 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Honda Cars / October 2006Civic SI replacement?
Hello, a friedn of mine is looking for a new car, he was originally interested in a VW GTI, I tried to turn him on the the Civic SI, problem is, he can't (and doesn't want to) drive a standard (I'll never get some people, hehe) the only advantage I can see the GTI having over the SI is the optional automatic DSG tranny. What toher cars should i recommend to him besides the GTI that can come with an auto tranny? he wants something sporty so I don't think a regular civic would do it for him. > Hello, a friedn of mine is looking for a new car, he was originally > interested in a VW GTI, I tried to turn him on the the Civic SI, problem is, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > besides the GTI that can come with an auto tranny? he wants something sporty > so I don't think a regular civic would do it for him. Look for remaining RSX S at his local Acura dealer. From what I have seen the price is about the same as the SI considering dealer markups and the limited availability of the SI. > Hello, a friedn of mine is looking for a new car, he was originally > interested in a VW GTI, I tried to turn him on the the Civic SI, problem is, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > besides the GTI that can come with an auto tranny? he wants something sporty > so I don't think a regular civic would do it for him. Sorry - did not take into account the auto requirement. So, the RSX (without the S). > What toher cars should i recommend to him > besides the GTI that can come with an auto tranny? Subaru Impreza WRX. > Hello, a friedn of mine is looking for a new car, he was originally > interested in a VW GTI, snip IMHO, Civic doesn't have sufficient torque for sport with an automatic. Can your friend afford a Nissan Z? >> Hello, a friedn of mine is looking for a new car, he was originally >> interested in a VW GTI, > snip > > IMHO, Civic doesn't have sufficient torque for sport with an automatic. so what about the torque on the stick???? a motor doesn't suddenly drop output depending on the transmission it's bolted up to. > Can your friend afford a Nissan Z? jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in news:jrmdnZa8- t2mVbzYnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@speakeasy.net: >>> Hello, a friedn of mine is looking for a new car, he was originally >>> interested in a VW GTI, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > so what about the torque on the stick???? a motor doesn't suddenly drop > output depending on the transmission it's bolted up to. In most people's hands, a modern automatic is faster than a manual.  SignatureTeGGeR® The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ > jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in news:jrmdnZa8- > t2mVbzYnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@speakeasy.net: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > so what about the torque on the stick???? a motor doesn't suddenly drop > > output depending on the transmission it's bolted up to. Are you suggesting it's as easy to keep an automatic in a fairly narrow powerband? Doesn't the Civic offer a "simple" automatic (not a manual-shift auto)? > In most people's hands, a modern automatic is faster than a manual. This is true if you mean faster 0-60 mph times. However, the manual is still more fun on the road if only for the ability to hold a gear. > Hello, a friedn of mine is looking for a new car, he was originally > interested in a VW GTI, I tried to turn him on the the Civic SI, problem [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > him besides the GTI that can come with an auto tranny? he wants something > sporty so I don't think a regular civic would do it for him. thanks for the great suggestions. I actually just told him to go test drive an Acura RSX, I didnt' even realzie they were as cheap nas they are. might be worth it just for the benefits of owning an acura (better warranty, maintence agreement etc) the WRX is out of his price range, as well as the Nissan X (honestly I wouldn't recommend a nissan, their quality has gone WAY down hill in my opinion, I used to own a maxima) > I actually just told him to go test drive an Acura RSX, I didnt' even > realzie they were as cheap nas they are. might be worth it just for the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > wouldn't recommend a nissan, their quality has gone WAY down hill in my > opinion, I used to own a maxima) Toyota Scion tC may be another viable car if you can find one. The $20K Scion uses a 2.4 L engine which should produce sufficient torque to make an auto trans car a little sporty. [All the Infiniti owners I know are pretty happy with their cars, esp. the G35 which is built on the same platform as the Z.] >> I actually just told him to go test drive an Acura RSX, I didnt' even >> realzie they were as cheap nas they are. might be worth it just for the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Toyota Scion tC may be another viable car if you can find one. The $20K > Scion uses a 2.4 L engine which should produce sufficient torque eh? dude, what is it with you and this notion of torque and automatics??? what problems have you experienced with automatics and on what vehicles? > to > make an auto trans car a little sporty. > > [All the Infiniti owners I know are pretty happy with their cars, esp. > the G35 which is built on the same platform as the Z.] > eh? dude, what is it with you and this notion of torque and > automatics??? what problems have you experienced with automatics and on > what vehicles? Any economy car with an auto trans will conspire to keep engine RPM well away from the sporty range in order to maximize mpg. Unless you've got some torque at low RPM (not a Honda strength) the car's gonna be a slug - but fuel efficient. The auto trans driver seeking sporty performance is better served by seeking a broad, relatively strong torque profile, even at the expense of top end horsepower. People buy horsepower but they drive torque. A manual trans driver has a lot more control and can better utilize a small displacement engine - Honda S2000 being a prime example. >> eh? dude, what is it with you and this notion of torque and >> automatics??? what problems have you experienced with automatics and on >> what vehicles? >> > Any economy car with an auto trans will conspire to keep engine RPM > well away from the sporty range in order to maximize mpg. say what? have you any idea how fuel injection works? do you have broken fingers preventing you from touching the shift selector? > Unless you've > got some torque at low RPM (not a Honda strength) the car's gonna be a > slug - but fuel efficient. utter b.s. > The auto trans driver seeking sporty > performance is better served by seeking a broad, relatively strong > torque profile, even at the expense of top end horsepower. so don't buy a honda! i'll take the top end horsepower any day. > People buy > horsepower but they drive torque. what a chintzy little catch phrase. so when i beat the socks off people trying to drive on torque, [because i don't have any /and/ my civic is an automatic] is that a ripple in the space-time continuum of the universe, or it just the fact that it's horsepower that gets the job done? > A manual trans driver has a lot more control and can better utilize a > small displacement engine - Honda S2000 being a prime example. you're confused - you're criticizing automatics for torque issues, but it's not the transmission that's responsible, it's the motor. honda automatics are not planetary gear sets, hence the losses for both sticks and autos are about the same. modern automatics with electronic control are just as quick off the line as a stick. up to about 60, i can keep up with any ricer kiddie with my stock automatic d15 because foot down, it red-lines, just like it's designed to. if you're criticizing automatics for drivability and control, there's an advantage with a closer ratio 5-speed vs a 4, but that's regardless of an automatic configuration. and personally, i have no problem pre-selecting ratios when i want control. you need to actually drive a honda automatic some time. if it doesn't red line, there's a maintenance issue - it's not an automatic transmission design issue. > > Any economy car with an auto trans will conspire to keep engine RPM > > well away from the sporty range in order to maximize mpg. > > say what? have you any idea how fuel injection works? Are you saying that fuel consumption is identical whether I drive a road (same speed) in a higher or lower gear? The two overdrive gears in my car are there expressly to maximize mpg by allowing me to drive at low RPM. Throttle response is worse in 6th than in 4th because at low RPM I've got a lot less torque on tap. > > People buy horsepower but they drive torque. > > what a chintzy little catch phrase. You might want to look that one up. It has a long history (not with Honda fans, of course). so when i beat the socks off people > trying to drive on torque, This, of course, is done at the track where the other guy actually knows you're racing. modern automatics with electronic control > are just as quick off the line as a stick. For the majority of cars/drivers on the road, this is true. Keep your foot planted and a properly functioning auto should hold to redline before shifting. Now how about the 99% of the driving time when you're not drag racing? Inexpensive cars are all built for economical operation and their transmissions will shift into a high gear as soon as they can. > and personally, i have no problem pre-selecting ratios > when i want control. it's your car. Autos built for manual control vary in their design but the best give sporty drivers all the control they need. AFAIK, none of these manual-shift autos are available at the price point we're discussing. >>> Any economy car with an auto trans will conspire to keep engine RPM >>> well away from the sporty range in order to maximize mpg. >> say what? have you any idea how fuel injection works? > > Are you saying that fuel consumption is identical whether I drive a > road (same speed) in a higher or lower gear? no guy, and nor were you. either you're failing to articulate your original point [whatever that may be] or you're trying to wriggle out of the fact that there's no inherent output difference between a honda auto and a honda stick. > The two overdrive gears in my car are there expressly to maximize mpg > by allowing me to drive at low RPM. Throttle response is worse in 6th > than in 4th because at low RPM I've got a lot less torque on tap. ok, this is where you show you don't know what you're talking about. lower revs != lower consumption. and only a kid with no driving experience would attempt to criticize a motor for "lack of torque" when trying to pull too high a gear. how old are you btw? >>> People buy horsepower but they drive torque. >> what a chintzy little catch phrase. > > You might want to look that one up. It has a long history (not with > Honda fans, of course). but it's not original to you guy - it's a marketing slogan from one company with sluggish engines competing with another company that has engines that fly. > so when i beat the socks off people >> trying to drive on torque, > > This, of course, is done at the track where the other guy actually > knows you're racing. eh? > modern automatics with electronic control >> are just as quick off the line as a stick. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Inexpensive cars are all built for economical operation and their > transmissions will shift into a high gear as soon as they can. what? just like stick drivers do too? makes no sense. the reason i show well against ricers is precisely because they don't know when to shift properly - my automatic is programmed to shift perfectly, and better than any human can too. >> and personally, i have no problem pre-selecting ratios >> when i want control. > > it's your car. and i know how to drive it! just because you've never driven an automatic and definitely don't know /how/ to drive one, gives you absolutely ZERO basis to criticize. > Autos built for manual control vary in their design not on hondas they don't. the transmissions are identical. the only difference is the control system. > but the best give > sporty drivers all the control they need. AFAIK, none of these > manual-shift autos are available at the price point we're discussing. what price point is that? the prelude had tiptonic-style "manual control" on the auto. every other auto honda gives a driver excellent control by moving the selector lever and using the throttle pedal. so, what about your other snippage? are you going to address the fact that your criticism is based on a misunderstanding of control systems and that you don't understand that a given motor will have the same output regardless of the transmission it's bolted to? > > Are you saying that fuel consumption is identical whether I drive a > > road (same speed) in a higher or lower gear? > > no guy, and nor were you. Yeah, I was. See repeat performance below. > ok, this is where you show you don't know what you're talking about. > lower revs != lower consumption. Are you saying that fuel consumption is identical whether I drive a road (same speed) in a higher or lower gear? > so, what about your other snippage? are you going to address the fact > that your criticism is based on a misunderstanding of control systems > and that you don't understand that a given motor will have the same > output regardless of the transmission it's bolted to? I understood the OP was searching for a sporty ride with an auto trans. I stated a torquier engine provides a sportier drive. I stated that auto trans in economy cars tend to maximize economy by shifting into high gear as soon as possible. Can you defeat that by holding at wide open throttle? Sure. How many idiots drive like that on a routine basis? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.