CanTex
 |
|
|
With the Focus coming in at 160 hp, hopefully Honda can find a way to raise the 1.8's performance a little. (The si would be off our radar because of all the qualities that appeal to the young racer crowd - rougher ride, a bit louder, a lot sportier. Sorry, I've moved out of that demographic, but I still enjoy a car that handles well and can keep up with traffic and on-ramps.) The '12 Civic, likely an EX automatic, is definitely a consideration for an around-town good-gas-mileage well-built car for us, now that our beloved '01 TL is in my son's hands.
|
80honda
|
|
CanTex wrote:
With the Focus coming in at 160 hp, hopefully Honda can find a way to raise the 1.8's performance a little. (The si would be off our radar because of all the qualities that appeal to the young racer crowd - rougher ride, a bit louder, a lot sportier. Sorry, I've moved out of that demographic, but I still enjoy a car that handles well and can keep up with traffic and on-ramps.) The '12 Civic, likely an EX automatic, is definitely a consideration for an around-town good-gas-mileage well-built car for us, now that our beloved '01 TL is in my son's hands.
|
Imagine a nice loaded EX-L sedan with the 2.4 liter!
|
CanTex
|
|
|
EX-L with the 2.4? I'm there! Where do I sign?
|
DCR
|
|
Keep imagining. Enjoy the 140hp all of the EX drivers have enjoyed for the past 6 years.
So, we are looking at 12 years out of this engine family, all told?
|
80honda
|
|
DCR wrote:
Keep imagining. Enjoy the 140hp all of the EX drivers have enjoyed for the past 6 years.
So, we are looking at 12 years out of this engine family, all told?
|
The R18 is a new engine. Are you begging for Honda to cancel this new design already?
|
DCR
|
|
I figured you'd be here sooner or later to champion the lazy asses at Honda for this.
I am more worried about the Si than the cars that I don't purchase that have the R18.
|
iutodd
|
|
The new Focus weighs in at about 2900-2950 pounds. The new Elantra weighs in from 2700-2900 pounds. The Mazda3 is over 3K, the Corolla is 2730 and up.
The current Civic weighs much less than all of its competitors (range from 2630-2831) and the new model is supposed to weigh less.
So lbs per horsepower (obviously this will change depending upon trim, and with the 3, depending upon engine choice - I chose the lightest automatic version of each)
2012 Focus: 18.125
2011 Elantra: 18.25
3: 18.19
Corolla: 21.21
2011 Civic: 19.22
So the ratio is a bit higher yes, but give the Civic 5 more hp and 50 pounds less weight and the new number is: 18.22.
So compared to the competitors, even the Focus and 3, the Honda will be right there.
|
JeffX
|
|
DCR wrote:
I figured you'd be here sooner or later to champion the lazy asses at Honda for this.
I am more worried about the Si than the cars that I don't purchase that have the R18.
|
Unfortunately, the R18 is a pretty boring, lazy engine itself. On paper it looks great due to the fuel efficiency and good emissions performance, but on the road it feels lifeless and more than a little agricultural. In other words, not very Honda-like. Now if they can give it a nice attitude adjustment and endow it with a similar sense of urgency and enthusiasm that the R20 has (I've only tried one in the Crossroad), that would be a big time upgrade.
|
DCR
|
|
|
I test drove a 2007 Civic EX coupe a couple of years back and that thing was extremely boring.
|
A77
|
|
I have been saying for ages the higher trim versions of the new Civic ie EXL should have the K24 and the Si keep a screamer. And I have no problem, and have said all along, that Honda will keep the R18 - its still a newish engine and Honda cannot meet economy targets by going with a bigger engine. I don't like the R18 much - I don't like the sound it makes when revved, and it doesn't provide any thrills when revved anyway, but it is super reliable, very economical and there's no need to change it. It's the bigger engine/higher trim versions/si option where things are just plain wrong.
As I have said before, in the Accord the 190hp reg gas version gets a claimed 49mpg highway. In a Civic this would be 54 or 55. Nobody would complain about that. I suspect the R18 will claim 58 or 59 or even 60 for real bragging rights in HF trim at least - which is great. But I for one would rather have a little more torque, a little more luxury a manual tranny and I don't give two hoots about the slight increase in consumption.
Above all I want something that will persuade me to move out of my 11 year old VR6. Something that drives better. And right now Honda offers nothing. Unless the Si proves even less than an Si that most people are hoping for and is a bit comfy and refined. It would be no Si, but might be what I want. I shouldn't have sold my 06 Accord EXL manual. TSX costs too much.
|
ldvknight
|
|
With the competition stepping up as it has in this catagory, i can't believe we are not going to a 2 liter. Hard to believe Honda can squeeze anymore significant MPG out of the R18.
2010 Civic EX R18 gets an EPA 25 city / 36 hwy now.
My prediction of the new R18:
- new "free flowing" exhaust system
- shorter gearing for 1-3rd gear for that extra new engine pep feeling
- taller gear for 4-6th gear for a whopping game leading 26 city / 37 hwy
Same recipe used on the Honda Ridgeline and Oddessey. Facepalm.
|
iutodd
|
|
ldvknight wrote:
With the competition stepping up as it has in this catagory, i can't believe we are not going to a 2 liter. Hard to believe Honda can squeeze anymore significant MPG out of the R18.
2010 Civic EX R18 gets an EPA 25 city / 36 hwy now.
My prediction of the new R18:
- new "free flowing" exhaust system
- shorter gearing for 1-3rd gear for that extra new engine pep feeling
- taller gear for 4-6th gear for a whopping game leading 26 city / 37 hwy
Same recipe used on the Honda Ridgeline and Oddessey. Facepalm.
|
_No way. Wrong. The Accord MMC gained more mpg than that - this Civic is lighter, smaller and probably has better aerodynamics, along with all the tricks they used for the Accord MMC (I'm not completely ruling out getting the 6at either) plus who knows what else. The standard Civic will be rated at 29or30/40 and the Civic HF will be 33or34/43or44. Just my prediction, but I don't see how it could be any/much less than that.
|
saulinpa
|
|
A77 wrote:
As I have said before, in the Accord the 190hp reg gas version gets a claimed 49mpg highway.
|
Just curious. Where did this number come from? http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-sedan/specifications.aspx reports 34mpg highway.
|
CanTex
|
|
saulinpa wrote:
A77 wrote:
As I have said before, in the Accord the 190hp reg gas version gets a claimed 49mpg highway.
|
Just curious. Where did this number come from? http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-sedan/specifications.aspx reports 34mpg highway.
|
Imperial gallons. 1 Imperial Gallon = 1.2009504234173434 U.S. Gallons, or 5 U.S. quarts. 20% bigger than a U.S. gallon. But still, 49 Impg~= 40.8 USmpg
|
bluefz22
|
|
CanTex wrote:
With the Focus coming in at 160 hp, hopefully Honda can find a way to raise the 1.8's performance a little. (The si would be off our radar because of all the qualities that appeal to the young racer crowd - rougher ride, a bit louder, a lot sportier. Sorry, I've moved out of that demographic, but I still enjoy a car that handles well and can keep up with traffic and on-ramps.) The '12 Civic, likely an EX automatic, is definitely a consideration for an around-town good-gas-mileage well-built car for us, now that our beloved '01 TL is in my son's hands.
|
|
NorCalSales
|
|
ldvknight wrote:
My prediction of the new R18:
- new "free flowing" exhaust system
- shorter gearing for 1-3rd gear for that extra new engine pep feeling
- taller gear for 4-6th gear for a whopping game leading 26 city / 37 hwy
Same recipe used on the Honda Ridgeline and Oddessey. Facepalm.
|
Except there is no 6th gear and 40mpg is not a game leader, in fact that makes you an also-ran
|
A77
|
|
saulinpa wrote:
A77 wrote:
As I have said before, in the Accord the 190hp reg gas version gets a claimed 49mpg highway.
|
Just curious. Where did this number come from? http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-sedan/specifications.aspx reports 34mpg highway.
|
sorry - I forgot to again state this is in canada - different govt testing procedure.
http://www.carquotes.ca/profiles/honda/accord_2011.html
Civic 2011 gets 52 mpg under the same procedure. Canadian system indicates what is possible, not what most drivers are likely to get. It was correct for my 06 accord - ie i invariably got as good (actually better in town) as the numbers showed - but I have my doubts that 49mpg is achievable easily in this gen.
|
amagbanua
|
|
Jeff wrote:
DCR wrote:
I figured you'd be here sooner or later to champion the lazy asses at Honda for this.
I am more worried about the Si than the cars that I don't purchase that have the R18.
|
Unfortunately, the R18 is a pretty boring, lazy engine itself. On paper it looks great due to the fuel efficiency and good emissions performance, but on the road it feels lifeless and more than a little agricultural. In other words, not very Honda-like. Now if they can give it a nice attitude adjustment and endow it with a similar sense of urgency and enthusiasm that the R20 has (I've only tried one in the Crossroad), that would be a big time upgrade.
|
Agreed, sold my 2007 Civic EX coupe 5M after 60K trouble-free, but boring-as-hell miles. Engine not only didn't like to rev, it also lacked torque in the lower ranges. Basically it never had a "sweet spot"
|
iutodd
|
|
NorCalSales wrote:
ldvknight wrote:
My prediction of the new R18:
- new "free flowing" exhaust system
- shorter gearing for 1-3rd gear for that extra new engine pep feeling
- taller gear for 4-6th gear for a whopping game leading 26 city / 37 hwy
Same recipe used on the Honda Ridgeline and Oddessey. Facepalm.
|
Except there is no 6th gear and 40mpg is not a game leader, in fact that makes you an also-ran
|
_There is only one car in the segment that gets 40 mpg. The Cruze doesn't (oh OK, the ECO version will), the Focus (again, SFE version) doesn't, the Jetta doesn't, the Corolla doesn't, the 3 doesn't. How does getting 40 mpg make a car in this segment an also ran?
I think, the reason Honda is choosing now to come out with the HF version is so competitors can't claim "class-leading" fuel economy. Because you know Chevy is/was going to do that whenever the Eco finally gets here. Again, my predictions for the efficiency stand as stated above in this thread and those numbers will not make the Civic an "also ran".
|
NorCalSales
|
|
Actually I meant to type the 37 number he stated in his post(something the poster thought a 6AT was needed to reach), the lack of an edit feature gets me again so allow me to restate it.
There is no 6th gear and 37 mpg does not make you a game leader.
|
|
|
| |
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
