2007 Honda Civic Si Sedan

[FlashG]

Originally posted by: Imdmn04
The front looks like a baby TL.

That's what I thought. I wonder if it can keep up with one? (6 speed)

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Prefer the MazdaSpeed3.

 

[FlashG]

Has anyone seen any actual performance figures for the sedan? 0-60, top speed

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: FlashG
Has anyone seen any actual performance figures for the sedan? 0-60, top speed

I'd assume that it would just be a smidge behind coupe. It's the same powerplant, but the sedan will probably weigh a little bit more slowing it down a small fraction of a second in the speed tests.

 

[FlashG]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: FlashG
Has anyone seen any actual performance figures for the sedan? 0-60, top speed

I'd assume that it would just be a smidge behind coupe. It's the same powerplant, but the sedan will probably weigh a little bit more slowing it down a small fraction of a second in the speed tests.

So the coupe has 0-60 of 6.4 and a top speed of 146. A 6 speed TL does the same in 5.9 and 152. I'll keep the TL thanks.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: FlashG

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: FlashG
Has anyone seen any actual performance figures for the sedan? 0-60, top speed

I'd assume that it would just be a smidge behind coupe. It's the same powerplant, but the sedan will probably weigh a little bit more slowing it down a small fraction of a second in the speed tests.

So the coupe has 0-60 of 6.4 and a top speed of 146. A 6 speed TL does the same in 5.9 and 152. I'll keep the TL thanks.

Huh?

The TL is 75% more expensive. Great comparison! :thumbsup:

 

[SpanishFry]

good job on the 4 door honda. I can't take a hatch seriously

 

[Nocturnal]

Looks like a Neon to me. I'll take the coupe.

 

[FlashG]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: FlashG

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: FlashG
Has anyone seen any actual performance figures for the sedan? 0-60, top speed

I'd assume that it would just be a smidge behind coupe. It's the same powerplant, but the sedan will probably weigh a little bit more slowing it down a small fraction of a second in the speed tests.

So the coupe has 0-60 of 6.4 and a top speed of 146. A 6 speed TL does the same in 5.9 and 152. I'll keep the TL thanks.

Huh?

The TL is 75% more expensive. Great comparison! :thumbsup:

I wasn't comparing price class just performance between the two cars. I like the looks of the Civic but it just doesn?t have enough to sway my interest.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: FlashG

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: FlashG

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: FlashG
Has anyone seen any actual performance figures for the sedan? 0-60, top speed

I'd assume that it would just be a smidge behind coupe. It's the same powerplant, but the sedan will probably weigh a little bit more slowing it down a small fraction of a second in the speed tests.

So the coupe has 0-60 of 6.4 and a top speed of 146. A 6 speed TL does the same in 5.9 and 152. I'll keep the TL thanks.

Huh?

The TL is 75% more expensive. Great comparison! :thumbsup:

I wasn't comparing price class just performance between the two cars. I like the looks of the Civic but it just doesn?t have enough to sway my interest.

It's still a bizarre comparison. A Ferrari F430 is much much faster than a TL, so the TL must be lame too, huh?

 

[FlashG]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: FlashG

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: FlashG

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: FlashG
Has anyone seen any actual performance figures for the sedan? 0-60, top speed

I'd assume that it would just be a smidge behind coupe. It's the same powerplant, but the sedan will probably weigh a little bit more slowing it down a small fraction of a second in the speed tests.

So the coupe has 0-60 of 6.4 and a top speed of 146. A 6 speed TL does the same in 5.9 and 152. I'll keep the TL thanks.

Huh?

The TL is 75% more expensive. Great comparison! :thumbsup:

I wasn't comparing price class just performance between the two cars. I like the looks of the Civic but it just doesn?t have enough to sway my interest.

It's still a bizarre comparison. A Ferrari F430 is much much faster than a TL, so the TL must be lame too, huh?

No I already own a TL and was considering the Civic as a posibility.

 

[RagingBITCH]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: FlashG

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: FlashG

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: FlashG
Has anyone seen any actual performance figures for the sedan? 0-60, top speed

I'd assume that it would just be a smidge behind coupe. It's the same powerplant, but the sedan will probably weigh a little bit more slowing it down a small fraction of a second in the speed tests.

So the coupe has 0-60 of 6.4 and a top speed of 146. A 6 speed TL does the same in 5.9 and 152. I'll keep the TL thanks.

Huh?

The TL is 75% more expensive. Great comparison! :thumbsup:

I wasn't comparing price class just performance between the two cars. I like the looks of the Civic but it just doesn?t have enough to sway my interest.

It's still a bizarre comparison. A Ferrari F430 is much much faster than a TL, so the TL must be lame too, huh?

What's the word for this? Oh wait, pwn3d.

 

[FlashG]

Originally posted by: RagingBITCH
[

What's the word for this? Oh wait, pwn3d.[/quote]A more correct term would be owner. I'm actually considering to move back from Acura to Honda.

 

[Imported]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: OS
Honda needs to stop dicking around and shut up the crybabies. They should slap TSX 2.4s in civics, complete with fat ass cams, a nicer equal length header and a factory ported head like the ITR.

Why not just go with that turbo'd 2.4 that's in the RDX?

That seems like the most logical solution to most of their problems.

I'd love to see the RDX motor in a Civic. I'd love it more if I could put it in my Accord.. along with the AWD, but that's only a dream.

 

[ballmode]

It won't be a dream they are working on it for the TSX

 

[ballmode]

Anyways, comparing the MS3 to the Civic SI sedan, use the money you save in price and mod the K20.

When it boils down to it, FWD + 250ish hp = Wheelhop/fight to drive/torque steer

Hell I feel it in my 170hp GSR bone stock.

Save the hassle and get the WRX for this price segment.

 

[FlashG]

Originally posted by: Imported

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: OS
Honda needs to stop dicking around and shut up the crybabies. They should slap TSX 2.4s in civics, complete with fat ass cams, a nicer equal length header and a factory ported head like the ITR.

Why not just go with that turbo'd 2.4 that's in the RDX?

That seems like the most logical solution to most of their problems.

I'd love to see the RDX motor in a Civic. I'd love it more if I could put it in my Accord.. along with the AWD, but that's only a dream.

Same here. Actually I would give anything if I could get an updated version of my old 92 EX. Great reliability, low upkeep, respectable performance and looks. I guess you just can't go back.

 

[Imported]

Originally posted by: ballmode
It won't be a dream they are working on it for the TSX

It's a dream for my Accord!

 

[DCFife]

Since the speed limit here is 65 (and most of the time the freeway is just a parking lot anyway) I have done the next best thing to buying the Civic Si sedan. I bought a standard 140hp sedan and put Si sway bars on it for $135 and an hour of my time. Now I get 38mpg (when I move) and can take the offramps at 60mph....pretty much the same thing as having an Si sedan in these parts but with better mileage.

 

[Dr. Detroit]

Originally posted by: ballmode
Anyways, comparing the MS3 to the Civic SI sedan, use the money you save in price and mod the K20.

When it boils down to it, FWD + 250ish hp = Wheelhop/fight to drive/torque steer

Hell I feel it in my 170hp GSR bone stock.

Save the hassle and get the WRX for this price segment.

For $3K more you get a MS3 with a waranty. No way that $3K into a SI is going to get you the performance of the MS3. Plus 4drs and a hatch.
Wheel hop is not an issue due to equal lenght axles and a awesome LSD. Torque steer is minimal as the computer keeps you out of high boost in 1st and 2nd gears. 4rd gear is a monster in the MS3.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: Fmr12B

Originally posted by: ballmode
Anyways, comparing the MS3 to the Civic SI sedan, use the money you save in price and mod the K20.

When it boils down to it, FWD + 250ish hp = Wheelhop/fight to drive/torque steer

Hell I feel it in my 170hp GSR bone stock.

Save the hassle and get the WRX for this price segment.

For $3K more you get a MS3 with a waranty. No way that $3K into a SI is going to get you the performance of the MS3. Plus 4drs and a hatch.
Wheel hop is not an issue due to equal lenght axles and a awesome LSD. Torque steer is minimal as the computer keeps you out of high boost in 1st and 2nd gears. 4rd gear is a monster in the MS3.

The mazdaspeed 3 may not have the overwhelming advantage people here paint it out to be;

dyno from earlier

if you look at those numbers, the mazda only makes ~35 WHP more, despite the 65+ HP plus advantage on paper. Plus the mazda is 200 lbs heavier than the civic.


Although modded vs stock is not really fair, 3K into the civic buys a comptech supercharger.

 

[JoPh]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Prefer the MazdaSpeed3.

 

[FlashG]

Originally posted by: DCFife
Since the speed limit here is 65 (and most of the time the freeway is just a parking lot anyway) I have done the next best thing to buying the Civic Si sedan. I bought a standard 140hp sedan and put Si sway bars on it for $135 and an hour of my time. Now I get 38mpg (when I move) and can take the offramps at 60mph....pretty much the same thing as having an Si sedan in these parts but with better mileage.

Smart move on the mod. Does the standard sedan come with a Navi as well?

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: OS
Honda needs to stop dicking around and shut up the crybabies. They should slap TSX 2.4s in civics, complete with fat ass cams, a nicer equal length header and a factory ported head like the ITR.

Why not just go with that turbo'd 2.4 that's in the RDX?

That seems like the most logical solution to most of their problems.

I actually don't think the civic SI has any serious deficiency, just the perception is low because of paper spec racers.

The RDX motor might work, but there is conflicting news whether the RDX motor only bolts up to V6 transmissions or not. Some people say it will bolt up to a 2.4L transmission, but the 2.0L transmission definitely do not work.

Either way, honda has their heritage in NA motors and turbos still have some delay building boost. The motor I described earlier would make 250 HP/200 lb-ft easy, often more. People in the aftermarket already build these frankensteins and preferably to put in old hatchbacks. That kind of setup runs 12s and 13s easy.

 

[Sketcher]

[Update] Regarding reliability, performance and safety in a $22,000 Sedan. Hit all four, or even three; can you really serve up an attractive competitor?