The 2017 Honda Civic Hatchback Is The Ugliest Car I've Driven Since …

Timothy Cain
by Timothy Cain

As I exited the grocery store this past Sunday night thronged by late night shoppers, the expressions on the faces of those who walked past the 2017 Honda Civic Hatchback LX, parked right in front of the store, were not difficult to discern.

Then, as it became obvious I was the “owner” of said Civic, previously repulsed glances shifted toward me, now full of pity. Can’t say I was surprised. The exterior design Honda foisted upon an otherwise excellent car is downright horrifying.

I wanted to shout across the grocery store parking lot, “It’s not mine.”


(Yes, we’re testing a Honda Canada-supplied Civic Hatchback this week, but this is a purely subjective complaint, not a review. Beauty, beholder, and all that. You can, however, read Mark Stevenson’s review of the new Civic Hatchback, and keep your eyes peeled for a TTAC comparison test involving this very Civic.)

THE BUILD-UP


The spy photos were troubling. The Honda Civic Hatchback Concept from this year’s Geneva Motor Show was eye-catching but manifested worrisome details. The production reveal in August was carefully crafted to focus on the more alluring Sport model — different sills, wheels, and rear treatment — but still set off alarm bells for North American Honda fans who (perhaps unwisely) thought our Civic Hatchback would be a worthy successor to the eighth-gen Type R.

And then, just a mile or two down the road from my home, British-built Honda Civic Hatchbacks began rolling off ships at the CN Autoport in LX trim. Oh dear.

Shortly thereafter, Civic Hatchbacks, initially just base LX models, began to appear in the wild as sad follow-ups to the largely successful Civic Coupe and oddly shaped Civic sedan.

THE CRITICAL MOMENT


Park that troubling, worrisome, alarming, disconcerting, sad car in your own driveway and you get a much better idea for how you feel about its styling.

Embarrassed is not too strong a word.

Sure, the Civic Hatchback is a particularly flexible tenth-generation Civic, which is objectively the best Civic ever. Refined, spacious, quick, and efficient, the Civic represents small car excellence. Indeed, I’m a Honda owner who’s been willing to overlook past Honda styling flubs such as the Odyssey’s windowline and sliding door track. Even I could likely get past the exterior treatment on the latest Civic sedan, which Honda evidently realized at the last minute was not supposed to be a hatchback.

But this actual Civic Hatchback is the ugliest car I’ve driven since, well okay, only since May. (There was that new Prius on tiny steel wheels covered by quinoa scraps and kale residue.)

GOLFING


Make no mistake, all Civic Hatchbacks, regardless of trim, feature the same disappointing proportions. Unfortunately, lacking the sort of detailing that distracts the eye on other models, the LX amplifies the Civic’s awkward angles, its stubby tail, and its hodgepodge of priorities.

Decreasing the Civic’s visual appeal and practicality is the slope of the hatch, a liftgate that takes a dive aft of the C-pillar.

Instead of copying the segment progenitor, the Volkswagen Golf, a small car that always features a more vertical, wagon-like rear hatch, the Civic follows the example of the Mitsubishi Lancer Sportback.

From a luggage-carrying perspective, the Civic’s low rear floor and expanded exterior nevertheless produce a large Christmas tree-swallowing cargo hold: 25.7 cubic feet compared with the sedan’s 15.1. But it could’ve been much more spacious and more attractive.

DETAILS


The general shape of the car does not lend itself to stylishness. Honda also botched the details.

The alloys on this LX model are straight out of Honda’s catalogue of awful base model wheels.

The taillights are cartoonish. The front end is redeemed largely by familiarity and the fact that unnecessarily aggressive front fascias are now the norm.

The wheel-arch surrounds seem to plead, “Don’t mistake me for a rally car.”

Behind the rear door handle, above the wheel arch, at and below the greenhouse’s terminus, lines and bulges meet in a disturbing flurry of activity.

Plus, unsure of what to do with swathes of blank territory, Honda installed gigantic black holes that fight for attention at the front and back.

POTENTIAL


Truly beautiful cars are often let down by additional bodywork. The Jaguar F-Type is arguably at its best when Jaguar leaves well enough alone and at its worst when Jaguar’s designers take inspiration from the TVR Sagaris.

Plebeian machinery, on the other hand, can be positively altered with tasteless bodywork. The Civic Hatchback won’t become a conventionally beautiful car. It won’t soon be handsome or classy. But a properly sized wing, big wheels, a front splitter, and chrome elimination will distract us from the car’s general offenses.

It will be the Type R, and I already know I want one despite the Civic Hatchback’s intrinsic dearth of beauty. Type R desire is natural for Honda owners.

We’ve put up with styling mishaps before, we’ll do so again.

[Images: © 2016 Timothy Cain/The Truth About Cars]

Timothy Cain is the founder of GoodCarBadCar.net, which obsesses over the free and frequent publication of U.S. and Canadian auto sales figures. Follow on Twitter @goodcarbadcar and on Facebook.

Timothy Cain
Timothy Cain

More by Timothy Cain

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 163 comments
  • Hgrunt Hgrunt on Feb 22, 2017

    Funny how subjective styling can be... I think it looks fantastic while I think most Jaguars look either bulbous or generic.

  • Fatima Fatima on Feb 16, 2023

    i like looking at cars because the honda civic hatchback 2017 is my dream car i always wishes my self having it.

  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh I'd rather they have the old sweep gauges, the hhuuggee left to right speedometer from the 40's and 50's where the needle went from lefty to right like in my 1969 Nova
  • Buickman I like it!
  • JMII Hyundai Santa Cruz, which doesn't do "truck" things as well as the Maverick does.How so? I see this repeated often with no reference to exactly what it does better.As a Santa Cruz owner the only things the Mav does better is price on lower trims and fuel economy with the hybrid. The Mav's bed is a bit bigger but only when the SC has the roll-top bed cover, without this they are the same size. The Mav has an off road package and a towing package the SC lacks but these are just some parts differences. And even with the tow package the Hyundai is rated to tow 1,000lbs more then the Ford. The SC now has XRT trim that beefs up the looks if your into the off-roader vibe. As both vehicles are soft-roaders neither are rock crawling just because of some extra bits Ford tacked on.I'm still loving my SC (at 9k in mileage). I don't see any advantages to the Ford when you are looking at the medium to top end trims of both vehicles. If you want to save money and gas then the Ford becomes the right choice. You will get a cheaper interior but many are fine with this, especially if don't like the all touch controls on the SC. However this has been changed in the '25 models in which buttons and knobs have returned.
  • Analoggrotto I'd feel proper silly staring at an LCD pretending to be real gauges.
  • Gray gm should hang their wimpy logo on a strip mall next to Saul Goodman's office.
Next