Topic: Test Drive: 2014 Honda Civic Si

[Autos_Editor]

Honda Civic Si ' a little sizzle.
Read More...

[Great_Big_Abyss]

Testing this thing on a track is a waste of time, methinks.  The Civic SI is no longer a performance car, but rather a compact car with some extra fun bits added on.  Trying to view it, test it, or drive it as a performance or track car (like the BRZ, STI, Focus ST, etc) isn't the right thing to do anymore.  Jacob, your last couple of paragraphs sums up the civic exactly, and this SI is just more of the same.  It's a really, really good compact car that happens to be more fun to drive than other current day compact cars such as the standard Civic, Sentra, Corolla, Cruze, etc.


Who thinks Civic should build and sell a special stripper track version of this car? 

-Delete all luxuries (heated seats, Air Con, power everything, radio, screens, etc.).
-Delete all the sound insulation, rear seats, all in the name of saving weight.
-Keep the suspension and Powertrain - these are already very good Maybe massage the engine a little to improve breathing a little more.
-Ship with performance rubber on all four wheels.

Drop the price by $5000 over the current SI, and you have yourself a real little boy racer.

[Noto]

It really makes me laugh - I don't usually check who writes each article until after I finish reading it, but this time, I got to:

You can tell this is the boy-racer model by the towel rack on the bootlid,

...and knew with 100% certainty that this article was written by the infamous, talented, and comical Mr. Black.

Never change, Jacob, never change. (that goes for all ya'll writers on this site!!)

The Civic pulls far harder than a naturally aspirated little four-pot should, but it somehow lacks that intangible, pinned-to-your seat sense of “pphhwoaarrrr” you might hope for.

I'm assuming the word you're looking for here is "torque"

It’s rated at 10.7/7.6/9.4 L/100 km city/highway/combined

Maybe I'm nuts, but I think these newer ratings are either insane, or the Civic SI is a beast on fuel - how can it only achieve 7.6L/100km on the highway?  That's brutal...but then I look at the ratings for the regular Civic and disagree with the 6.5L/100km, too.  My lassie pal has a 2012 Civic and in the City she averages ~7.2L/100km and on the highway it drops well below 6.5L/100km, even at 120km/h (or the few speeding tickets she's gotten having travelled somewhat faster than that).

I'm happy to see ratings increased to be more realistic, but paint me green and call me Gumby, these seem about 0.5L/100km too high (not your fault, of course, Jacob!).

Those who read Autos.ca regularly will know that I am fond of making large sweeping statements

As far as Lanewatch is concerned, I've never seen it in action - but my coworker had a Pacifica, traded it in for an Accord Touring (4-banger), and has touted it as her single favourite feature in the car.  Seems odd to me that it would be so effective, but it really is garnering some rather prominent praise.

In the end the only safe way for me to park was with the driver’s side against the wall, then climb over the console and out the passenger door so I could let Maddie out.

I will buy you a Burger's Priest burger if you film the above.  My goodness that'd be a hilarious sight of gymnastic proportions.

There is a miniscule central hub,

See, I can understand the hub in AWD cars.  I can even understand the hub in cars that are FWD if AWD is offered somewhere on the same chassis.

...I cannot, for the life of me, understand why any trim or model of the Civic would have a rear-wheel driveshaft hub.  It makes no sense.  None.  The Corolla, Sentra, etc. have done away with any bump at all.  I mean, I see that it truly is minimal, but why have one at all?  What does it add?  What's underneath it?  Would it really be that difficult to move whatever it is?

When you start to look beyond the performance hype of the Civic Si and see it as a Civic, it becomes clear why so many people buy these things.

And this is my biggest criticism of the Civic - and you can all be enthusiasts and boo me for it - I think it's ludicrous that there's no automatic version of this car.  The 2.4L with a CVT from the Accord should easily fit and it's already made.  To think that the only consumers that will spring for a performance-enhanced vehicle want it to be 6MT-only is to ignore the population.  Hell, if we can have a CVT-laden WRX, why can't the Civic have the SI with an automatic?  I've said it before that I know several people who have abandoned the Civic line after 2005 because the suspension became less capable and have yearned for a higher-performance model, but their significant others won't allow a manual-transmission car into their garage.

There's emotions, and then there's business sense.  It seems like poor business sense for pretty much any car to be manual-only in North America.  In Europe/elsewhere, sure, but we silly North Americans like our automatics.  Silly as we are, that's our preference and the statistics show it.

Jacob, yet another informative, yet entertaining review with a definitive tone and conclusion - quite enjoyed.  Thanks!

[mixmanmash]

Noto, the hump in the floor is usually for adding strength.

[toolatecrew]

Test drove a Sedan SI this summer.

I was very taken with the gearbox/engine and suspension. I know its not "hot" like a Focus ST or Mazdaspeed 3 but I am OK with warm more along the lines a of  GTI. I'll trade some ultimate performance at my age for livability. The lanewatch is indeed steller. I am not one for such things usually. Self park..I know how top park..radar cruise...I can pay attention and hit the brake. I am even capable of doing a blind spot check but this thing is so easy and automatic it seems silly everyone doesn't have it. it doesn't preclude you checking yourself but it just might save you if you miss something or simply can't see it.

That said the interior is too boy racer in my opinion of a "warm" car like this. Yes maybe in a screaming Civic R red seat inserts and flashy red gauges everywhere would fit. But if they toned down the car they should tone down the interior.

Ideally this what the ILX should be. Just oull the interior out of the ILX and put it in this chassis with this powertrain etc.

I did think about it for a minute..having a fun frugal car that should last you many years. But I don't think I want to drive it when I'm 50. Whereas a GTI..sure.

[tortoise]

NoTo - It's also where they route the exhaust.

[bombastic]

"Civics are a favourite of parents buying the first car for their spoiled very lucky kids" - I would disagree with that since the insurance rates for Civic are insanely high for the price of the car. Even more for the "lucky kids". Most kids I see driving around are driving either a Cavalier/Corolla/Mazda/Focus and sometimes Jettas. Civic not so much.

[Noto]

Noto, the hump in the floor is usually for adding strength.

...which can be done in other ways that are not intruding into the passenger compartment.  If it can be done in a Corolla or a Sentra, so, too, can, and should, the Civic, Mazda3, etc.

Like I said - I understand what goes under that tunnel, but engineers can route piping around a flat floor.

[Kris78]

Noto, the hump in the floor is usually for adding strength.

...which can be done in other ways that are not intruding into the passenger compartment.  If it can be done in a Corolla or a Sentra, so, too, can, and should, the Civic, Mazda3, etc.

Had a look at the Nissan website - the rear hump in a Sentra is WAY more pronounced than the Civic. The Toyota site wasn't playing nice with my computer, but the test of the 2014 on autos.ca had a picture of the rear floor area. While definitely flatter than the Sentra, The Corolla didn't appear to be any flatter than the Civic. The hump in the Civic really is minuscule - as the review mentioned. If it is half an inch tall, I'd be surprised.

[Noto]

Had a look at the Nissan website - the rear hump in a Sentra is WAY more pronounced than the Civic. The Toyota site wasn't playing nice with my computer, but the test of the 2014 on autos.ca had a picture of the rear floor area. While definitely flatter than the Sentra, The Corolla didn't appear to be any flatter than the Civic. The hump in the Civic really is minuscule - as the review mentioned. If it is half an inch tall, I'd be surprised.

I was working off memory re: the Sentra - if it has a hump, then I retract any statement about it.  My 2010 Corolla has a completely flat floor.  I'll check again when I head home today, but if there's any hump, it's <1" tall and is pretty well level with the rear floor mats.

[pi314]

In my corolla there's a 1inch hump, not completely flat 

[hemusbull]

What an alienating discussion about one of most sold cars in Canada!

[Great_Big_Abyss]

Even the Civic I had (2008) had barely a hump in the floor.  It was, if anything an inch tall.  It was for all intents and purposes non-existant, and I think it is surely best in class.

The direction this discussion has taken is to disparage something that really isn't much of a problem at all.


Seriously guys, for those of you who disbelieve, go to a Honda showroom and go sit in the back seat of a Civic.  You'll see what I mean.

[Noto]

K, end discussion.  It doesn't matter.  My comment was more so for vehicles that have large humps though the platform will never be used for AWD.  C-segment cars are not likely offenders.

[nlm]

And this is my biggest criticism of the Civic - and you can all be enthusiasts and boo me for it - I think it's ludicrous that there's no automatic version of this car.  The 2.4L with a CVT from the Accord should easily fit and it's already made.  To think that the only consumers that will spring for a performance-enhanced vehicle want it to be 6MT-only is to ignore the population.  Hell, if we can have a CVT-laden WRX, why can't the Civic have the SI with an automatic?  I've said it before that I know several people who have abandoned the Civic line after 2005 because the suspension became less capable and have yearned for a higher-performance model, but their significant others won't allow a manual-transmission car into their garage.

Didn't the CSX have the same suspension as the SI?

Or do some suspension work on a different trim Civic. Probably would've cost the difference between the SI and the other trim anyways, if not less if you assumed that an automatic option on the SI would've added another $1000?

[Great_Big_Abyss]

K, end discussion.  It doesn't matter.  My comment was more so for vehicles that have large humps though the platform will never be used for AWD.  C-segment cars are not likely offenders.

Like my Altima.  IT has a large hump and no available AWD.  That being said, this may be because it is the same platform (Nissan D) as the Murano, which IS available with AWD. 

[greengs]

Testing this thing on a track is a waste of time, methinks.  The Civic SI is no longer a performance car, but rather a compact car with some extra fun bits added on.  Trying to view it, test it, or drive it as a performance or track car (like the BRZ, STI, Focus ST, etc) isn't the right thing to do anymore.  Jacob, your last couple of paragraphs sums up the civic exactly, and this SI is just more of the same.  It's a really, really good compact car that happens to be more fun to drive than other current day compact cars such as the standard Civic, Sentra, Corolla, Cruze, etc.

I don't know about waste of time.  I think the Si easily competes with the BRZ/FRS. 

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/08/honda-civic-si-dominates-subaru-brz-in-track-test/

[Great_Big_Abyss]

I don't know.  They tested the HFP version which among other things gets you upgraded suspension AND high performance tires (instead of the crappy MXM4's that are on the standard SI).  All this is at a premium, of course.   I doubt that the regular SI would be as fast as a BRZ, nor do I think it would be as fun.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Testing this thing on a track is a waste of time, methinks.  The Civic SI is no longer a performance car, but rather a compact car with some extra fun bits added on.  Trying to view it, test it, or drive it as a performance or track car (like the BRZ, STI, Focus ST, etc) isn't the right thing to do anymore.  Jacob, your last couple of paragraphs sums up the civic exactly, and this SI is just more of the same.  It's a really, really good compact car that happens to be more fun to drive than other current day compact cars such as the standard Civic, Sentra, Corolla, Cruze, etc.

I don't know about waste of time.  I think the Si easily competes with the BRZ/FRS. 

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/08/honda-civic-si-dominates-subaru-brz-in-track-test/

there was just 1/10th of a second difference between these two pocket rockets, with the Civic Si HFP posting a 1-minute 26.5-second best lap and the BRZ coming in at 1-minute 26.6-seconds.

But as was said, the BRZ was on Michelin Primacy tires while the Civic Si HFP was rolling on Michelin Pilots. In other tests, the BRZ had picked up over 2 seconds a lap with sticky tires

[whaddaiknow]

BRZ vs Si has been argued ad nauseum on this forum. It's not the point.

The answer to the Great_big's question is a resolute NO, Testing this thing on a track is NOT a waste of time. Si, a bigger FWD car with a usable rear seat can hold its own against the BRZ with a difference in performance that is negligible for all intents and purposes. It's a matter of personal taste really and a testament to Honda's engineering team who managed to build a FWD car that is a few years old and gives the modern RWD purpose built the-most-fun-to-drive car a serious run for its money, all that while offering a way more comfortable daily driver.