks going back to the beginning.

          • 0 avatar
            mnm4ever

            And if that’s the truth and it really doesn’t fit, that is even more meaningful. Many other manufacturers would have dropped the whole idea of offering that engine in that chassis if they couldn’t get the auto with it, as @agenthex pointed out, you lose a lot of potential sales over that. I imagine even more for the Acura version. Yet Honda still offers the performance version, both brands, with manual only. Can’t drive stick? Well, then buy the slower version.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I agree, but I don’t think they are taking ILX seriously. I would venture the guess the only reason the motor is offered in ILX at all is because ILX is a Civic so why not offer a slightly nicer Acura “Si” for more profit?

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            “Can’t drive stick? Well, then buy the slower version.”

            The problem for ILX anyway is that people generally don’t go for the ILX 2.0L, they go to another brand.

            But I guess if that’s the route Honda wants to go, no skin off my hide.

          • 0 avatar

            > The SI 2.4L only revs to 7000RPM now too. AFAIK, it’s the exact same engine as the TSX.

            > From what I was told by the Acura salesman the 2.4/auto would not fit in top trim ILX, so this bodes for Civic because well ya know…

            Hmm… the front track of these cars are ~2in apart so maybe, but maybe not. Another possible factor is that the Tsx auto transaxle doesn’t play with an LSD they’ve already paid for.

            They’re certainly leaving money on the table by not offering auto if the option exists.

          • 0 avatar
            burgersandbeer

            Any speculation on why Ford doesn’t offer the Focus ST with an auto? That engine/transmission combo exists in other models (Fusion, Escape, maybe more). Same story, doesn’t fit?

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            “Another possible factor is that the Tsx auto transaxle doesn’t play with an LSD they’ve already paid for.”

            Unless they recently added it, the ILX 2.4L doesn’t offer a LSD like the SI. It must be those 2 inches.

    • 0 avatar
      kvndoom

      I’m not complaining… I’m VERY glad this car exists. And it soldiers on and sells well enough to stay in production, even in spite of “enthusiasts” because it’s an affordable sporty car that has a record of outstanding reliability. Sad as it is to say, it’s the “ricers” keeping the manual transmission alive (even if on life support) in this country, which is why the cars with these kinds of options are always compacts. The larger cars? well those “enthusiasts” talk a good game but duck their tail between their legs when the wife says she won’t drive a stick, so we get the Accord Coupe (with all of 3 colors) and nothing else unless you want a stripper with plastic hubcaps.

      TL;DR the ricers at least put their money where their mouth is.

      • 0 avatar
        mnm4ever

        well of course you aren’t complaining, look at your avatar. :)

      • 0 avatar
        Short Bus

        I don’t see a whole lot of “ricers” driving newer Hondas these days. At least not the type of person that the label applied to 15 years ago.

        • 0 avatar

          It’s pretty sad, actually. But what’s interesting, the remainder is very much hardcore in the same way lowriders are, at least in my area. A month ago I went to AutoZone in Los Lunas to grab a piece of 5/16 fuel hose, and there was a red Civic parked in front: nicely lowered – not excessively, maybe 20 mm – and NOT having idiotic opaque tinting. And it had one little sticker “JDM as F*CK”, with the green-yellow book symbol for the asterisk. I’m sure that driver knew he’d lose a stop-light race to about anything, and didn’t care.

          • 0 avatar
            Short Bus

            lol, that’s awesome. I admire his dedication.

          • 0 avatar
            jconli1

            That one (the yellow-green symbol) always throws me for a loop… it literally means “inexperienced young driver”. I guess someone saw one on a car in Japan and thought it would be cool to put on their US car and it caught on? I always imagine them with a UK or Canadian “L” plate instead.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoshinsha_mark

            Guess I’m getting old.

    • 0 avatar
      Ryoku75

      Monthly face-lifts aside these are probably fine cars, I’d take one over an FRS easily due to the better engineoverall quality.

      I see riced modern Civics from time to time, I know of one with false pace-car lights on the roof amongst other tasteless touches. Though certainly more riced out junkers from the 80’s-90’s.

    • 0 avatar
      Scott_314

      Haters gonna hate, but the number of critics on here that have actually driven an Si Coupe is probably nil. I had a chance to spin one around a parking lot, and it’s a fun car.

      But it is $31,500 in Ontario, taxes in, so I didn’t see the value for myself.

    • 0 avatar
      burgersandbeer

      It also has a mechanical LSD, another item enthusiasts are always pining for.

      I had a similar comment in the review for the Lexus IS250 regarding the smooth NA V6 that everyone wishes manufacturers would sell instead of Turbo I4s. People are never happy…

  • avatar
    Clarence

    Isn’t the Accord Sport a lot more car for about the same money? My ’07 Si is going strong at 120,000 miles, but I don’t think Honda has done enough to keep the Si competitive over the past seven years.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      Sure, if “more car” (and the resulting 400 lbs or so of weight) is what you are after.

      The Accord Sport is also lacking the Civic Si’s moonroof. If it only had the moonroof it would seem like the perfect package of options, but losing the moonroof is a significant bummer in a light-starved place like the Pacific Northwest.

    • 0 avatar
      Short Bus

      Yeah, but I’m going to guess that this decision will come down to what kind of driving experience you want. The Accord is plenty fast, capable, and competent. But I don’t think it can provide that same agile sport-compact experience the Si can.

    • 0 avatar
      mnm4ever

      If you are looking for a larger car then yes then I think Accord Sport is a better buy, and I do really like that car. But the Si is about 300 lbs lighter, a solid half second faster 0-60 and a smaller package overall. IMO its more about the image, the Si is obviously aimed at the younger crowd while the Accord Sport is geared towards an older buyer. Honda marketing would probably want ppl in their 20s buying the Si then graduating to the Sport when they have kids.

  • avatar
    Jeff Waingrow

    My 1952 Honda Civic Si is better than anything made today. I get 67 mpg on regular, and that’s with racing from light to light. Never repaired anything. Car has been perfect. Seats still look like new. My friend timed me at 4.5 seconds from zero to sixty, and that’s with a load of firewood in the trunk. Woman constantly stop me to ask about the car. Most guess it’s Italian and expensive. A guy offered me $25,000 for it the other day, but I turned him down.I’m not that stupid.

  • avatar
    Cubista

    WHEN DOES THE V-TEC KICK IN, YO???

  • avatar
    omer333

    I keep going back and forth on getting another Si sedan when my Crosstour’s lease is up. I really wish I kept my 2010…

    • 0 avatar
      mnm4ever

      I almost bought a 2010… what is the big difference between the 2010 and the new ones?? If anything, the new one has “fixed” any complaints about the previous generation. Now if you were pining away for a ’99 I could see it.

      • 0 avatar
        omer333

        The 2010 and I want to say the 2011 Si’s were the last years of the high redline 2.0 litre engines. Only 197hp and 135tq, but you could hit 8000rpm easy.

        And it was a glorious sound indeed.

        Now, the redline isn’t as high, but there’s more torque. Which is nice to have in the Monterey Bay area. Y’know hills and all that.

        • 0 avatar
          mnm4ever

          True, they lost the 8K redline. But traded it for a 7K redline and an extra 30-40 ft lbs of tq, which is a lot more usable. And 7K is still pretty high, I wonder if they can be tuned for another 500rpm or so on stock internals?

          Most of the people complaining about this car just don’t get it and really never will. I KNOW the turbo engines feel stronger and can make more power, I even chose a GTI over the 2010 Si when I was shopping specifically because I wanted that low end grunt feeling. But I can still appreciate the different feel of a high revving NA engine and Honda still has a winner with this K24. If they had this Si when I was shopping I would have gotten it instead of the GTI, and I wouldn’t be selling it now like I am my GTI.

          • 0 avatar
            Quentin

            What are you replacing your GTI with? Some days I really miss my MKV. Other days I’m so glad it is gone.

            I 100% agree, btw. I loved the GTI for what it is. I also love that Honda offers/ed a high revver with a completely different character. What a dull world it would be if we only had one way for performance driving.

          • 0 avatar
            omer333

            I think a company called Hondata has a tuning module/program for the Si 2.4. If not them, I’d wager Mugen, DC, and Skunk have some tricks up their respective sleeves.

          • 0 avatar
            mnm4ever

            I am looking at the 2015 Mustang, waiting to see one in the flesh and find out how to pricing end up.

            For now I am just selling the GTI, we have 2 other paid-for cars already, and we may end up with our daughter’s car when she goes to college. Don’t want to make any decisions until we see how that situation plays out.

            I also have my eye on an old Firebird and I have always wanted a classic muscle car. Its a local steal of a deal, I might end up with that too. I know I am all over the map!

  • avatar
    Ryoku75

    People must be spoiled or something, does anyone seriously want 257hp going to the front wheels along with a tacky spoiler?

    I think Honda needs to take that 207hp engine and stick it into the Fit, it’ll feel like one of those “Tegy swap CRX’s” the ricers fantasize about while providing something akin to a real hot hatch.

  • avatar
    cheeky.monkey

    As some have already alluded, it’s a little hard to explain the appeal of this car to someone who hasn’t driven it, mostly because on paper it loses out to just about every hot hatch on the market. However, the reality is quite different: the Civic Si can be a great choice if you are not overly fixated on 0-60 times. I am 36, and was looking for a fun commuter that can hold its own on an AutoX track but also accommodate a car seat in a pinch. My previous car was a 2009 GTI that I never bonded with, so I narrowed down my choices to an S4, WRX, and the Civic Si, which I also poo-pooed due to its power shortfall. In fact, I was all set on getting my second WRX, but then actually drove the Si and was immediately sold:

    – It has a jewel of an engine that revs up to 8000 RPM (fuel cutoff ruins the fun at 8300rpm) and sounds great. I personally don’t find VTEC to be anything special, but it does make a fine racket when it comes on around 5200 rpm.
    – Lightweight. Only weighs about 2900lbs, so a WRX/GTI is about 400lbs heavier.
    – Ride is firm, but not punishing; I find it to be a good compromise.
    – A proper mechanical LSD, no electronic gimmickry here.
    – The 6-speed manual gearbox has great feel and is more fun than a barrel of monkeys.
    – Outstanding build quality. My 2009 with 70K doesn’t have a single rattle.
    – Very good interior room due to the funky but efficient packaging. The trunk is absolutely cavernous for a compact.
    – Once you get used to the tiered dash, it actually makes a lot of sense and allows one to easily read the speed without taking eyes of the road.
    – Excellent ergonomics; the car feels like it was designed by actual humans who tried to think things through instead of just throwing a bunch of buttons on the dash and calling it a day.
    – Not half-bad standard stereo
    – Good fuel economy.

    There are some downsides, to be sure: the steering is rather numb, the rear visibility is atrocious — the new ones have a back-up camera standard — and the styling is definitely an acquired taste (I choose to think of it as “distinctive”). Still, it’s a car that does so many things well that I am convinced that the majority of people who talk sh*t about the Si have never actually driven one. I highly recommend trying it out if you are in the market for a sports sedan or a hot hatch.

  • avatar
    EX35

    It seems paying a few grand more for a 2015 WRX is a no brainer. The chassis, suspension, drivetrain, and steering are in a completely diffeent class. Am I wrong?

    • 0 avatar

      Always that “few grand” fallacy.

    • 0 avatar
      burgersandbeer

      Yes, you are wrong :-)

      The 2015 WRX looks like a great car, but it definitely isn’t a no brainer. Before talking about the car itself, a few grand in this price class matters. Someone will probably say “if a few grand matters that much, you shouldn’t buy a new car anyway.” There might be some merit to that, but it isn’t how people buy cars. Besides, everyone has to draw a line somewhere. Besides the initial purchase price, I would expect the care and feeding on a WRX to be considerably more expensive than on a Civic Si.

      As for the car itself, I think the only thing anyone not in the automotive press knows for sure about the new WRX is it has more power than the Civic Si. There is lots of talk about how they benchmarked 911 steering, but that doesn’t mean they hit that mark. With so many bad EPS systems out there, I’m skeptical of anything I read about steering feel on a new car.

      The chassis and suspension on the WRX are supposed to be very tight, with plenty of reviews saying it rides rough as a result. There is also the road noise issue. If there is any car that can make a Civic sound quiet, it’s a WRX. Civic Si might be a better balance for daily driving, depending on preference.

      The WRX shifter is supposed to be much improved, but I would need to try it for myself. Honda has an excellent reputation for manual transmissions. Subaru – not so much.

      2015 WRX looks very promising, but this is far from a no brainer.

      • 0 avatar
        EX35

        C&D just did a full review of the 2015 WRX sedan.

        You’re telling me you wouldn’t pay $4K more for this?

        50:50 bias
        268 HP
        258 lb-ft at 2000rpm
        0-60 in 4.8 sec.

        “Highs:
        Superb steering and body control, sports-car grip and acceleration, robust drivetrain, it’s not front-wheel drive.

        Lows:
        Jumpy throttle, lumpy ride, some turbo lag, tire noise, just look at it.

        Verdict:
        A better-handling WRX retains the soul of a rally car.”

        • 0 avatar

          > You’re telling me you wouldn’t pay $4K more for this?

          ~20% higher price for ~30% more power is about how it generally works. Not everyone buys the V6 over the I4.

        • 0 avatar
          LALoser

          I’m a fan of the WRX/STI, Evo/Ralliart…and can’t wait to see/try the new Golf R. But counter to many, I am not a fan of hatchbacks. Old notchbacks were cool tho. Bought a new Plymouth Turismo in ’86. Remember those?

          • 0 avatar
            cwatwell

            Had an ’83 Charger 2.2. Great car until the idler switch on the carb went south and starting dumping gas into the engine, which sent the tach into the stratosphere and flames out of the carb and the exhaust. It was like driving the Batmobile, which I recall was a Chrysler too. Hmmm……

      • 0 avatar

        > The chassis and suspension on the WRX are supposed to be very tight, with plenty of reviews saying it rides rough as a result.

        Both are still fundamentally Civic and Impreza. Just as one of those isn’t unarguably better than the other, neither are the souped up versions. WRX has a bit more performance for bit more money; buyer’s discretion whether it’s “worth it”.

        • 0 avatar
          EX35

          yeah, 4.8 sec and 0.95g is just a “bit more” performance. I don’t know about you, but those sound similar to Civic EX numbers. I’m saving a boatload of cash for practically the same performance!

          • 0 avatar

            > yeah, 4.8 sec and 0.95g is just a “bit more” performance. I don’t know about you, but those sound similar to Civic EX numbers. I’m saving a boatload of cash for practically the same performance!

            Skidpad performance is largely in the tires. This is why bench racers are the worst enthusiasts ever. Why even buy a car.

          • 0 avatar
            EX35

            you’re right, i’m sure if we put the same wheels/tires on both cars, we would have the same result.

          • 0 avatar

            > you’re right, i’m sure if we put the same wheels/tires on both cars, we would have the same result.

            Do you even know how tires work? I thought you read car magazines?

      • 0 avatar
        Power6

        Given it is 4k more, and even then that is the base model WRX, figuring for feature parity without looking closely you are spending even more probably for a higher model.

        The WRX is clearly a more developed automobile off of the Impreza chassis. The Si is springs/shocks/bars and a motor. The WRX has wider track and fenders, aluminum pillow ball arms with extra caster, firmer bushings, extra chassis structure bigger hubs and bearings…you get the idea. Its not just AWD and turbo you are buying.

        Now the current WRX is less so other than the wider track suspension, but pretty sure the 2014 WRX already outperforms the Si in all cases even if it is a bit softer in the corners.

        The Si is the best Civic there is if you are going to buy a Civic. I found the previous gen fun to drive, but myself I could never get over the VTEC-ness it was shades of my old GS-R you don’t have any usable power in normal daily situations.

        Now this new WRX Subaru has given up on “and it rides nice too” they have given the kids what they want. 300+# spring rates on a stock car this is serious stuff. Of course it is going to ride a bit rough, this is not a compromise car any more they are committing to handling. Should be fun. And way beyond the aggressiveness of a Civic Si. But it does cost a bit more of course more money buys more car, should compare the Si to the Fiesta ST.

        Interesting tidbit, The boxer motor allows a “front steer” steering rack like a RWD car, which Dan Edmunds says gives better steering feel in his suspension walkarounds. All transverse motor FWD cars have to have rear steer racks due to packaging the drivetrain. So you start off already with worse steering feel. There are other factors I’m sure but interesting.

    • 0 avatar
      WRC555

      For some people, the end(overall performance) does not justify the means. Drivers used to the manual Honda transmissions find the Subaru gearbox less than desirable.
      Being a conservative and safety-conscious driver myself, I am forced to keep driving the WRX, for its full-throttle cornering capability. :)

    • 0 avatar
      mnm4ever

      Yes, you are wrong. Not everyone wants a WRX, and not everyone is shopping for cars based on ultimate performance. A WRX is a great car, amazing performance bargain, for sure. But for a daily driver it is loud, a bit harsh, gets lousy gas mileage, will cost more to maintain, insure, and repair, is not as well screwed together and doesn’t have the bulletproof reliability reputation of the Honda. Not to mention, a few grand puts it in a totally different price class for most people. You can almost always get a grand off a Honda, sometimes more, not so much with the WRX.

      • 0 avatar
        Power6

        You can pre-order a 2015 WRX from Heuberger Subaru, $500 over invoice. Once the demand is satiated discounts are typically not a problem from the local dealer. I paid about 1k over invoice for my 2009 WRX, about a 1k off sticker or so IIRC.

        While I agree the Subaru is probably not going be as reliable as a Civic, if you want a WRX and you are buying new, take care of it, change the oil, service it etc. I don’t see any reason you could not drive for as long as you’d like to with minimal maintenance costs.

        • 0 avatar
          mnm4ever

          As I said, the WRX is a great car, no doubt. I am just saying that not everyone chooses a car based on the maximum performance.

          The Si gets better gas mileage, is cheaper to maintain and insure, is quieter and more comfortable to use for commuting, has more interior room and a bigger back seat, and is less expensive to buy, and is still fun to drive. Its just an EASY car to own and meets the needs of people who care about other things besides 0-60 times.

          This sounds like exactly the same comments that the FRS/BRZ gets. This car is essentially the sedan equivalent to the twins.

          • 0 avatar
            Power6

            Yes I think we agree, if you have less money and don’t mind less performance buy a Civic Si.

            I did not find my WRX uncomfortable to commute in at all, it is a very docile and regular car the ride is softer than a Civic Si. Plus I had a hatch which fits all sorts of stuff. And the AWD so snow was fun instead of dreaded. In fact the Civic VTEC is more annoying to have to shift around. In the WRX just plant the foot and you are gone. From my prespective the WRX makes a better daily driver.

            I understand you may be referring to the new model, which is reported to have a more aggressive suspension and is sedan only. So the jury is out on that. I had a lot of parts into my WRX eventually, with a stiff but *very* carefully tuned (custom valved Bilstein) suspension, it was pretty freaking ideal for me, just comfortable enough but a true handling setup. Would be cool of the WRX was something like that.

          • 0 avatar
            mnm4ever

            Or maybe it’s for people who want better gas mileage or cheaper insurance or cheaper long term upkeep or a bigger back seat. Not everyone needs a hatch to haul “all sorts of stuff” and not everyone wants a turbo engine.

            Like I said, if you care more about ultimate performance than anything else, then sure, the WRX is an excellent choice. But can’t you even imagine anyone having different priorities than yourself??

            This is why we have choices. The car world would be a pretty boring place if we all drove the same thing.

          • 0 avatar
            Power6

            These old threads, once you get going in a good conversation they are stale…coo, you got back to me

            I could ask the same of you, can you imagine anyone with different priorities?? I wasn’t saying anything of the sort, I was challengine your baseless assumptions, that somehow a Civic Si is a practical daily driver while a WRX is not. Its what I like to call “Making Shit Up on the Internet” and many people do it.

            You name a number of things about the WRX being so much more impractical and extreme of a daily driver.

            Do you know the Si has lower insurance than a Civic Si? I paid the same $600/yr for my WRX I do for my 2001 Lexus ES. Cheaper civic attracts younger buyers pushes risk and theft profile up. WRX has an exceptionally mature and high income buyer base.

            Do you know it has a bigger back seat? I only drive the coupe and that certainly had little back seat room but the sedan is longer I know. They gain a couple inches in the WRX for 2015 using the new chassis.

            I’m the fist crtic of Subaru turbo motors, but given the issues they have had, if you buy one new and change the oil with synthetic, you are fine. You might want to change the diff fluids after 5-10 years. There isn’t a big expense difference in maintaining. What you are talking about is more like “risk” but none of that is guaranteed.

            I guess if a sporty model of a compact economy sedan is considered “too extreme for daily driving” for you fine we’ll disgree.

            Bottom line, I think the Si is great at the price but given a few more bucks I would buy the wRX and could not see who wouldn’t if they want a great performance bargain with plenty of daily livability. You might be the only one in the country who thinks the plebian WRX is too extreme.

          • 0 avatar
            mnm4ever

            haha yea this one has dragged on a bit. But I will give it one more response. Actually, I have said several times that the WRX is a great car, really amazing performance value. But I see the value in BOTH cars. I was responding to the original comment (not even by you) that implied that there was no reason to consider the Civic when the WRX was only a few grand more. And I think that there are several very good reasons to NOT buy a WRX: gas mileage, back seat room, long term reliability and costs associated with driving an AWD turbocharged car.

            I will admit I cannot confirm that the insurance is cheaper, as that can vary greatly by driver and location. But I do know that my friend pays a lot for insurance on his WRX, and when I checked on insurance for an Si it was cheaper than my GTI which is still cheaper than his WRX. I can definitely confirm the back seat is bigger on the Civic, at least compared to the 2014 WRX and 2014 Impreza. The Si definitely gets better gas mileage. Is the WRX unreliable? No. But you don’t have to go home and change the oil on your brand new Si if you want it to last. It doesn’t take any special attention, as I said its an EASY car to own. Like you said, its risk that may never matter, but to some buyers its just the easy choice to get a Honda.

            And lets get this straight, I never said the WRX was too extreme for ME. I was just pointing out that there are a lot of people for whom performance is 3rd or 4th on the list of why to choose a car. They aren’t going to ever go to a track, or ever worry about having to change diff fluid, or whatever. They don’t care if the WRX has more HP or AWD, actually to someone who cares about gas mileage and maintenance costs, those are negatives.

            So I like both cars, I can see why you would buy a WRX, and I can see why people buy the Si. I can appreciate a lot of different cars that might not appeal to me personally, but I appreciate the choices we have and can see the benefits for many of them. I want a new Mustang GT, but I can even appreciate the Prius and the Leaf.

  • avatar
    Compaq Deskpro

    I won a stop light grand prix with a Honda Ridgeline in my Crown Vic yesterday. Not an impressive victory, but one nonetheless.

  • avatar
    slavuta

    And no one here has mentioned Mazda3 with 2.5L, which has less hp but similar torque
    TORQUE 185 ft-lbs. @ 3250 rpm
    HORSEPOWER 184 hp @ 5700 rpm
    Much better mileage: 28/39 and probably as fun to drive. Also Mazda now has highest safety ratings.
    So 2014 SGT goes 0-60 6.6 and 2013 Si was 6.1. So, may be now 5.9 – the whole half seconds no one will notice.

    • 0 avatar
      mnm4ever

      It is not as fun to drive, and you can only get a manual on the lower trim models. It isn’t a bad choice, and to each his own, I just didn’t like it as much.

  • avatar
    omer333

    Ok, now I get the Si’s front-end/foglight design, it’s taken from the Civic Type-R.

    http://www.speedhunters.com/2014/03/meanwhile-back-real-world/

  • avatar
    fttp

    Agreed.

    Another lame a$$ Civic R Type from Honda.

    Ugly as sin? Check.

    Underpowered? Check.

    Hideous dashboard? Check.

    Overpriced by several thousands of dollars? Cneck.

    ———————————————————-

    Marginal brakes? Check.

    Doughy, artificial steering? Check.

    I honestly don’t know how Honda stays in business. Can they really be coasting this long on their “reliability?”

  • avatar
    drobbins

    I just purchased a 2014 Si Sedan in Orange. Love the car.

    Test drove MK7 GTI, Corvette C7, Fiesta ST. I was looking for something that spoke to me.

    MK7 GTI is an extremely capable car, almost a supercar of hatches, and yet I was doing very illegal things even on the test drive. It’s like a caffeine buzz, always wanting you to dig into the boost and go too fast for your own good. Much improved over the MK6, which I owned. Could not fault it, other than I only truly enjoyed it when doing inappropriate things in the car.

    Corvette C7 is nice, but it’s $65K optioned the way I like it. Relaxed ride when you’re just cruising around, which is good. Only two seats. So, maybe a good third or empty-nester car. You feel good driving it, though. Poor visibility.

    The Civic Si is pretty special… it has ‘charm’. The Fiesta ST had some, and the Civic Si has more, and much more room, much better build quality. Great seats, lovely shifter, smooth and linear engine. You may be commuting from point A to point B, but what you’re really doing is enjoying that engine and the supple suspension, shifting and happy. It is relaxing, yet delightful to drive. Exciting without getting you tense. Interior ergonomics are great. It’s the car I’ve felt most at ‘home’ in, having owned G35, WRX, S2000, 335is and also currently leasing a BMW X1 28xi. I will drive it for a year or two and then my daughter will inherit it as her first car.

    To understand the Si, look at it as a Fiesta ST that is not a sub-compact, is built better, is all motor, is much more enjoyable to be in, has excellent safety ratings, and gives you what you really want when you get a sporty car, which is driving enjoyment. It’s a car that is sporty but that you would be comfortable having your daughter drive. It’s a car you’d want someone to drive so that they can understand those special qualities that make driving fun, like a shifter that is a joy to use, an engine that is a joy to rev, and it’s a car that you will recommend to those who might otherwise not understand the charm of driving a car that you can connect with so directly. This is what you’re paying $23K for. You’re not paying for the specs. You’re paying for the experience and the fact that finding what the Si offers is quite difficult these days.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Lou_BC: @redapple – interesting. “An acre of mature trees can capture 2.6 tonnes of CO2 per year.”...
  • dal20402: OK, that’s a new one, but taking it at face value… (1) If it is actually possible to engineer a major...
  • dal20402: My state imposes a registration surcharge for EVs that is quite a bit more than the gas tax savings I...
  • j lu: “Though your author would argue that there’s nothing luxurious about nixing built-to-order...
  • RHD: When you have solar panels, charging is basically free.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber