What can beat a Civic?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Forgive me for not following this post.. It has taken an unfortunate twist and I don't care to really be part of too much of the banter. Plus, I'm typing with a band-aid on my finger, and it is taking forever.

The Fusion is V6, automatic, and rated for 26mpg. Yes, it is lower mileage. However, balance wants and needs. I want a car that could get me 45mpg, costs under 15k brand new, and will run to 500k with no problems. However, I have a stronger NEED for AWD (if I did purchase a car) that I would be willing to sacrifice some of the above wants to satisfy my needs.

Considering a SE Fusion with all the toys (leather, AWD, sat. radio, and 6 cylinders) can be had for around $25635 MSRP, I dare say that there are few other manufactures that can come even close to comparing to the new AWD Fusion.. Unless someone can think of an AWD, V6 (or subaru flat 6), loaded MIDSIZED Sedan that is price comparable?



Quote:

Quote:

Time for you to go test drive an AWD milan or fusion.

Cannot be beat for the price. Midsized, AWD, mileage.. What more can you ask for?

Click to expand...


Yeah but how do the AWD fusions come set up??? V6? AT?

It sure won't be were his corolla is, mileage-wise... Big difference, and he'd be lucky to get the 28 MPG used in his estimates.

JMH

Click to expand...
 
You can't go strictly by price when you compare cars with vaguely similar drivetrains. When you pay more $$ for a similarly engineered car, it's likely due to content beyond the drivetrain. No, you can't get a Legacy GT for $25 but I can promise that when it comes to performance and luxury appointments, the Legacy has as much value. To some, the added appointments and extra performance isn't important and a Fusion serves all their needs...but for those who want more, it only costs money. The reason you can't buy a Fusion AWD with a 5-speed? The drivetrain wasn't engineered to be strong enough to tolerate abuse that it may be subjected to if the clutch work were left up to the driver. The Subaru's drivetrain is engineered to withstand 250 hp worth of clutch popping launches with AWD. Engineering like this costs extra.
 
I see.

So your egineering degree and inside information as to Ford's drivetrain construction are from ...... ?

Quote:

You can't go strictly by price when you compare cars with vaguely similar drivetrains. When you pay more $$ for a similarly engineered car, it's likely due to content beyond the drivetrain. No, you can't get a Legacy GT for $25 but I can promise that when it comes to performance and luxury appointments, the Legacy has as much value. To some, the added appointments and extra performance isn't important and a Fusion serves all their needs...but for those who want more, it only costs money. The reason you can't buy a Fusion AWD with a 5-speed? The drivetrain wasn't engineered to be strong enough to tolerate abuse that it may be subjected to if the clutch work were left up to the driver. The Subaru's drivetrain is engineered to withstand 250 hp worth of clutch popping launches with AWD. Engineering like this costs extra.

Click to expand...
 
It should be pointed out that:

1)No V6 variant of the Fusion is currently available with a manual transmission

2)The Mazdaspeed 6 has a manual transmission and AWD.
 
Last edited:
"What, exactly is driving Toyota's drive to the top of the sales heap if they're attempting to sell a bunch of ill-configured cars that nobody wants? So far the only American sedan to outsell the Camry is the Taurus, and that only lasted for a year. WHO's making the undesirable vehicles?"

The Taurus was best selling car in the US for something 5 years. We continue to buy them for the (most ?) affordable 6 passenger seating if one gets the bench front seat, something that none of the Japanese sedans seems to offer. We also like the standard larger engine, a 3L V6, as it seems to take more abuse when used with 5 to 6 people, an automatic, and driving up and down hills. Obviously not everyone has similar needs.
 
Quote:

A good friend just got an 06 matrix for $100 over invoice.

Given the premiums being had for civics (ridiculous), and their less than stellar styling (lots of glass = very hot in the summertime), along with Honda's poor selection of rubber and plastic materials (longevity-wise), I think that a matrix at a good deal price would beat a civic...

JMH

Click to expand...

The Matrix is built on an ancient platform, engine, and transmission. Why should I settle for last-generation technology when the future is here?

Besides, the Civic is not exceptionally overpriced. With a little haggling, upper $16k is certainly attainable for the well-equipped LX Auto, and $18,000 for the EX. I'll certainly get the EX, as the thought of no 60/40 split folding backseats with the LX do not appeal to me.
 
Good choice, I for one love the new look of Civic, one of the most attractive new cars to come out lately, even better than the new Accord.
 
There are a bunch of other things the EX has over the LX. The disc brakes, ALLOY wheels and the 360 watt subwoofed 7 speaker stereo were the things I thought were worth the extra money for. The LX is a great value car.

I too think the styling is fresh and . Has a slight "supercar" look to it, too.
 
Just ask yourself, if John Wayne was around what would HE be driving?

Emulate John Wayne and y'all can't be too darn wrong in yer conveyance choice.
 
Quote:


The Matrix is built on an ancient platform, engine, and transmission. Why should I settle for last-generation technology when the future is here?

Besides, the Civic is not exceptionally overpriced. With a little haggling, upper $16k is certainly attainable for the well-equipped LX Auto, and $18,000 for the EX. I'll certainly get the EX, as the thought of no 60/40 split folding backseats with the LX do not appeal to me.

Click to expand...


'Ancient' is relative. Given Honda's inability to make a proper auto trans, Im not sure Id be scolding toyota in that department... Engine-wise, is the toyota engine proven? Is it long lasting? DOes it show reasonable efficiency and power output? If so, what is the issue? Yes, certainly new technology and powerplant design is of the utmost importance, but noting that the civic offers is earth shattering, IMO.

And, isnt the civic supposed to be an 'economy car'? Heck, $16k for a lower level, and $18k for a 'top of the line' isnt particulalrly economical to me. Especially when one can buy an accord, which is the better built, better lasting car for almost the same money. It the driving feel of the new civic is anything like the last gen, good luck getting the advertised MPG in anything less than the optimal conditions, and the rest of the time, good luck having a fun drive, as it is grossly underrpowered, especally with those poorly shifting auto transmissions... You might say that the engine now puts out more power now - but lets not forget that this car is also the size of previous generation accords at this point, and so surely has gained a number of pounds to go along with its power bump... net effect????

At the end of the day, if youve convinced yourself that nothing can beat a civic, then so be it. Everyone has their vehicle that nothing can beat, and it is a personal choice more than anything. Its like what was cited before... most stats and most criteria are near useless. There is a lot of spin, and people can convince themselves to liking one thing and then that is that - its easy at that point to shoot holes in any other option. Youre spending a lot of money to buy a car, whether a lot is $13k or $18k or $25k. You need to be sure that you like the feel, operation, dynamics, etc. of the vehicle - that is the end all. Stats are extremely useless a lot of the time, and unless youve experienced all the players yourself, you cant make an informed decision - youre just comparing numbers or facts on a screen without the personal element that makes them matter in the final analysis. Why do you think people label toyotas and hondas as appliances? Because their typical buyer geves even lipservice to the other options before theyre sold that Japanese is better, and don't even care to reasonably and rationally compare on a fair basis , the other vehicles, for real?

JMH
 
Last edited:
Auto tranny is a tricky affair in any car, I know quite a few German marquees suffering from premature failure of auto tranny, MB for instance, had few instances of failed tranny at under 100,000 miles on 300TD as well as 420SELs. Also few BMWs and Audis as well. As far as Toyota reliability goes, its well proven beyond fact, you can still see many Toyota 4 cylinder trucks as well as ancient Corollas and few Tercels plying around. So far, three of my friends have bought the new Civic, two with auto and one with manual, I have driven both extensively, took one for a 1000 mile trip, can say with contention, its vastly improved over it's predecessor which is saying a lot as the older Civic was not a bad deal, now it can be rightfully called mini Accord with better looks, engine is real peppy, tranny is the best auto I have driven yet and I have driven many past and present, also not a big fan of auto but the F-I type shifter had be in smiles.

No one car would be best for all, depends on what one's perception and demand is of best, considering all that, Honda Civic looks like a good candidate for sure.
 
The 4-door looks like something heavy fell on the trunk and bent the unibody...the coupes look ok (to me) but that messed up 2-tiered dashboard sent me running to the Mazda 3.
 
Quote:

Auto tranny is a tricky affair in any car, I know quite a few German marquees suffering from premature failure of auto tranny, MB for instance, had few instances of failed tranny at under 100,000 miles on 300TD as well as 420SELs. Also few BMWs and Audis as well. As far as Toyota reliability goes, its well proven beyond fact, you can still see many Toyota 4 cylinder trucks as well as ancient Corollas and few Tercels plying around.

Click to expand...


Auto transmissions are a tricky thing, for sure, and short of GM (who Im sure have also had a bum unit here and there), all makers have had issues. It is just a bigger, more well known thing in a wide variety of Honda vehicles, across the board. I personally would trust a toyota AT over a honda AT, particularly when it comes to longevity. The AT in our 94 toyota previa still shifts like it did when new, after 12 years and 202k miles of use.

Thus my comments about not knocking toyota as having an 'ancient' drivetrain. They certainly have proven themselves time and time again (though based upon our experiences in the USVI with recent toyota products, some have slipped), and as such, are nothing to scoff at, even if their technologies were designed a few years in the past.

Its good to know that the civic is better now. As a great example, I drove back and forth to pittsburgh in an 05 civic a number of times. To get fuel economy past 34 MPG was nearly impossible. In my saab, which I did the same trip last weekend in, I got 37.6 no problem, on winter gasoline no less. There was no constant downshifting, or raucous engine noise as it tried to climb the mountains of the PA turnpike. The old civic was relatively pathetic in AT variety as a highway car. Around town, OK, but highway? not a good car at all, IMO. If the new one has a significantly enhanced engine that can provide the fuel economy along with power to maintain hill climbs, etc., regularly, then ood for it, especially since it gained a lot of size and weight. I think 1sttruck has reiterated the old civic's lack of capability for a lot of applications. Its good that it is more useful now, with great feel and still excellent, economy-wise.

However, that said, for my dollar (certainly not much more), an accord is still the better deal than an $18k civic, IMO.

JMH
 
Last edited:
I assume buyers of mini coopers go through the same justifications of why they need to spend $18- 22K for the standard mini and even more for the miniS. If you already know what the answer is of what you want you can set up a list of must haves that fits what you want to buy.

My take on the close 2nd here is the Mazda 3 has been out several years and is proven tech with as much shaved off the brand new model premium as you'll get until there's a 2008 Mazda 3 Focus. The Civic is still maybe proven and genuinely at a new models premium which I doubt will be supportable after the Nissan Sentra and next Gen Corolla roll on the floor 12 months from now. Someone always buys first year models but I know most wish they'd waited a few years.
 
Quote:

I assume buyers of mini coopers go through the same justifications of why they need to spend $18- 22K for the standard mini and even more for the miniS. If you already know what the answer is of what you want you can set up a list of must haves that fits what you want to buy.

My take on the close 2nd here is the Mazda 3 has been out several years and is proven tech with as much shaved off the brand new model premium as you'll get until there's a 2008 Mazda 3 Focus. The Civic is still maybe proven and genuinely at a new models premium which I doubt will be supportable after the Nissan Sentra and next Gen Corolla roll on the floor 12 months from now. Someone always buys first year models but I know most wish they'd waited a few years.

Click to expand...


Just to offer a slightly different point of view for the sake the emotional, irrational side of car ownership. (I would have gotten a Mazda 3 if the Civic hadn't existed...)

Sometimes people don't have a choice and they have to buy something NOW. Even though I understand and basically agree with what your saying, I don't agree that "most people wish they had waited a few years to get their car". However, even if that was true, I really don't care what "most people" would do. Cars are also an emotional experience for guys like me and works of engineering art and design art more then pure machines from "Vulcan" logic about best, better, bestest. But even THAT can be the emotional attraction of the "buy". (Don't some of you wish you still had your '71 Karmann Ghia convertables? I do. Do you remember when you passed by the used car lot in the early '70's and thought $5K was too much for say a cherry "used" Shelby 350 Mustang?)
I do have a BMW motorcycle that I have taken care of and used every month and enjoyed for 33 YEARS. My son will own it and pass it on I hope. Even though the cold facts said there are faster, better, more powerful motorcycles in the world, I'll keep riding my 1973&1/2 R75/5. Quality and art are not subject to the laws of fashion and progress.

When I bought the Si I liked the look, color, ergonomics, Honda reputation, dealership, salesman, and the "fun" factor of the Si more then anything I was considering up to about $30K. I also studied the numbers and the shoot-outs in the mags, etc. If Si's go one sale next month, I have no regrets paying TOP dollar for the "priveledge" of getting my Si. Sometimes you just can't be "cheap". Pay up and play or move on. Your choice. It's not always a buyers market. Wonder how much I could negotiate off of a new Rolls Royce? "Come on, throw in the floor mats and tint the windows and we got a deal."

Approximatley 1,700 other people in the USA will drive an '07 Habanero Red Pearl Si Coupe like mine. I won't see "my car" very often on the road. Every time, if ever, you see one like mine just remember the fool driving it probably payed top dollar and got hosed. That guy will probably be me!
grin.gif
 
The more I read this thread, the more I like my RSX Base M. I can drive 80-100mph all day and come back with 30 mpg. Handling AND ride is incredible. Still, I think the Acoord is a better deal...in a more substantial car. I definately like the styling of the Coupe, but if it came down to Jetta vs Accord in 4-door....probally would do the Jetta. PS there a re a lot...too many new Civics on the road. I sorta prefer the previous Gen!
 
Mazda 3s is really starting to catch onto me, especially after seeing the potential deal I could "possibly" get...

25/31 doesn't sound so bad, considering that the Saturn gets 23-25 in-town anyway, and it's rated 24/34.
 
Quote:

Quote:

Auto tranny is a tricky affair in any car, I know quite a few German marquees suffering from premature failure of auto tranny, MB for instance, had few instances of failed tranny at under 100,000 miles on 300TD as well as 420SELs. Also few BMWs and Audis as well. As far as Toyota reliability goes, its well proven beyond fact, you can still see many Toyota 4 cylinder trucks as well as ancient Corollas and few Tercels plying around.

Click to expand...


Auto transmissions are a tricky thing, for sure, and short of GM (who Im sure have also had a bum unit here and there), all makers have had issues. It is just a bigger, more well known thing in a wide variety of Honda vehicles, across the board. I personally would trust a toyota AT over a honda AT, particularly when it comes to longevity. The AT in our 94 toyota previa still shifts like it did when new, after 12 years and 202k miles of use.

Thus my comments about not knocking toyota as having an 'ancient' drivetrain. They certainly have proven themselves time and time again (though based upon our experiences in the USVI with recent toyota products, some have slipped), and as such, are nothing to scoff at, even if their technologies were designed a few years in the past.

Its good to know that the civic is better now. As a great example, I drove back and forth to pittsburgh in an 05 civic a number of times. To get fuel economy past 34 MPG was nearly impossible. In my saab, which I did the same trip last weekend in, I got 37.6 no problem, on winter gasoline no less. There was no constant downshifting, or raucous engine noise as it tried to climb the mountains of the PA turnpike. The old civic was relatively pathetic in AT variety as a highway car. Around town, OK, but highway? not a good car at all, IMO. If the new one has a significantly enhanced engine that can provide the fuel economy along with power to maintain hill climbs, etc., regularly, then ood for it, especially since it gained a lot of size and weight. I think 1sttruck has reiterated the old civic's lack of capability for a lot of applications. Its good that it is more useful now, with great feel and still excellent, economy-wise.

However, that said, for my dollar (certainly not much more), an accord is still the better deal than an $18k civic, IMO.

JMH

Click to expand...


I would agree about the Accord being a better value as it provided more car per dollar spent. As for quality ratings, take a look at what once was perceived king of automobiles namely Mercedes Benz have fallen over the years, its almost shameful, their SUV and S class have led people to slam lawsuits as well as give rise to sites like www.lemonmb.com

I don't know much about the economy of the new Civic but according to my friend, it gives better mpg than his Skoda turbo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

SammyChevelleTypeS3
NEW Vehicle Advice / Recommendations: Anyone? Subaru or Toyota? What says the gang?
3 4 5
Replies
84
Views
2K
mikeduf
buster
GM 8L45 and Octane
Replies
3
Views
876
ragtoplvr
haggler
'18 Optima EX, Selling Time?
Replies
9
Views
1K
haggler
R
2025 -- (up to 4/30/2025) YTD Totals: "Post your latest oil change"
Replies
5
Views
1K
perkz
69GTX
Residential Real Estate Assessments - best actions when appearing before town Board of Appeals
Replies
18
Views
967
SC Maintenance
Back
Top Bottom