lol, some Mullet-Mobile?
Honda Civic Si
- Thread starter Winston
- Start date
- Status
J, I paid $18,600 plus freight. I log too many miles right now to bite down on an expensive car. I sometimes wish I got the Accord Coupe' though.
That is actually what I wanted as its much quieter (Saab added more sound insulation, upgraded WRX interior, softened suspension a bit without a large decrease in handling). It was more attractive without that large ugly hood scoop on my car. However at the time I bought the WRX no rebates on the 9-2x which later was $5000. Currently its a decent bargain(large rebate) in its last year of 2006(GM sold Subaru shares) with its incredible 2.5L lower pressure and much less peaky turbo engine.
Why yes, it is "some Mullet-Mobile" which I DID pay less than $20K for, and WILL do what I said it can. No, I never said it weighs slightly more than an Si (though it is 6 Vettes with that statement. I guess if it does not come from a Nippon or Tuetonic nameplate then it MUST be cr@p, huh??
Now, now, let's remember how this escalated....
What DO you have, BTW? I like anythng fast. Each has its own merits.
What DO you have, BTW? I like anythng fast. Each has its own merits.
quote:
Originally posted by dailydriver:
Wow, then my car, at < $20K new and tire mods, while getting 20mpg city even driven fairly hard and 32 mpg hwy. at > 70 mph is a real bargain, huh?? BTW, it's been just as "reliable" as ANY Honduh or TOYota for the last 95K miles of daily beatings in ALL weather conditions/seasons.
Also, just how heavy do you think C5/C6 Vettes are?? Hint; NOT much more than your "sport compact". Yes, you are right with a massive engine motivating a massive car, but the Vette is a massive engine motivating a svelte car, hence, GREAT performance with very good mileage. The f bodies are not much behind, and, as mentioned can also carry four people, just like your "sport" compact.
[/QB]
It's an F body of sorts. Great fun but not for me. I like quicker reflexes more than straight line speed. An Fs limits are high but not my kind of feel. I've got a Mazda 6 V6 at the moment and I'd still prefer something lighter and less front heavy. To each his own depending on likes. I'm not the one throwing stones and nobody said an F body was crappy. "BTW, it's been just as "reliable" as ANY Honduh or TOYota for the last 95K miles of daily beatings in ALL weather conditions/seasons." Somebody's name calling but at least you're using the right standards for gauging reliability. A Honda S2000 would be my idea of fun.
Mazda, THERE'S a car than can take a beating.
Never said it could. This one's even an auto
. Needed a wagon for work and thought I should put my cards on the table in this thread. Handles better tha anything else I could find that would haul as much. Couldn't find a stick in the time I had to get a car after my Pontiac Vibe GT(Matrix XRS) got totalled by a guy that ran a red. That car had ProKits, a bigger rear bar and a unichip. The torqueless wonder was an absolute blast and made power beyond 8k rpm but had a weak clutch for the application so I do understand that Toyota isn't perfect either. Was a little too small for my needs. I had a couple of Mazdas in the distant past that were very reliable. My early RX7 seemed bulletproof. My freind had a the hot Firebird of the day(1979). We both enjoyed driving the others car but in different ways. I'm not anti US. I just like what I like regardless of what others do. I actually like BMW 3 series for sedans and have owned a Saab 900 also which wasn't special in reliability and a Cherokee that was crappy. Owned other Japenese, German, French, and American cars. Driven M3's Maserati's and Porshe's that unfortunately weren't mine.
[ July 07, 2006, 12:44 AM: Message edited by: goodvibes ]
[ July 07, 2006, 12:44 AM: Message edited by: goodvibes ]
You're one of the few on here to admit this!(about the Nippon Giant) Sorry, as you were seeming to be one of the domestic nameplate bashers/haters which make up the vast majority on this site. It tends to make me a little defensive when so many are telling me my car is a P.O.S., and I know it is NOT!!
BTW; it's a 2000 Z28, no options except p.s. cooler (even has crank windows!!).
Also; yes, it does not have that "razor's edge, tossable" response on a tight autocross course (like a small, sport oriented FWD import), but it IS close, and will KILL most of those on an open road course, or mountain passes.
I saw not a single Camaro at either Speed GT nor the Touring Cars competition today. Mazda, BMW, Porsche, Mustang, Mercedes, Cadlliac, even a few odd cars. The awesome Camaro was nowhere to be found. #1 & #2 were the RealTime Acura TSXs and the RSXs were not far behind. If the Camaros are so great, why are the completely absent from pro-level competition? One can infer that the Z06 cannot really keep up with the Civic (RSX) in the "Real World".
Last time I checked the FWD imports were in a different class than the bigger displacement RWD/AWD cars, so they are not even running together. Funny how the big ol' Caddy with a "low tech"
When the f bodies were still in production (and therefore eligible), they did just fine thank you. Besides, Speed World Challenge/GT is not the only race series out there. F bodies still rule for the most part in SCCA T2 (yes, it IS amateur competition, so I guess it does not count
One can "infer" all they want, but they cannot break the laws of physics. A stock RSX/Civic is not going to beat a C5/C6 Z06 Vette (driven in the same manner they barely get better milage than the Z06!!
Do I sense "MY CAR IS BETTER THAN YOURS"? Right, I will not want to take a stock RSX against a C5/C6, but you gotta admit that they are still great cars for their purpose though. As for TOYotas and HonDUHs in general, hummm.... wait, who is going down here in the US? Name calling isn't good, m'kay.
Anyways, went off topic a little. I sense a headbutt coming my way now.
As for the milage for cars these days, a lot of the newer cars come with some seriously inflated milage ratings. It's probably because of that milage is such a good selling point these days. This is especially true for a few "younger" companies. You will be suprised how off some of the milage really ratings are.
[ July 10, 2006, 02:27 AM: Message edited by: SSQ ]
Anyways, went off topic a little. I sense a headbutt coming my way now.
As for the milage for cars these days, a lot of the newer cars come with some seriously inflated milage ratings. It's probably because of that milage is such a good selling point these days. This is especially true for a few "younger" companies. You will be suprised how off some of the milage really ratings are.
[ July 10, 2006, 02:27 AM: Message edited by: SSQ ]
Daily, If you flog both those cars around, their mieage will vary greatly. HP does come at some expense. If you don't use it like cruising aroung at 1500 rpm than the mileage can be great but if you choose to use it by winding up those big cylinders with lots of rich wot, the mileage suffers greatly in a big V8. It's not why you buy that vehicle anyway so I don't understand why it's become such an important point here.
lol, comparing a SI to a WRX, Corvette, or any other car costing $20,000+ more is pretty silly.
WRX in Canada MSRP is $48,995, before 15% tax, PDI, etc.
Corvette in Canada MSRP is $67,805 + 15% tax, PDI, etc.
Civic SI in Canada MSRP is $26,080 + tax, PDI, etc.
My point is, find a car for the same price as the SI that comes even close to matching it's performance and I'll send you my first born.
WRX in Canada MSRP is $48,995, before 15% tax, PDI, etc.
Corvette in Canada MSRP is $67,805 + 15% tax, PDI, etc.
Civic SI in Canada MSRP is $26,080 + tax, PDI, etc.
My point is, find a car for the same price as the SI that comes even close to matching it's performance and I'll send you my first born.
and drive any one of the above mentioned cars in regular day to day city driving (like I do, living in Montreal) and I'd bet the Si comes out on top, easily.
However, the anal retentive side of me agrees there is room for improvement. I thought Honda had forsaken turbos forever, until I saw details on the RDX. Can you imagine how embarrassed (from a performance perspective) the competition will be if Honda decides to go the turbo route with their vtec engines in the future? I personally hope they do not, but hype is hype and sometimes you need to follow the sheep to slaughter
Anyone can slap a turbo in a car (CX-7 anyone?) to improve performance/mpg. Improving performance/mpg without one is engineering at its' artistic and creative best.
I'll take a normally aspirated, mechanically sound, Honda engine over any turbo engine, anyday. Good friends of ours just shelled out 8 grand for a *used* Saab engine for their Saab convertible turbo. The engine just puked on itself after only 100K KM (about 60K miles), timed perfectly for the end of warranty coverage... lol. I'll never buy these gimmick cars.. just a huge waste of money. Then again, I can't afford one
However, the anal retentive side of me agrees there is room for improvement. I thought Honda had forsaken turbos forever, until I saw details on the RDX. Can you imagine how embarrassed (from a performance perspective) the competition will be if Honda decides to go the turbo route with their vtec engines in the future? I personally hope they do not, but hype is hype and sometimes you need to follow the sheep to slaughter
Anyone can slap a turbo in a car (CX-7 anyone?) to improve performance/mpg. Improving performance/mpg without one is engineering at its' artistic and creative best.
I'll take a normally aspirated, mechanically sound, Honda engine over any turbo engine, anyday. Good friends of ours just shelled out 8 grand for a *used* Saab engine for their Saab convertible turbo. The engine just puked on itself after only 100K KM (about 60K miles), timed perfectly for the end of warranty coverage... lol. I'll never buy these gimmick cars.. just a huge waste of money. Then again, I can't afford one
Gimmick cars? Saab makes some fine cars and thanks to folks like you thinking they are gimmick cars I can buy used, easily mod-able Saabs for the price of a downpayment on an SI. The 99-03 saabs had probs with sludge but otherwise they are fantastic cars...But please, keep thinking they are gimmick cars. I'm thinking about a nice late 9-3 Aero and don't wanna pay a whole lot.
You made my point exactly. The fact that a Saab depreciates so quickly should tell you all you need to know. While a $50,000 car at $20,000 after only a couple years may seem like a good deal, I would need to ask why so cheap?quote:
Originally posted by BrianWC:
Gimmick cars? Saab makes some fine cars and thanks to folks like you thinking they are gimmick cars I can buy used, easily mod-able Saabs for the price of a downpayment on an SI. The 99-03 saabs had probs with sludge but otherwise they are fantastic cars...But please, keep thinking they are gimmick cars. I'm thinking about a nice late 9-3 Aero and don't wanna pay a whole lot.
I do agree with you that it *might* be worth it as a hobby at the 60% discounted price, but how would I afford the replacement engine when it dies early?
I would prefer not to lose $30k over a couple of years when buying new, hence why I stick with Honda. Now, if I was loaded with cash, that's a different story.. I'd have one of every car in my 100 car garage
Then again, like everything else, the cost and economics of cars may be different south of the border. Example, best deal I can find for a Napa Gold is $9.98 in Canada. Cars cost a ton, so does gas, and especially parts for gimmick cars. I have to spread my dough around conservatively
[ July 10, 2006, 11:10 AM: Message edited by: webfors ]
- Status
