n00dleboy

Chrysler PT Loser.



That changes with the 2003 PT Cruiser Turbo. Horsepower is up from 150 to 215, delivered through a four-speed automatic transmission or a Getrag 5-speed manual transmission. Torque is a hefty 245 lb.-ft at 3600 r.p.m., which enables this vehicle to pull away with some authority.

Price starts at $27,000 Canadian. + taxes (For manual tranny).

mwwhonda

iTrader: (3)

we must realize...honda will most likely never produce a car w/ a turbo and insane amounts of power.....because the demand is not there....hondas market is not primarly young people like ourselves....we just represent a very tiny portion of the market

Blown

Guys, what about all the new Pontiac GXP models coming out? I think the majority of them are coming supercharged.

n00dleboy

HOnda is stupid if they think the demand is not there. I bet more people would buy a car that comes turbo stock than getting an aftermarket one.

mwwhonda

iTrader: (3)

you are wrong......the demand is NOT there....maybe "we" as the small market portion have the demand for a turbo charged high performance civic......but the MAJOR portion of the market are buyers that will buy the car, and keep the car stock.....they buy the civic for its reliablity, comfort, safety, and fuel efficency....that is why the 7th gen has been "americanized"....with more features granted towards comfrot and safety, and less performance worthy components, such as the VTEC-E motor, the change in suspension, and the spongey 185/65 series tires.....all three which are NOT designed w/ performance in mind.

mark

Crashoveride

iTrader: (2)

That is true, the demand for a Turboed or SC'ed Honda is not in big demand. Sure they would no doubt sell quite a few, but when they look at it most people buy the Honda product for reliability, and safety, not performance and the cost for R&D to do that might not be worth it in the end. I do think that it would be a good time to try though, as they will start to loose the younger crowd now with all the other companies comming out with cars that are more sporty, powerful, faster, ect .....
With any luck they will though.

On a differnt note, my mother owns a PT cruiser and she wants me to try and get ahold of a Turbo for hers so she can smoke people, he he, I have a cool Mom .......

n00dleboy

No, i doubt it. Even if they threw a turbo in, the price wouldn't increase by that much. Many people, not just teens like ourselves, but even people in their 30-40's would get it. Horsepower + reliability is a big seller these days. Honda is known for reliability and quality, + the turbo for another 30-40 hps, and you will have a lot of sellers.

I bet you if honda came out with a turbocharged (si)SIR in a coupe form, and given they produce 5000 units, i bet EVERY single one of them would be sold out.

Take a look at the Protege. It's an econo car just like the civic. Yet Mazda produced 2500 Turbocharged protege's, and eVERYONE of them is almost sold out. Honda should at least try....

liq

even if its target is adult, look at chrysler its making a turbo pt cruiser, im sure the pt cruiser is targeted towards older people.

robbclark1

iTrader: (8)

I also believe that the demand is not there. Most people keep HOnda's stock. Though there is a subculture (us) that want performance. The problem with putting a stock turbo on a car like a civic, at least for tuners, is that you will want to upgrade it anyway!! why pay extra for something you are gonna take off?!?! Everyone wants the civic to come with rims, factory turbos, good stereo systems, and the like, but what is the use if you will just take off most of it anyway. It will drive up the price and you will end up spending more! I think dodge has the right idea with the Razor, though it is still an American car. It has nothing but pure mid 200HP, no power windows/doors, not even a radio!!

I read a review about the Turbo cruiser and they still felt like it was a sluggish car.

n00dleboy

The dodge Neon was an econo car, now the SRT-4 with turbo will sell for sure, for 20G's for that kind of power, it will sell. Like someone else said, the PT Loser was audienced for an older generation, yet they put a turbo on it. I'm sure it will still sell. .. and i bet.. even tho people say that after they get their turbo'ed civic will upgrade it, i bet most people won't and will leave it stock. Acura brought the Type R integra over and they sold every single one of them, and i know if they put a turbo in a civic, it will sell out and they will still make money off it. Don't know unless you try. The sentra was originally an econo car too, now they put the spec-v out and it's selling pretty well also... sigh.. Honda.. Well, i jumped from Acura to Honda and now to Mazda.. i think Audi will be next on my list.

CivicXLR8ion

All you guys are talking about turbocharging a civic think about what Honda has done with the Acura RSX Type-S it is a perfect car pushing out 200HP and it could probably take most cars with a turbo, like the MazdaSpeed Protege or even the 1.8T GTI. All my friends drive GTI VR6's and they even respect the RSX. I'm not saying it wouldn't be badass if Honda came out with a turbo Civic but if you want factory proformance then buy an Acura.

n00dleboy

RSX isn't a cheap econo car.

.. and yes, the RSX-s may beat the Mazdaspeed in a straight line, but on an autocross, track or twisties, the RSX-s will be beaten hands down.

robbclark1

iTrader: (8)

The desire for speed is great in the Americas. However, if we keep turboing stuff or making stuff faster, that leaves us with burning more fuel. As much as I like fast cars, i am completely content with my spunky civic. I am sure tons of other people will be too. Sure a turboed PT cruiser or neon will sell, but not nearly as much as the millions that regular pt cruisers or neons will sell. If I wanted a fast car, i wouldn't get a turbo neon. I feel it won't last as long as a honda and I would be willing to lose the power to have a car that will last me longer. You talk about the SE-R and the Mazda speed protege, but you fail to realize that they don't sell as much as base senteras or proteges (since there will only be like 2000 made of the mazdaspeed protege made). If you want to compare the SE-R or the MS protege to something compare them to the RSX and the Si. The Si has taken hits because it is kinda sluggish and it is ugly, but if it were a 1999/2000 Si then everyone would be raving how quick it was. If Honda took the step to bring of the Type Rs then we would see some good Honda cars, but the reason they aren't here is because emissions for foreign cars are a biotch!!
Honda has always been one to seperate themselves from the pack and then suprise people.

You mention that the RSX will take the MS protege off the line but not on autocross. You are too idealistic. There is no perfect car that has great handling, great speed, great gas milage, great looks, etc. Every car has its downfalls and good points.

n00dleboy

You make some good points, but i still feel honda needs to do come out with something other than their odyssey shaped SI(R). Albeit a turbo'd econo box, or a car with a little more potential with still great looks and great price, but with some OOOMPH in it. Let's just say.. Honda is alittle bland now?

..on a side note, someone compared how much faster the rsx-s was to the msp. So i threw in a counter with how much better the handling was.. that is all.

AEMcivic

Hey, I went to my local jeep/Mazda dealer to check out the new Mazda6 and they had a 4-speed Turbo PT Cruiser. That thing was kinda cool. It even had a nice sized FMIC. I wanna go back and test drive it.[IMG]i/expressions/demon.gif[/IMG]

Cyclosporine

I agree that maybe Honda should aim more for the younger market and make a better civic or factory turbo car, but, let's face it, Honda already has it's performance car and all N/A, it has the S2000 and the NSX, which I bet anyone of you will kill for one of those car with good speed, good handling and average gas milage, Honda aims for all people, econo car=FIT and Hybrid, econo family car=Civic, sports car=Integra, SUV=CRV, 4x4=Pilot, Minivan=Odessey, mini-minivan=CTR, sports convertible=S2000, exotic=NSX and I don't know how many other, Honda doesn't need to make turbo car unless nobody I mean NOBODY buys their cars anymore[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-frown.gif[/IMG]

gggplaya

The fact is, honda could care less for turbo. In fact they frown upon it. It's just too hard to mass produce reliable turbo cars that still run well after several years. Yes, it can be done. But a majority of turbo cars that i have ridden in don't feel like they run verywell once they get older. They run sloppy and choppy.

Honda believes that through engine technology, they can achieve similiar "smooth" horsepower and retain their reliability and reputation and get decent gas mileage.

- this is not my speculation, i actually read that somewhere and just can't find the article.

S2000man01

iTrader: (1)

Someone finally hit it on the head.

Honda's reason for not using turbos has absolutely NOTHING to do with demand. Honda doesn't use turbo's in their cars because of reliability, pollution, and engine efficiency. Honda feels that technology is a better route to go. They will not use turbo's in their cars. But they'll use any other means they can. For example, the new NSX they are designing with over 400hp, that uses a combustion engine as well as an electric motor. The thing gets like 35mpg, and cranks out 400+hp.

And not all is lost with the civic. Honda is changing the civic in 2005/2006. More horsepower, sportier suspension, better handling.

And by the way.... the turbo PT cruiser is still a slow car for having a turbo. It runs like high 15's/low 16's. Taking a bloated pig like that and adding a tiny T25 turbo does jack squat.

Blown

Wow, you really don't know too much about the new 1.8T GTI. It has 180HP and what, 176 ft-lbs of torque? How can a RSX-S compare? I know a chipped Jetta with the 1.8T can run the 1/4mile in under 14 seconds. Now, about handling. Ever seen the GTi 337? I have and I also drove one. It has amazing handling. But, for some reason, that 337 hasn't sold yet. It's been sitting on the lot for 2 months now.

My personal take on this issue is that Honda will never bring out a turbo'd car. N/A and handling is their thing. The S2000 defines their goals, 240HP, 50/50 weight distribution, etc... How about the FP packages? What do they all entail for the RSX and Civic? The only thing Honda need to do about their cars is to make them more inspiring. Take for instance the Accord. The majority of accord owners upgrade to BMWs afterwards. Why? The Accord was bland. Look at the new re-designed Accord and you'll see how they're trying to change that.

Jon

S2000man and the other guy were right about the pollution deal. right now on yahoo's main page in the headlines section there is an article about honda being the least polluting car there is today.

anyways the specialty of Honda is to squeeze horsepower out of small displacement NA motors

robbclark1

iTrader: (8)

You mention that Honda has become bland. Well personally i think toyota has become bland. Besides lexus, which are all too expensive for most of us, they really dont' have much besides the GT-S and the MR2 (which is an ugly car). They don't even have an exotic or something comprable to an S2000. At least the new accord has an aggressive face. You know what tho, I think that these companies are bland for a reason. They know what works. Toyota and Honda have been 1 and 2 on the the top of almost every list when it comes to sales and reliability. All these other companies are taking risks where toyota and honda aren't to try and get some of the market. Honda has no need for FI when it uses technology to meet it needs. Now i am not saying that a faster car for the same price wouldn't be nice, but trading a faster car and losing all the important stuff isn't for me. all the cars in the civic's class can out run it in the 1/4 mile (most likely even an Echo), but most of those cars (Focus, Elantra, Lanos, Cavelier, Sunfire, etc) don't have the same backing of reliability and comfort the civic offers.

KeNsHiN

iTrader: (1)

i agree[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-puke.gif[/IMG]

Wanger

iTrader: (4)

just be greatful that honda put vtec in the lineup! shheeeeeeeesshh! you know a lot of "other" people buy hondas too and would like to keep the cost down. if they put out a stock turbo/SC, it wouldn't sell, then they would jackup the prices on the other models to make up for the loss.

Shawn02

Years ago, Toyota had my vote. Lately, Honda added spice to the lineup where toyota did not. They have a creative way of creating a weird split and yet keeping many older, repeat customers. toyota now has the blandness, the new camry isn't all that, outside or inside. I'll give this topic some more thought, and actually add a real original idea a bit later.

Blown

One thing I'm enjoying is how all the Domestics are coming out with concept cars. Even if they don't make it into production, gotta love the fact that they are trying new things. It would be nice to see Honda and Toyota be more adventerous.

TwilightX

iTrader: (1)

You have to also give credit to a company that can still produce low emissions and still push the envelope in terms of HP (in reference to the S2000). I mean a turbo is great and all, but the fact remains that if you increase the output, something has to suffer. Engine performance and fuel/emissions quality don't go hand in hand, but I think Honda gives the market the best of both worlds. At least for the every-day consumer.

This car was not made to be fast, or even that inspiring. It's just right for A to B, and a little pep in between.

An interesting tidbit that I read, Honda is ranked #5 in R&D in Technology Review. It spent in its latest year 3,165 million dollars for R&D which is a 1% reduction from the previous year, and produced 58,959 million in revenue, up .7% from the previous year. All the companies above it spent more on R&D, but all reported losses in total sales. By this study, they are #2 in R&D spending per employee (120,600 employees = $26,240per head). First was Opel per head.

They spend less, earn more, and still able to produce an excellent car for the price. I'd say that's pretty good by my standards...

Blown

If you look at profits, Porsche reins!

Now, low emission systems hamper fuel economy, thus more fuel is used. Which is better? Less emissions? Or, better fuel economy. If you look at the car level, it's good on the environment. However, if you look at the big picture, if you use more fuel, that means more oil has to be pumped, more gas has to be refined, more pollutants are released, etc... Overall, the crap is shovelled to a different pile. Same goes with electric cars.

Diemos

So mark youv done a survey recently on what the market is about? Props on the bash on the suspension, but VTEC-E.. only one Civic comes with that engine my friend, and if the market isent there for a performance civic why make an SI? I rest my case.

Blown

Sure, there is a market for the SiR but it's targeted for the wrong people. They appeal to the younger crowd but insurance doesn't make them affordable. That would be true if they introduce a high performance civic, honda couldn't sell enough to make a big enough profit off of them.

OMega

Sorry, HONDA has made and still makes turbo cars. The first turbo honda was the turbo city. The second was the acura legend. Turbo hondas. The other ... can't rember the name but it some kind of mini van. In fact mugen got its real start in cars because of turbos. But in the end turbo is a path honda rearly takes.