Rep Power: 0

Whoa!

I got my new Car and Driver March 2002 today, and I was surprised to see a Civic Si lose against a Focus SVT and a GTI 1.8T. I hoped the new Civic would win (it is the newest design out of the three) but it got second place... I looked back at the specs and times to figure out why...this is where the real shocker comes... an 8.0 sec 0-60 time! The 1999-2000 Si was quoted at 7.1 seconds by the same magazine, and the previous Si engine was smaller (1.6 liters) and was not equipped with "i"-VTEC. (It did have VTEC though). Comments? Why the slow times?

MyOtherRideIsBritney

2k2 Satin Silver Metallic EX Auto
BONE STOCK

 
Rep Power: 0

i dont like how that test is run.... the Si is the only one without FI.... supercharge that Si and then we'll see a real test.[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG]

 
Rep Power: 0

hmmmm wow 8.0...i heard 7.5 now its getting worse [IMG]i/expressions/laugh2.gif[/IMG]

Why so bad? Looks? 6800rpm line? It's Heavier? worse final drive ratio? Should I even keep going??

Personally I don't think this car should have the privilage of the wearing the Si/SiR badge

 
Rep Power: 0

I think the new Si weighs quite a bit more than the 99-00

 
Rep Power: 0

and since when does the SVT have FI?

last I heard it was N/A 170hp 6spd.

 
Rep Power: 0

hmmmm. cant wait to get home and read............
and yea what the hell FI[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/IMG]
the svt is n/a........ port,polish,,,i have to read.

JR does make a SC for the normal focus.........pushes like 170hp[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-puke.gif[/IMG]slow sor FI.
anyway peace.
[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG]

 
Rep Power: 0

you know whats funny? Someone on this board said they pushed 7.7 0-60 in there EX with there G-tech.

Thats fuucking sad if an EX gets up quicker than an Si.

 
Rep Power: 0

Not surprised that it's slower since it's heavier...

But I wouldn't get a Ford still... if I was stuck with the three, I dunno what I'd take cuz the Civic sucks as a stock car. You know, I'm REALLY curious on how this car is going to sell. It's ugly, and like Neo said, it doesn't deserve the Si badge. It's ugly... go get a real Civic Si coupe, and Honda ought to make their Si in the form of a coupe. (Gee... I wonder what 3 colors we'd be stuck with... I'd hope the same... black and electron blue I'd hope for... oh, and white wouldn't be bad!)

 
Rep Power: 0

personally I would have liked a 99-00 Si in white. Too bad its on these fugly hatches.

Between the three? GTi baby. GTi.

 
Rep Power: 0

Theyr'e here!


The new Si is a LOT heavier than the old one. Also compared to the Focus SVT (which is also heavy but not quite as much) it has 10 less HP and I think like 20 less torque. Add to that gearing optimized for fuel economy and it ends up with a surprisingly slow car.

As for the styling as has been said many times before it is a matter of opinion, here are a couple of shots of the new Si next to the SVT.




------------------
Rainforest Green 2000 Ford Focus ZX3 5 Speed "Kona Car"
-----
Focaljet | Club-Focus | FCI | Club Si
-----
My Home Page
-----
Founding Member and Earl of Team Slow: SoCal (SlowCal)

 
Rep Power: 0

The Honda emblems off the car is the only thing I like on it... oooh, look at how they sparkle... it's going to be glued on to my school binder.

 
Rep Power: 0

Here are the specs and times...

Civic Si: 160 hp @ 6500 RPM; 132 lb/ft of torque @ 5000 RPM; 0-60 8.0 s; 0-100 22.6 s; 2740 lb weight; 1/4 mile 16.2 s @ 86 MPH

Focus SVT; 170 hp @ 7000 RPM; 145 lb/ft of torque @ 5500 RPM; 0-60 7.8 s; 0-100 22.6 s; 2800 lb weight; 1/4 mile 16.1 s @ 87 MPH

GTI 1.8T; 180 hp @ 5500 RPM; 174 lb/ft of torque @ 1950 RPM; 0-60 6.5 s; 0-100 17.9 s; 2900 lb weight; 1/4 mile 15.3 s @ 94 MPH

Car and Driver said that that odd looking shifter on the Si's main cluster looked like a "bent nail, but it works brilliantly." I wanted to know, it looks so weird...the last type of shifter I saw like that was in an Alfa Romeo Spider Veloce. Back on topic...Looking at the numbers, it is easy to see why the VW creamed the other two, just look at where its peak torque is, a mere 1950 RPM. But it is still hard to believe an 8.0 second 0-60 time from the Si. In November of 2000, Car and Driver tested a 2k1 EX Manual and ran an 8.4 second 0-60!


BTW - does anyone have the curb weight for the B16 Si?


MyOtherRideIsBritney

2k2 Satin Silver Metallic EX Auto
BONE STOCK

 
Rep Power: 0

Gaaaa.... Never seen a side by side pic of the focus and the Si. Damn they are almost Identical. WHY

New Si makes me sick[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-puke.gif[/IMG]

The new motor makes me

 
Rep Power: 0

i've seen a similar trial done which included the SER Spec-V....Si coming third in the 0-60 ...lost to the SVT by .1 and of course the GTI...

 
Rep Power: 0

i didnt read the article, so i cant say anything about it.

I CAN say that

A) i-VTEC doesnt make the car any faster. I dont know why you mentioned that.

B) the stupid 02 Si weighs 2800Lbs where as my car weighs in at 2600.

C) magazines are notorious for fucking up cars times. Im willing to bet each of those cars are a bit more capable then what they claim.

D) they can NEVER launch hondas (or any other low torque car) right in larger publications such as road & track and car & driver. This is why they get crap times for the S2000 and high 15s for the 99/00 Si. they claim its because of the lack of torque that its slow off the line, which is true in part, but if they were launching correctly it would be more of a non issue.

E) newer doesnt mean better.

F)

 
Rep Power: 0

Just to let you know, this is the same engine as in the non-Type S RSX. So why is an engine swap so "impossible?"

 
Rep Power: 0

Actually the engine is tuned a little differently. The base RSX has more torque than the new Civic Si/Si-R.

 
Rep Power: 0

everyone runs diffirent times and results on the tests...
.like for the WRX in motorweek it ran
5.6 0-60 compared to others 5.9-6.3 sec.

 
Rep Power: 0

So now its not only ugly but slow too.

 
Rep Power: 0

LOL

JSH summed it up pretty good!

 
Rep Power: 0

<< and since when does the SVT have FI?

last I heard it was N/A 170hp 6spd. >>



i thought it was supercharged?[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/IMG]

 
Rep Power: 0

you thought wrong

 
Rep Power: 0

Wow, it's amazing how similar the new SI is to the Focus. I had never seen the two fronts
side by side like that! The SI also looks a lot like a 1/2 size version of my Honda Odyssey minivan.
(I'm sure that comment won't go over well with some of you). [IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/IMG]

Like another "poster" mentioned, you cannot go solely by 1 magazines times. Other magazines will run similar tests, no doubt, and the times will be different. Maybe the other two cars were well broken in already and the Civic was not. This will make a difference. Don't get all twisted around the axle on this one.

Wait and see if the Civic can represent a little better in the face of tough competition.

You can't deny that the SVT Focus is a nice ride.

 
Rep Power: 0

If those times are close to being correct and the same is true for these times on the 2k1 Civic EX 2001 Honda Civic EX review @ Edmonds then in stock form these cars accelerate about the same.

 
Rep Power: 0

The new Si will probably be a little faster than the rest of the 2K1's, due to the extra power, but the damn coupes weigh like 300 lbs less. Thats alot of weight!! When I put my 75lb sub box in my Si, I can feel a big difference. I couldn't how bad 300lbs would handicap it. Now if they slapped that sucka of an engine into the coupe and still kept under 2600 lbs, then it would probably beat out the old Si's.

 
Rep Power: 318

I bet I can get the SI up to 200 horsies atleast......

I just need about 20 stickers though.

 
Rep Power: 0

honda screwed up with the new Si/SiR model, theyll probably pay for it with less sales. maybe if its bad enough theyll start making a coupe version with the Si/SiR engine instead (and probably sell a lot more of them) Si/SiR hatchback = [IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-puke.gif[/IMG]

 
Rep Power: 0

Now that we've bashed the poor SI into the ground because of what may amount to be a few tenths of a second, what other performance numbers is the new SI capable of?

Perhaps it's more solid than the previous car?
Brake better?
Overall handling?

I doubt Honda would go backwards, especially in the face of stiff competition from other manufacturers....

Remember, it's just ONE magazine. ONE test.

I guess I'll have to wait for my Car and Driver...

 
Rep Power: 0

I don't see Honda making an Si(R) coupe just because it didn't do that well in an early test by one mag. However I could see them making an Si(R) coupe because this new one is ugly as hell [IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-puke.gif[/IMG].
I just don't know what it is, but the new Type R looks way better than the new Si(R) despite them having identical bodies (minus extra trimmings like skirts and stuff)...

 
Rep Power: 0

I like beefmans link to the 2k1 ex......niiice
[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG][IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/IMG]