look in your new Car and Driver.

loses to the GTI.

no room, strange interior, no torque, poor mpg

can't crack 7 seconds in 5-60 (7.5)

32 cu ft of rear seat space. for the record, that's TINY. does the mini have more room in back?

no power till 6000 rpm apparently

good job honda on your CAR OF THE YEAR which got beat by the vdub

AGAIN proving why the COTY choice in MT was a complete and total fraud

what a waste of a car. cobalt SS is a full second faster in 0-60, has a less QUESTLIKE interior, and has actual room in back.

Civic Si (economy car) 19 mpg

Porsche 19 mpg

toyota avalon 23 mpg

ford 500 20 mpg

the nissan maxima probably beat it too

Edited February 2, 200620 yr by regfootball

Reminds me of an old episode of Top Gear, re: Civic Type-R vs. Golf GTI: "If you buy a Honda, you end up with the Honda, whereas if you buy a Volkswagen, you don't." C/D said that the Si was more of a driver's car, but that the GTI was more complete.

torque is not on the standard or optional equipment list on the civic,Btw

I'm sure you guys would be happy to see though that the TB SS took first in the hi-po SUV comparo. 2nd was the GC SRT-8. Don't remember who the other competitor was...This will probably get its own thread soon, but figured I'd just share while we were on the topic of this month's C&D...

didnt read that one yet, woulda thought the srt 8 would have creamed the TB

Yea...I haven't read it yet either...just read the results...saw a portion of it talking about how the GC does smoke the TB as far as acceleration goes though...the outcome deffinitely came as a suprise.

Edited February 2, 200620 yr by Nick

Perhaps the Trailblazer's chassis had more "athletic tension." :AH-HA_wink:

Of course, you guys gotta love the quote C&D gave it...I believe in the low points, they noted that "It's still a Trail Blazer"...

Oh, and only 2 competitors...not 3...my bad.

Edited February 2, 200620 yr by Nick

We can only hope with articles of late that the press is SLOWLY getting over their bashing America is good theme.

Plus, the Civic Si looks so...ugh.

0-60 7.5s...

Even a G6 GTP which has been criticized for poor performace gets better time...

OK great. I can safely challenge my friend's friend's Si

I'm sure you guys would be happy to see though that the TB SS took first in the hi-po SUV comparo. 2nd was the GC SRT-8. Don't remember who the other competitor was...This will probably get its own thread soon, but figured I'd just share while we were on the topic of this month's C&D...

Oh BTW... I got confused with the GC designation. At first sight I thought it was Grand Caravan SRT-8

We can only hope with articles of late that the press is SLOWLY getting over their bashing America is good theme.

well, that's kind of what is happening, did you read James healy's Lucerne review?

basically he's saying 'toyota is good, but not worthy of godly worship'

Of course, you guys gotta love the quote C&D gave it...I believe in the low points, they noted that "It's still a Trail Blazer"...

Oh, and only 2 competitors...not 3...my bad.

no no! its a SAAB, BORN FROM JETS!

0-60 7.5s...

Even a G6 GTP which has been criticized for poor performace gets better time...

OK great. I can safely challenge my friend's friend's Si

GTP G6

5.9 from MT

6.2 (i think) from Car and Driver

for 0-60

and the 5-60 times weren't much more.

its larger than the civic and much more useful and comfortable. i would even say the G6 GTP has the interior edge. If you found a base GTP G6 with plain sunroof and a stick, it'd be a far more desirable car than the tin can SI.

Edited February 2, 200620 yr by regfootball

139 fl-lbs of torque in that new Civic Si...

Geez my '90 Trofeo had 210 ft-lbs....

my SRT-4 laughs at every Civic Si that I pass...

Actually, a standard V6 Fusion would also do a number on the Si.

Oh............ sorry............. it doesn't have a Honda badge.

I'm sorry, I just have no liking of high horsepower, zero torque mobiles. Sure they are fun on a racetrack. However, in the real world, they are a PITA.

In response to original poster:

Well if you knew the difference between the Civic Si to the GTI, you'd find out that the GTI wasn't fully introduced to the public until '06. Which in-turn, excludes it from being the COTY for '05.

So just quit your whining about the Civic. Everyone is actling like it totally affects how they are able to sleep at night, knowing a Civic beat whatever car they had in mind for the title of COTY. Who really gives a damn? It's not the end of the world, you know? There's always next year, and luckily for everyone who hates Honda on here, they (Honda) won't be able to reintroduce the Civic for '06.

Oh yeah, and calling the Civic Si an, "economy car." Is wrong as well. It's basically labled as a sports car... now about the other basline Civic's? THOSE are economy cars, so why don't you put up that figure of MPG as well. Heh, talking about biased Car Magazines... This is a classic case of pot calling the kettle black.

Just so you know, I'm not a Civic fanboy either. Just calling you out on your plethora of uncalled for whining.

The End

Edited February 2, 200620 yr by Horizon

Ok, the Civic SI is a POS! Damn it seems like your guys' life goal is to find bad reviews of the Civic or anything that you can use to bash it. Maybe we should start a "Why the Civic Si Sucks" thread and just post all of our opinions on why it sucks so we don't have to regurgitate everything every week when a magazine comes out with a bad review of the car (because it sucks so much of course).

The 0-60 is kind of high, but remember MT's 1/4 time for the Civic, 15.8? lol, the numbers for the Si are all over the place. From what I can remember, R&T has gotten some of the best numbers out of the Si (6.8 0-60, 15.1 1/4). It probably has to do with the DBW throttle and 6sp gearbox (really short 1st gear leads to lots of wheelspin). The Si does wonders on the track (where 1st gear isn't used), not as good in the straight line performance tests. Unfortunately track time comparisons are hard to come by, and honestly I don't think most magazine reviewers would be good enough to do half of the cars they drive any justice.

I would like to see the Civic Si with a normal throttle cable and weigh a little less. The fact that it weighs more than the base Civic Coupe is exactly the opposite of what you should be doing when building a sports car trim (but then again, this isn't a Type R, but an Si).

Ok, the Civic SI is a POS! Damn it seems like your guys' life goal is to find bad reviews of the Civic or anything that you can use to bash it. Maybe we should start a "Why the Civic Si Sucks" thread and just post all of our opinions on why it sucks so we don't have to regurgitate everything every week when a magazine comes out with a bad review of the car (because it sucks so much of course).

The 0-60 is kind of high, but remember MT's 1/4 time for the Civic, 15.8? lol, the numbers for the Si are all over the place. From what I can remember, R&T has gotten some of the best numbers out of the Si (6.8 0-60, 15.1 1/4). It probably has to do with the DBW throttle and 6sp gearbox (really short 1st gear leads to lots of wheelspin). The Si does wonders on the track (where 1st gear isn't used), not as good in the straight line performance tests. Unfortunately track time comparisons are hard to come by, and honestly I don't think most magazine reviewers would be good enough to do half of the cars they drive any justice.

I would like to see the Civic Si with a normal throttle cable and weigh a little less. The fact that it weighs more than the base Civic Coupe is exactly the opposite of what you should be doing when building a sports car trim (but then again, this isn't a Type R, but an Si).

Well, you have to understand this IS a GM forum... If you want to start a rebellion, you'd expect resistance.

"The Si does wonders on the track"

that's exactly my point. what good is it to regular commuters then?

In response to original poster:

Well if you knew  the difference between the Civic Si to the GTI, you'd find out that the GTI wasn't fully introduced to the public until '06. Which in-turn, excludes it from being the COTY for '05.

So just quit your whining about the Civic. Everyone is actling like it totally affects how they are able to sleep at night, knowing a Civic beat whatever car they had in mind for the title of COTY. Who really gives a damn? It's not the end of the world, you know? There's always next year, and luckily for everyone who hates Honda on here, they (Honda) won't be able to reintroduce the Civic for '06.

Oh yeah, and calling the Civic Si an, "economy car." Is wrong as well. It's basically labled as a sports car... now about the other basline Civic's? THOSE are economy cars, so why don't you put up that figure of MPG as well. Heh, talking about biased Car Magazines... This is a classic case of pot calling the kettle black.

Just so you know, I'm not a Civic fanboy either. Just calling you out on your plethora of uncalled for whining.

The End

loaded sports car?

a corvette with 200 more horsepower gets simular mileage.....(i believe the vette gets 16 city 27 highway)

In response to original poster:

Well if you knew  the difference between the Civic Si to the GTI, you'd find out that the GTI wasn't fully introduced to the public until '06. Which in-turn, excludes it from being the COTY for '05.

So just quit your whining about the Civic. Everyone is actling like it totally affects how they are able to sleep at night, knowing a Civic beat whatever car they had in mind for the title of COTY. Who really gives a damn? It's not the end of the world, you know? There's always next year, and luckily for everyone who hates Honda on here, they (Honda) won't be able to reintroduce the Civic for '06.

Oh yeah, and calling the Civic Si an, "economy car." Is wrong as well. It's basically labled as a sports car... now about the other basline Civic's? THOSE are economy cars, so why don't you put up that figure of MPG as well. Heh, talking about biased Car Magazines... This is a classic case of pot calling the kettle black.

Just so you know, I'm not a Civic fanboy either. Just calling you out on your plethora of uncalled for whining.

The End

nice post, i agree

relatively speaking, the civic si gets bad mileage, however since its overall performance and sporty character are comparable to Cobalt SS SC, even if accelerattion numbers are not, that car would be a better and fair comparison for mileage figures. I know the Cobalt is faster, but compare the mileage to that car. And I am not apologizing for the Civic's poor mileage, I said it is bad, and that's a good thing for GM's car. Though I'm positive people who end up buying this car won't be as concerned with that issue as many here would like them to be. Build a bridge and get over it.

relatively speaking, the civic si gets bad mileage, however since its overall performance and sporty character are comparable to Cobalt SS SC, even if accelerattion numbers are not, that car would be a better and fair comparison for mileage figures. I know the Cobalt is faster, but compare the mileage to that car. And I am not apologizing for the Civic's poor mileage, I said it is bad, and that's a good thing for GM's car. Though I'm positive people who end up buying this car won't be as concerned with that issue as many here would like them to be. Build a bridge and get over it.

You're right, any car you rev that high will get bad gas milage...

In response to original poster:

Well if you knew  the difference between the Civic Si to the GTI, you'd find out that the GTI wasn't fully introduced to the public until '06. Which in-turn, excludes it from being the COTY for '05.

So just quit your whining about the Civic. Everyone is actling like it totally affects how they are able to sleep at night, knowing a Civic beat whatever car they had in mind for the title of COTY. Who really gives a damn? It's not the end of the world, you know? There's always next year, and luckily for everyone who hates Honda on here, they (Honda) won't be able to reintroduce the Civic for '06.

Oh yeah, and calling the Civic Si an, "economy car." Is wrong as well. It's basically labled as a sports car... now about the other basline Civic's? THOSE are economy cars, so why don't you put up that figure of MPG as well. Heh, talking about biased Car Magazines... This is a classic case of pot calling the kettle black.

Just so you know, I'm not a Civic fanboy either. Just calling you out on your plethora of uncalled for whining.

The End

I agree with you 100% but to some people on this board, it is the end of the world, the end of THEIR little world for the entire year.

"The Si does wonders on the track"

that's exactly my point. what good is it to regular commuters then?

Just because it does wonders on the track, doesn't mean a normal drive can't be equally exciting to the regular commuter.

My point is, mags rag on the Civic's straight line performance compared to the Cobalt SS and this VW (despite the very small differences), yet they have no standardized way to test its track performance (slalom doesn't cut it), other than comparing the cars side by side on the track and logging times.

Of the three cars mentioned, they all excel in different areas. For the people that can't get over the fact that there isn't as much low end horsepower in the Si, and think the car sucks because of that, they're missing the boat entirely.

i believe the vette gets 16 city 27 highway

And the Si gets 23/32.

cobalt SS is a full second faster in 0-60

It depends on the review, like I said in the other post. Here's an excerpt from a review by Inside Line:

to get the Si to 60 mph in 7.2 seconds, though Honda claims a 6.7 is possible. We've timed Chevrolet's Cobalt SS coupe at 7 flat and the Saturn Ion Red Line at 6.7. Although we hate the way the engine holds onto revs artificially when you lift off the throttle, Honda has geared the six-speed perfectly to keep the tach above 6,000 rpm during acceleration runs. With a 15.1 at 93.8-mph run, the Si does beat the supercharged Cobalt in the quarter-mile

Road and Track got a 6.8 second 0-60 for the Si, and a 6.2 for the Cobalt SS. How long do you suppose it takes to shift to 3rd gear and accelerate the additional 2mph to hit 60 in the Si? Probably not 6 tenths, but it would definately close the gap a little bit.

My point? The difference in straight line acceleration isn't that much, and varies greatly depending on who you're asking.

loaded sports car?

a corvette with 200 more horsepower gets simular mileage.....(i believe the vette gets 16 city 27 highway)

Excuse me? Are you incapable of reading comprehension of simple words? Where in my reply, did I ever say a "loaded sports car?" Ok, I'll wait here while you find it...... ok, time's up! What? You didn't find it in the reply? Well, you said it was there!

Ok, enough about me ragging you... but in the end, I am right. Heck, go to Yahoo! vehicles and check it out for yourself: http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/sportscars....e9FYQkWwvI_c78F You will find the Civic Si in the sports category there, as it's basically a "sports car." And that's just it, it's a lable... of course it's nowhere near the likes of a Corvette! And just so you know, it shares the same lable as a sports car as a Scion tC... imagine that! So what about the gas mileage, people will buy it anyway.

So next time, do me a favor and don't patronize me, ok?

I saw a brandy-new Hybrid Civic in gray wiht Maine plates the other day. We were stuck in traffic shoulder to shoulder. Rigid looking guy was driving it in a Stuffy suit.

This evil voice inside my head said to drop the clutch at like 4000rpm in the datsun and burnout sideways right into his rear quarter and then drive off yelling "Japanese cars suck!"

I'm mostly kidding.

Actually, that's hillarious...you extolling how Japanese cars suck after hitting a Japanese car while you're driving a Japanese car you bought. Then, you know, you'd have to fix his car.

Technicaly I would not fix his car.

Some body shop in Maine would fix his car... they would just get paid by my insurance company and in return my insurance would be jacked up slightly (like say $600 a year) for seven years.

That plus the $500 deductible would total $4700 not including fixing my Datsun's scratched bumper cover. In other words it would be A L M O S T worht it.

Edited February 4, 200620 yr by Sixty8panther

My point is, mags rag on the Civic's straight line performance compared to the Cobalt SS and this VW (despite the very small differences), yet they have no standardized way to test its track performance (slalom doesn't cut it), other than comparing the cars side by side on the track and logging times.

Motor Trend does a figure 8 test. That is a standardized test that tests turning and straightaways.

However, I didn't do any research to see what time the CiviD got.