Drove one today - 4 door. Thoroughly impressed with the car. Steering feel, lightness, agility, pedal position, heavenly shifter and superb seats. Would make an excellent autoX car. It is a true driver's car. Position of steering wheel and shifter remind of M3...ergonomically it perfect.

Even like the futuristic interior. Fact that it has timing chain instead of belt is also appealing.

Want one!

4/7/2009 1:22:18 AM

Are you joking?

4/7/2009 2:09:11 AM

watch for 3rd gear grinds and bad heads.

4/7/2009 9:26:07 AM

I'll pass.

4/7/2009 2:56:56 PM

it would be a pretty fun daily driver

4/7/2009 3:01:52 PM

From a performance standpoint there's no reason to buy one of these over a Mazdaspeed3, Cobalt SS, or a WRX (if you can get one below MSRP).

And new? They've been out for like three years.

4/7/2009 4:49:15 PM

Quote :

"From a performance standpoint there's no reason to buy one of these over a Mazdaspeed3, Cobalt SS, or a WRX (if you can get one below MSRP)."

From a pure performance point of view sure. You don't buy a car in this class for pure performance. You buy it to be quick, reliable, easy on the eyes and easily sold when you're done.

I wont argue if it does any of those better. I honestly don't care.

4/7/2009 5:58:46 PM

i dont care about new mazda shit. now that ford owns it is garbage. always was garbage.

i also would never buy civic si because of power. car is incredibly agile and ton of fun to drive. on our local autoX civic si were running very nice times. it is very capable chassis and you feel completely in control. i like it.

4/7/2009 9:01:30 PM

lets get one thing in the clear. you dont buy a civic anything for power.

4/7/2009 9:16:04 PM

Quote :

"i dont care about new mazda shit. now that ford owns it is garbage. always was garbage"

How far behind the curve are you? Now that Ford owns? You state that like it just happened. Additionally, as of 1-2 months ago Ford doesn't own them anymore, so nicely done.

4/7/2009 10:35:14 PM

it's a nice car for the money, especially now since you can get it in sedan. I wouldn't mind owning one.

4/7/2009 11:12:08 PM

Quote :

"How far behind the curve are you? Now that Ford owns? You state that like it just happened. Additionally, as of 1-2 months ago Ford doesn't own them anymore, so nicely done."

gtfo.

4/8/2009 10:45:17 AM

lulz

4/8/2009 12:33:09 PM

Quote :

"it's a nice car for the money, especially now since you can get it in sedan. I wouldn't mind owning one"

meh if im gonna pay that much for a honday it needs to be an NSX with mods

4/8/2009 12:36:02 PM

i wouldn't pay that much for a car period

4/8/2009 12:42:00 PM

i couldn't pay that much for a car anyway

4/8/2009 11:50:23 PM

too busy paying fines and lawyers and financing your huffy bike from walmart after your dui failfest?

4/10/2009 8:11:36 AM

http://horsepowerjunkies.com/forums/showthread.php?t=81834

I like this one from HPJ.

4/10/2009 1:48:34 PM

i tried to like this car but i just couldn't do it. it shouldn't take that much work just to get a car to accelerate.

4/10/2009 2:54:27 PM

just press the gas pedal and shift when it hits redline (into a gear higher than youre in). it isnt hard. first gear isnt THAT long. if you're not into premeditated speed this type of engine is certainly not for you. i could completely understand that viewpoint. sounds like a can of bees!

4/10/2009 8:21:44 PM

it just seemed like if you wanted to feel the car accelerate you had to downshift and beat the crap out of it...if youre cruising around 3K RPMS and stomp the gas nothing happened. i loved everything else about the car, but couldnt get over that. went with a gti instead

4/10/2009 10:18:24 PM

well i mean it is Vtec so its power is mostly up top.....It's a high revving engine its doing what it was designed to do.

4/10/2009 10:45:35 PM

Quote :

"if you wanted to feel the car accelerate you had to downshift and beat the crap out of it."

Maybe in your mind you feel you are beating the crap out of it. In reality you are using the engine exactly as it was designed. They have been making 8000rpm engines for the last 20 years. The GTI is a very nice car so I dont think you went wrong! I love hatchbacks and heavily considered a rabbit at one point. I dont own a civic si for what its worth but I do enjoy the engine they placed in the car. I'm not really a big fan of "one size fits all sports sedan".

4/11/2009 10:28:10 AM

it is geared and designed exactly like e46 m3, minus 2 cylinders.

4/11/2009 11:31:49 AM

There are a large number of differences between the design of an S54 and the design of a k20 beyond the cylinder count.

cast iron block, ITBs , seperate oil pump for "vtec" , expensive ass one piece header, plastic fin waterpump. The s54 is/was a piece of work but it isn't nearly as K.I.S.S. as a K20. Rightfully so they put the engine in a 50/60k? car versus a 20k car .

The inline 6 high revver platform is amazing. I wish they ,bmw , had kept their sights on that platform and produced a cheaper and lower weight (aluminum block) version. I think the days of high revving engines is fading with the mass adoption of turbo'd cars. We have an example in this thread alone with the GTI purchase. You will continue to see it from Honda for awhile because they are about the last on the planet to adopt new technology. I was honestly shocked when I saw the s2000 with a timing chain and coil packs .

4/11/2009 12:19:49 PM

Quote :

"There are a large number of differences between the design of an S54 and the design of a k20 beyond the cylinder count"

Well, yeah of course. VERY Generally speaking...it is same concept...

4/11/2009 2:53:42 PM

Quote :

"it is geared and designed exactly like e46 m3, minus 2 cylinders and a driveshaft."

fixed it for ya...lol.

[Edited on April 11, 2009 at 3:55 PM. Reason : l]

4/11/2009 3:55:41 PM

Quote :

"The inline 6 high revver platform is amazing. I wish they ,bmw , had kept their sights on that platform and produced a cheaper and lower weight (aluminum block) version."

N52B30

4/11/2009 7:51:53 PM

Quote :

"Well, yeah of course. VERY Generally speaking...it is same concept..."

Well they are both high output power at high rev motors. I guess I see what you were saying. You made a very very generalized statement. They are implemented very differently as I pointed out but as you stated designed with a similar goal.

Quote :

"N52B30"

Good point. 3L @ 265hp isn't THAT bad HP/L (ok it is bad but its affordable and thats what I asked for) but still maintains the high revving nature and is placed in an inexpensive (relative to ///) car.

This thread needs more RPMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

4/12/2009 8:21:50 AM

All motor doesnt scale to supercar HP numbers without going to gargantuan L numbers.

4/12/2009 7:57:25 PM

^ wtf

4/14/2009 1:22:51 AM

^^ I think you mean without pushrods

4/14/2009 8:29:57 AM

lamborghini Murcielago is a good example. 640hp from 6.5 liters I believe, all motor and redlines at 8500. STraight up nasty!

4/14/2009 8:38:02 PM

^ not that impressive

4/16/2009 8:08:52 PM

How's a 6 1/2 liter engine that redlines at 8500 not straight up nasty?

4/17/2009 1:45:28 PM

^It's pretty nasty.

4/17/2009 1:58:44 PM

^ a 3.2 liter V-12 that produces 650 horsepower at 14k rpm, now thats impressive

4/18/2009 12:59:49 AM

why would ppl buy a civic when they could buy an accord

4/18/2009 1:03:19 AM

My point still stands.

4/18/2009 4:22:13 PM

Quote :

"I think e36 and e46 have the worst shifters in the world. it is complete garbage."

Quote :

"It is a true driver's car. Position of steering wheel and shifter remind of M3...ergonomically it perfect."

Which is it 1in10^9?

4/18/2009 8:20:17 PM

Quote :

"it just seemed like if you wanted to feel the car accelerate you had to downshift and beat the crap out of it...if youre cruising around 3K RPMS and stomp the gas nothing happened. i loved everything else about the car, but couldnt get over that. went with a gti instead"

yeah that is like the complete opposite of my car. My car does not have power to brag about but anywhere from 1800-5400 you have acceleration on demand.

4/19/2009 7:37:02 PM

Quote :

"Which is it 1in10^9?"

read again...

Quote :

"...Position of steering wheel and shifter remind of M3...ergonomically it perfect"

4/20/2009 10:55:40 AM

ergo, nomically.

4/20/2009 11:14:34 AM

Quote :

"think the days of high revving engines is fading with the mass adoption of turbo'd cars."

I don't know man, I think the formerly "low revving" motors are revving higher, like LSX motors and Nissan VQ engines, and maybe the highest revving motors are coming down a bit (like dropping the redline on the s2k). I think we're working towards an equilibrium. 7000rpm redlines are pretty normal now. I'll be interested to see if the new 1.6 liter rotary engine will still rev to 9000, or if the increased stroke (and torque) will necessitate a lower redline.

Those are all n/a engines though. The turbo ones and the direct injected gas ones don't seem to want to rev so high, especially since you tend to need less responsive turbos to keep the power from falling off up top.

4/20/2009 11:19:36 AM

dont forget piston speed!

4/20/2009 11:24:10 AM

^^

I dont consider anything that makes peak hp lower than 7000rpm a high revving engine.

4/20/2009 6:27:51 PM

^people on the bmw forum were trying to tell me that an N52 (330i engine) was a high revving engine.

4/20/2009 7:14:01 PM

we discussed just that earlier.


it's fundamental

4/20/2009 7:34:05 PM

damn bmw owners

4/20/2009 10:36:32 PM

Quote :

""think the days of high revving engines is fading with the mass adoption of turbo'd cars.""

Unless you are street racing, going to the track, or merely prefer the challenge/fun of a high revving engine than what is the advantage? For city driving, using your car's power to make your own holes in traffic, or passing a wider power band albeit less total power is where its at.

I'm not knocking those that prefer the SI or the high reving NA engines of many foreign marks; just trying to understand the negative tone perceived in the above quote.

Is there a difference in efficiency? I may get a few laughs from this one but is there a correlation with fuel economy in a wide power band car versus one which may have a higher but narrower power band.

[Edited on April 21, 2009 at 12:00 AM. Reason : l]

4/20/2009 11:59:24 PM