By on November 24, 2015

civic-6mt

A purported screenshot of a Honda ordering screen over at CivicX shows the new turbo-powered, tenth-generation Civic will be made available with a six-speed manual transmission starting next year.

The only engine available with a row-your-own box for this year’s Civic is the naturally aspirated K20 2-liter four that cranks 158 horsepower — 16 horsepower fewer than the turbocharged mill — in the base LX model. Starting with the EX-T model, Honda is planting its 1.5-liter turbo into many of its trims with a CVT only to start.

The recently announced Civic Coupe will get the same powertrain options as the sedan — manual only on the base model, CVT everywhere else — when it goes on sale in March. It’s unclear if the coupe would receive a mid-year update to add manual transmissions.

It’s unclear if the announcement that a manual would only arrive for 2017 would have any impact on the coming Civic Si’s powertrain.

Honda has already announced that the 2018 Civic Type R — when it will be available in the U.S. for the first time — will be powered by a 2-liter turbocharged four. That could leave the Civic Si with a variant of the 1.5-liter turbo four with VTEC (from Europe) or Honda’s aging 2.4-liter naturally aspirated four.

Assuming you don’t want to wait until next year for a third pedal in your turbo Civic, there’s always “sport” mode?

2016 Honda Civic Sedan

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

31 Comments on “New Honda Civic Turbo Will Get Manual for 2017 Model Year...”


  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    As usual, whoever typed that page in the screenshot doesn’t know how to use an ellipsis.

  • avatar
    sportyaccordy

    I am hoping 2017 will bring some non-Crosstour body styles too. My only hope for a Honda beyonda the 2015 MY is a Fit with that 1.5T, and even that is hard to look at. Hopefully they put the 2.0T into the ILX. That’s really all that interests me from HMA at this point.

  • avatar
    GermanReliabilityMyth

    I can imagine a sassy front passenger hitting the the ECON button while the Civic is driving up a steep hill with a full trunk and the AC on for a lark. Kind of like the Subaru driver-bun-warmer-secret-switch game.

  • avatar
    Zackman

    How in the world will avid manual TTAC’ers buy these? They only buy used, and NO TTAC’er EVER buys anything new!

  • avatar
    JMII

    Is the 3 door hatchback coming? Because Civic + Hatch + Manual + Turbo = pretty much my ideal of a perfect car. Sure I can but such a car now, its called the Golf, but I’ve burned by VW once already.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    In one redesign, the Civic seems to have gone from a dull rival of the Corolla for left-brain-only honors to something with real appeal. A practical stick shift turbo sedan with decent handling and a probable 0-60 time of about 7 seconds priced in the mid-20s? Not bad.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    It all makes sense seeing the once vaunted-for-reliability Honda take a major hit in Consumer Reports latest Reliability Index, where the Civic received a prominent black eye.

    If they’re going to throw away the 40 year, hard-earned reputation for rock solid reliability with the Civic, go all the way down the well with a more-likely-than-not-problematic turbocharger attached to their appliance.

    Turbos cause many more problems than they resolve.

    Tsssk tsssk, Honda.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al From 'Murica

      Yeah, thats probably why 18 wheelers are always breaking down.

      • 0 avatar
        stuki

        Compared with normally aspirated marine diesels, they are pretty darned unreliable and expensive to maintain……

        Some of those hand cranked soot makers have been in continuous fishing fleet service, in locations where no diesel mechanic has ever set foot, since the 60s. Run out of diesel? Press some oil out of your catch and keep ticking….

        For a more direct comparison: Despite the kind of materials and production standards, as well as manufacturing tolerances, that prevailed around WW2, old M6 diesel trucks are still infinitely less problematic than the latest class 8 engines. Despite much less predictable service requirements. While the Soviets, seemingly content to hand hammer combustion chambers for their trucks out of prerusted cast iron cookware, still get almost infinite hours of service out of the engines. Despite them spending half their lives submerged in Siberian mud.

        And, speaking of service requirements, 18 wheelers, as far as road vehicles go, represent the absolute best-fit for turbo charged engines. Constant load close to peak output, and with stupid expensive transmissions making every saved downshift under load up a hill a meaningful savings.

        Passenger cars exhibit none of those advantages. They spend most of their time at a fraction of marketing (and comfort) mandated peak power, where the turbos aren’t doing much beyond mandating lowered static compression and adding complexity. All the gains are coming from the engines’ ability, after a second or two, to pull from lower rpm: hence allowing for epa friendly ridiculous over gearing.

        In Europe, where people accept less peak power, turbos (and their functionality wise turbo squared, turbo diesels), are more sensible, as more time is spent at their sweet spot, similar to the case in 18 wheelers. But in the US, the 60-75 peak hp that is strictly required from a flat torque turbo engine in a compact passenger car, just won’t sell much. So, we end up with a class of engine with a narrower sweet spot, spending 95% of it’s time further away from that spot. Rendering the final product at best no better than a NA engine with even half the costly over engineering applied to it.

        But the added degree of freedom provided by those fans, does allow for tighter optimization for simplistic tests like the ones the EPA uses. And, as every indoctrinated drone just knows in their degreed little hearts, the EPA, lawyers and government bureaucrats are all there to save Gaia from evil people with the audacity to actually know stuff beyond childish rules and chaning “iiiiits the laaaaw…”

    • 0 avatar
      wmba

      No they don’t.

      I’ve had them since 1989 and no problems.

      There, that’s about as reliable a statement as yours.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      I’m not saying Honda has fallen into the abyss as Ford has –

      Bark’s beloved Ford TrashFiesta:

      http://www.autoblog.com/photos/the-five-least-reliable-cars/#slide-3677701
      “Ford Fiesta

      The second vehicle to perform particularly poorly on Consumer Reports 2015 Reliability Survey is the Ford Fiesta. Problems included transmissions that don’t shift properly to overheating engines and fuel pump failures.”

      – but Honda indeed took a hit on CR’s index as of late (bad transmissions & electrical issues).

      Watch, wait and see the problems with Honda motors equipped with turbochargers ebb higher and higher.

      Any rebuttal of the claim turbochargers incease problems built around commercial tractor-trailer applications is a red herring given that engines used in commercial turbo diesel trucks are massively overbuilt, overcooked, and in fact, are so robust that they’re specifically designed to be rebuilt every 500,000 to 1 million miles.

      • 0 avatar
        pragmatic

        Turbos in HD diesels are a problem (at least in the fleet I work for). While our engines go between 750K and 2000K before rebuild turbos are known to fail in 100K to 200K and can (in conjunction with DPFs) cause the vehicle to throw a large flame out the exhaust (melting everything near the exhaust exit) when the turbo bearing seals go.

        In cars my only experience was with a cast iron block and cast iron head 2.3L in my XR4Ti. Drove it from 70K to 280K I never had the head off, previous owner replaced the head gasket at 36K. He had over heated it. When I purchased it had an owner installed dash switch to control the fan. After a couple of boil overs I installed thermostatic control on the fan and that was that.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al From 'Murica

        I did my homework prior to buying a 2.7 EB powered F150. Yes, I am rolling the dice to a degree, but given the 3.5 has been solid and the 2.7 seems pretty stout with the CGI block and other borrowed from diesel I can live with it.. I don’t know anyone who has had issues with them. I’ve owned several forced induction cars and never had an and I am anal about maintenance. I’m more comfortable with 2 turbos than a V8 with displacement on demand for sure. And don’t give me your internet forums crap…every car I’ve owned had an internet forum telling what a piece of crap it was, even my anvil TBI 305. Read all about broken ring lands (which actually happened to me at 40k.) The only ecoboost that had any number of issues seemed to be the 1.6. Turbos are older tech than VTEC and other whiz bang stuff that is now considered old.

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      Hondas – rock solidly rusting to pieces in the Northeast for 40 years. I’ll stick with VW if I need a cheap car, thanks. I’d infinitely rather deal with a CEL than rust holes.

      I’ve owned more than a dozen turbo cars, the only one that even remotely had an issue was a Saab that the previous owner turned the boost down on when his daughter got her license. Oh, and one other Saab had gotten a new turbo before I bought it – at 180K miles or so (and that was an old oil-cooled turbo on an ’85). I think that is a way more than adequate lifespan, myself.

      • 0 avatar
        thornmark

        >>Hondas – rock solidly rusting to pieces in the Northeast for 40 years. I’ll stick with VW if I need a cheap car, thanks. I’d infinitely rather deal with a CEL than rust holes.<<

        Lol. CHeap car. As a former VW owner I and most know that VW is about the worst used car – except being initially cheap to buy due to their unreliability and expense to keep going. As for rust, you’re about 20 years out of date. Hondas haven’t had a rust issue for decades.

        VW free zone:
        Toyota, Honda Dominate List of Cars Kept for More Than 10 Years
        (CR-V tops the list}
        https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2015/10/toyota-honda-dominate-list-cars-kept-10-years/#more-1196378

      • 0 avatar
        gtemnykh

        Krhodes, Honda exorcised their rust demons by the late 90s/early 2000s. Starting with the ’98 Odyssey, ’01 Civic, and ’03 accord, I rarely see body rust on any of these vehicles even after 15 years in the rust belt. It’s an old and now irrelevant story to trot out. Meanwhile vw continues to amaze with their ability to crank out problematic vehicles that suffer from a myriad of mechanical issues even at lower mileage.

  • avatar
    lot9

    Honda has lost their way with their transmission. After driving the new CR-v, it is nothing like the prior models.

    Their cvt tranny is junk!

    They need to go back to the drawing board these transmissions.

    Having owned Honda and still do…but I would not buy a new model,today.

    Honda’s reliability has dropped, too. t

    Once they get their act together, maybe I will look at them again.

    There are better selections in the market, today.

    • 0 avatar
      GermanReliabilityMyth

      I’m going to disagree with your claim that the Honda CVT is junk. Although I can’t vouch for its long term reliability or robustness, I believe it’s one of the best CVTs on the market (likely THE best) in terms of performance. Having driven a number of Honda vehicles equipped with variations of their new CVT, I find it to be a huge improvement over their previous ubiquitous 5 speed automatic. Nevermind the fact that traditional Honda automatics have never been poster children of longevity, the new(ish) CVT is still better due to its smooth application of power even if reliability is a dead heat.

    • 0 avatar
      WheelMcCoy

      A year ago, I test drove an Accord with a CVT. It did a pretty good imitation of a 5 speed automatic. I think Honda has figured out the CVT, but like @GRM, I have to say the CVT hasn’t been around long enough to prove its longevity.

    • 0 avatar
      thornmark

      >>There are better selections in the market, today.<<

      There are always better selections in different areas but by acclamation the CR-V is regarded as the best whole package and its CVT the best in the business.

      THat said, I would only buy one w/ manual, which means, at this point, I wouldn't.

  • avatar
    Demetri

    I wonder if they can squeeze a little more power out of that K24. If they carried it over to the new Si, I’d probably be ok with it as long as they hold the line on price. It isn’t the engine keeping me away from the current model Si, it’s the rest of the car. Still, I think it’s much more likely it gets the 1.5T with the boost turned up, or a detuned version of the 2.0T from the new Civic Type-R.

  • avatar
    dantes_inferno

    Honda – the gold standard of the Racing Inspired Cosmetic Enhancement scene.

  • avatar
    sgeffe

    When I test drove a CVT Accord, my impression was that of a normal automatic without shift points. A CR-V I had as a loaner exhibited a little more CVT-ness, but was still reasonable. Will be interesting to see the next-gen CR-V next year

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Rich Fitzwell: Edit ruthlessly EB White
  • thelaine: Prove it, Lou. Quote them, saying these numbers are wrong.
  • thelaine: HP, Is this a FRINGE character? Or is it just someone who disagrees with your politically-motivated...
  • thelaine: If you read the posts, N8, you would see that you are wrong. The numbers are from the CDC.
  • el scotto: When two people from your office building die from COVID-19, you take COVID-19 seriously. One was an avid...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Timothy Cain
  • Matthew Guy
  • Ronnie Schreiber
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth