2007 Honda Civic Si Sedan

[Sketcher]

OP updated w/review comparing Volkswagen GTI, Civic Si Coupe and MazdaSpeed3 performance. Dyno test vids included.

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: 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?

Performance? It's runs a 15 second quarter mile. You can throw dynos all you want, but no torque is no torque.

 

[bootymac]

.

 

[Sketcher]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Performance? It's runs a 15 second quarter mile. You can throw dynos all you want, but no torque is no torque.

I?ve driven the Civic Si Coupe and I don?t know where all this talk of ?no torque? comes from. It?s an enjoyable ride, snappy and smooth throughout its? powerband. Paper specs don?t tell the whole story and when you look at the whole package it?s even less relevant. Performance isn?t just about torque.

Take a car that does better in torque specs and I bet it won?t compare across the board when looking at reliability, safety and price. Or maybe there's one that does but no one's pointed it out yet. So far, th argument has been "this car is faster" but at x the cost. Little mentioned about the overall value and performance of the vehicle as a whole compared to others.

 

[jtvang125]

IMO it's one of the ugliest civics yet. They're also overpriced for what you get.

 

[LS20]

Originally posted by: bootymac
Torque wins races, HP sells cars.

what are you implying in regards to the civic si?

yes it outputs adequate torque - its got short gearing allowed by a high redline

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: jtvang125
IMO it's one of the ugliest civics yet. They're also overpriced for what you get.

To each his own I guess, but I personally think the new Civic sedan is one of the freshest, cleanest Honda designs in many years (as opposed to the Accord, which seems to get uglier with each new generation). Obviously it's a conservative design, but I think it's very attractive, and clearly the nicest looking car in its segment. They're definitely not cheap, but the resale will be predictably awesome. I don't own one, and more than likely never will, but I think it's a very handsome car.

 

[Sketcher]

Originally posted by: DonVito
To each his own I guess, but I personally think the new Civic sedan is one of the freshest, cleanest Honda designs in many years (as opposed to the Accord, which seems to get uglier with each new generation). Obviously it's a conservative design, but I think it's very attractive, and clearly the nicest looking car in its segment. They're definitely not cheap, but the resale will be predictably awesome. I don't own one, and more than likely never will, but I think it's a very handsome car.

I agree completely. I prefer the '06/'07 styling over any previous design and over any other car in it's segment.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: LS20

Originally posted by: bootymac
Torque wins races, HP sells cars.

what are you implying in regards to the civic si?

yes it outputs adequate torque - its got short gearing allowed by a high redline

Adequate, at best. The torque does come with a few cavaets. Now, I don't have a Civic Si, but I think I can speak fairly well for it considering my car. 2000 Celica GT-S. Dynoed, has lower HP, but lower weight. Weight/Hp ratios are 16 for the civic, 16.6 for the celica. Gearing is the same within a few percentage points. Redline is 8000 on both, switchover to the high cam, giving the nice kick in the pants, occurs *slightly* earlier on the Si, but essentially 6000 rpm for both. Skidpad and slalom scores also within a few percentage poitns either way, depending where you look. So speaking in terms of performance, VERY similar cars. Both have about 6.9 0-60 times.

Adequate is a relative term. You'll have no problem getting around town, but the full performance of the engine is just not there unless you upshift over 6000rpm. 1st and 2nd gear are so short, that it is a very jumpy ride at those rpms in those gears. You really, really have to push it to get that torque. On paper, it sounds like the high redline makes up for the lack of low-end torque, but in reality, it doesnt.

Having lived with this car for a while, I've come to appreciate what you get from a peaky, light car like the Si. Great economy, great handling, and even though you have to work for it, pushing the car to it's limits is FUN. There's nothing like screaming down the street at 7000 rpm in 2nd gear. But because it requires concentration to push it like that (you can easily overrev if youre not very careful 6000 is not far from the 8000 redline), it's not something you get to use as often as you'd like. You stay in that peak zone for a split second, and then you had better shift - that alone limits its utility.

Whereas the torque from a good v6 is there at the press of the pedal, whereever you are on the tach. My next car will most definitely be torquier. Day to day, I'd much rather prefer the 2.4L camry/scion I4. I still love the car, and it's got a lot more going for it than performance (reliability and price...saftey not so much ) The Si is a great choice, but know that it's performance comes with a lot of strings attached.

Now, if you slap on a low lag turbo or supercharger onto the engine, we're definitely talking.

 

[LS20]

Originally posted by: BD2003
Adequate is a relative term. You'll have no problem getting around town, but the full performance of the engine is just not there unless you upshift over 6000rpm. 1st and 2nd gear are so short, that it is a very jumpy ride at those rpms in those gears. You really, really have to push it to get that torque. On paper, it sounds like the high redline makes up for the lack of low-end torque, but in reality, it doesnt.

Having lived with this car for a while, I've come to appreciate what you get from a peaky, light car like the Si. Great economy, great handling, and even though you have to work for it, pushing the car to it's limits is FUN. There's nothing like screaming down the street at 7000 rpm in 2nd gear. But because it requires concentration to push it like that (you can easily overrev if youre not very careful 6000 is not far from the 8000 redline), it's not something you get to use as often as you'd like. You stay in that peak zone for a split second, and then you had better shift - that alone limits its utility.

Whereas the torque from a good v6 is there at the press of the pedal, whereever you are on the tach. My next car will most definitely be torquier. Day to day, I'd much rather prefer the 2.4L camry/scion I4. I still love the car, and it's got a lot more going for it than performance (reliability and price...saftey not so much ) The Si is a great choice, but know that it's performance comes with a lot of strings attached.

and against the 2.4l camry/scion (or a v6), once the 1.8L gts/2L si gets going, would need to be shifted to a taller gear which lowers its torque output (at the driving wheels). and thus camrys and scions are not as fast as gts' and sis. peak torque Figure is not as good determinant of performance as peak hp Figure. so that oft-quoted carol shelby liner is oversimplified, misleading, and misinterpreted by many people

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: LS20

Originally posted by: BD2003
Adequate is a relative term. You'll have no problem getting around town, but the full performance of the engine is just not there unless you upshift over 6000rpm. 1st and 2nd gear are so short, that it is a very jumpy ride at those rpms in those gears. You really, really have to push it to get that torque. On paper, it sounds like the high redline makes up for the lack of low-end torque, but in reality, it doesnt.

Having lived with this car for a while, I've come to appreciate what you get from a peaky, light car like the Si. Great economy, great handling, and even though you have to work for it, pushing the car to it's limits is FUN. There's nothing like screaming down the street at 7000 rpm in 2nd gear. But because it requires concentration to push it like that (you can easily overrev if youre not very careful 6000 is not far from the 8000 redline), it's not something you get to use as often as you'd like. You stay in that peak zone for a split second, and then you had better shift - that alone limits its utility.

Whereas the torque from a good v6 is there at the press of the pedal, whereever you are on the tach. My next car will most definitely be torquier. Day to day, I'd much rather prefer the 2.4L camry/scion I4. I still love the car, and it's got a lot more going for it than performance (reliability and price...saftey not so much ) The Si is a great choice, but know that it's performance comes with a lot of strings attached.

and against the 2.4l camry/scion (or a v6), once the 1.8L gts/2L si gets going, would need to be shifted to a taller gear which lowers its torque output (at the driving wheels). and thus camrys and scions are not as fast as gts' and sis. peak torque Figure is not as good determinant of performance as peak hp Figure. so that oft-quoted carol shelby liner is oversimplified, misleading, and misinterpreted by many people

Well, it depends on what kind of performance you're looking for. Straight line acceleration, or general responsiveness on the street. Id say that responsiveness is a more important factor to the general buying public, and any attempt to encapsulate performance into one or two simple numbers is never going to tell the whole story.

 

[quikah]

Originally posted by: OS

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.

Does the Si idle at 2500 RPM? Seems kind of high. I ask because the graph for the Si starts at 2500 RPM, while the 3 and GTI start at 1000.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: quikah

Originally posted by: OS

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.

Does the Si idle at 2500 RPM? Seems kind of high. I ask because the graph for the Si starts at 2500 RPM, while the 3 and GTI start at 1000.

You often don't see dyno's start until 3k.

 

[quikah]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: quikah

Originally posted by: OS

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.

Does the Si idle at 2500 RPM? Seems kind of high. I ask because the graph for the Si starts at 2500 RPM, while the 3 and GTI start at 1000.

You often don't see dyno's start until 3k.

Yeah, I have noticed that, but they graph the GTI and 3 starting at 1000 (and the 3 graph is broken down by 500 RPM while the GTI is broken down by 1k RPM). Just curious, smacks of bias by the author of that article (which is already evident from the comment that turbo is cheating). What is the Si doing from 1000-2500? The author felt it was important to show what the 3 and GTI do in those ranges, why not the Si?

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: quikah

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: quikah

Originally posted by: OS

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.

Does the Si idle at 2500 RPM? Seems kind of high. I ask because the graph for the Si starts at 2500 RPM, while the 3 and GTI start at 1000.

You often don't see dyno's start until 3k.

Yeah, I have noticed that, but they graph the GTI and 3 starting at 1000 (and the 3 graph is broken down by 500 RPM while the GTI is broken down by 1k RPM). Just curious, smacks of bias by the author of that article (which is already evident from the comment that turbo is cheating). What is the Si doing from 1000-2500? The author felt it was important to show what the 3 and GTI do in those ranges, why not the Si?

The article says "That said, the Civic Si peaks at 134 lb-ft, and didn't stray much under 120 lb-ft from 2500 rpm (as low as we were able to obtain reliable data)". I don't quite understand why Dynos arent as accurate under 2.5k, but it seemed like the results they got varied widely, and rather than pick and choose which they would use, some might look good, some might look bad, they decided to just leave that part out altogether. That reeks of non-bias. Maybe they should have cut out sub 2.5k on the other cars, but if it's reliable data, why not leave it in there I suppose.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: quikah

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: quikah

Originally posted by: OS

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.

Does the Si idle at 2500 RPM? Seems kind of high. I ask because the graph for the Si starts at 2500 RPM, while the 3 and GTI start at 1000.

You often don't see dyno's start until 3k.

Yeah, I have noticed that, but they graph the GTI and 3 starting at 1000 (and the 3 graph is broken down by 500 RPM while the GTI is broken down by 1k RPM). Just curious, smacks of bias by the author of that article (which is already evident from the comment that turbo is cheating). What is the Si doing from 1000-2500? The author felt it was important to show what the 3 and GTI do in those ranges, why not the Si?

It might be an artifact of the gearing, since the car has to be "driven" to the right gear for dyno to start.

another dyno

The RSX K20Z1 is similar to the 06+ civic SI K20Z3, you can figure the shape of the torque curve is the same.

 

[quikah]

Originally posted by: BD2003

The article says "That said, the Civic Si peaks at 134 lb-ft, and didn't stray much under 120 lb-ft from 2500 rpm (as low as we were able to obtain reliable data)". I don't quite understand why Dynos arent as accurate under 2.5k, but it seemed like the results they got varied widely, and rather than pick and choose which they would use, some might look good, some might look bad, they decided to just leave that part out altogether. That reeks of non-bias. Maybe they should have cut out sub 2.5k on the other cars, but if it's reliable data, why not leave it in there I suppose.

The article may not be biased, but it is either taking liberties with the data, or the editor needs to be fired:

Honda's loud pedal anywhere between two and eight grand, you'll have at your disposal at least 85% of the maximum quoted torque. VW's turbo GTI will hand over at least 70% of its peak number at any time from two grand to its own redline. The Mazda is far behind the others at 20%.

According to their graph at 2k RPM, the 3 is generating ~120 lb-ft, this is ~50%. The 20% numbers is at 1k RPM (car is at idle practically). I would agree that the torque curve doesn't look too impressive from the 3. Could use some tuning most likely.

 

[overst33r]

Originally posted by: bootymac
Torque wins races, HP sells cars.

F1?

 

[BD2003]

The article may not be biased, but it is either taking liberties with the data, or the editor needs to be fired:

Honda's loud pedal anywhere between two and eight grand, you'll have at your disposal at least 85% of the maximum quoted torque. VW's turbo GTI will hand over at least 70% of its peak number at any time from two grand to its own redline. The Mazda is far behind the others at 20%.

According to their graph at 2k RPM, the 3 is generating ~120 lb-ft, this is ~50%. The 20% numbers is at 1k RPM (car is at idle practically). I would agree that the torque curve doesn't look too impressive from the 3. Could use some tuning most likely.

It says "The Si's 2.0-liter, four-cylinder screamer is rated at 197 horsepower and 139 lb-ft of torque." The dyno shows a essentially flat torque curve until 6k, then a slight jump to 135ish at 6k rpm. 120 measured/139 quoted = 86%.

For the VW "Volkswagen rates its 2.0T at 200 horsepower and 207 lb-ft of torque." Looking at the graph, it measures out between about 140 and 185. It says at least 70% 140/200 = 70%

For the 3, and 2k rpm, its about 120lb-ft, as you said. Mazda claims 280 ft-lbs. Thats 42% - where they got the 20% number, I'm not quite sure. Seems like they're factoring in turbo lag, or just can't divide properly.

 

[Sketcher]

My local dealer is getting two Si Sedan's in December, they're scheduled for build next month; both already sold. The Si Coupe is a 3-month backorder, the Si Sedan is expected to be similar. The sales rep is calling me back with actual pricing.

Other dealers are in same situation; only a couple available on build schedules for each dealer at this time. BTW, there's still a backlog on regular '07 sedans.

 

[Sketcher]

Blah. Pricing not available yet. However, the Rep said that the Sedans are only $100 more than the coupes and the variance between the Si Sedan and Si Coupe should be similar. Said to expect cost to be close to $21k.

 

[0roo0roo]

less flashy the better, less immature and cop magnet. good thing they went with sedan this time, i didn't like coupe ..and hatch is just tacky. sedan looks better and has better side impact protection

and yea its slightly mini tl'ish in some ways.

 

[Sketcher]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
less flashy the better, less immature and cop magnet. good thing they went with sedan this time, i didn't like coupe ..and hatch is just tacky. sedan looks better and has better side impact protection

and yea its slightly mini tl'ish in some ways.

We have a WINNER! Regarding the mention of side impact protection. Civic Sedan is the only car in its class and pricing w/side impact airbags standard. It's a factor that I consider important.

 

[d3n]

I am curious about the new Volvo C30 Coupe. It strikes me as a lot of what a new CRX would be.

 

[Sketcher]

Added two reviews to OP.