tC and Jetta are both great cars. The Jetta is likely the most car for the money. My Mom has a 1996 Passat, not too different. Nearly zero problems. When I pick her next car (soon) it'll probally be a Jetta. If you want an automatic, that's the way to go. Maybe pop for the extended warranty.
What can beat a Civic?
- Thread starter The Critic
- Start date
- Status
JHZR2
Staff member
Char Baby, great post, but this one point you made is especially good... The civic is dangerously close to NOT being an economy car at this point.
Too many people think theyre too high end to have a car without power windows and an automatic transmission. To the point that they finance a vehicle and do themselves no favors.
That said, considering how the typical civic is outfitted, and how it is priced, though it is apples to oranges, an accord is very close in price and the smarter choice. Buy a civic at a price point that is more in 'economy car' range, or more specifically, at an outfitted level indicative of an economy car, and the fit is a better choice for the car-buying dollar, IMO.
So, in the end all, to me at least, Honda is squeezing the civic out of a useful position. It offers no specific advantage (other than perhaps the civic coupe, which is a niche car) over the fit and accord at this point, and is to me, irrelevant.
To some extent, it is natural progression. People want larger cars from the nameplate that was historically a smaller, cheaper car. toyota corolla/tercel/echo/yaris is a good example, as is the honda accord/civic fit. What was the stat... that the current civic is larger than the orignal accord.
it makes an apples to apples and oranges to oranges comparisson difficult.
JMH
Well, my Saturn rattles terribly at 94k miles, but it's partially my fault for not replacing the upper mount for the last 40k or so. At the same time, a few rattles here and there don't bother me that much.
VW was actually my idea. My mom is trying to shy away from the import offerings as she wants something different.
I'm not too worried about the xB. My mom and dad really despise its boxy styling, so I really doubt that they'd spring for that thing. My dad is a huge Toyota guy, so I wouldn't be surprised if he gives the tC some serious looks, though I'm not exactly thrilled about driving one of those given their cop magnet status and the lack of a 5-spd Auto.
Thanks for bringing this up.
I'm looking at either a Civic LX, or EX sedan with Automatic transmission. My goal of this car shopping exercise is to find a subcompact with a 4-cyl engine.
As for my original question, what can beat a Civic, I'm referring to reliability, durability, and refinement on a vehicle under $20k. Those are the most important factors.
Fuel economy is also important, but not as important as the other factors. It must be reasonable.
Power, styling, and handling are less important but most be average and/or reasonable.
As evident, I do not mind spending $1-$2k for something a bit "nicer," so getting the most for my money is clearly not my objective.
The car is too big for some members of the household. I want it to stay on the road and out of the body shop.
Aha! Now, with these added requirements (your price emphasis especially), I'd pretty much withdraw the Prius as a nominee for "Beater of Critic's Civic." Unless you luck out and find a mint, low-miles used one like I did.
Actually, as I see this, you've pretty much defined the "heart of the envelope" for gasser Civics. Within your parameters, whether any car can "beat" the Civic in any meaningful sense, probably becomes just a matter of opinion. Despite it's little flaws (like the awful lack of low-end grunt), I still loved my 88 Civic for all 10 years I had it. Go for the Civic, outstanding cars that are substantially less imperfect than the other choices. 
Critic, what do you think of the Fit? With gas prices going up, you'll wish you bought the smallest displacement available, and not those monster 2.4 and 2.5 liter pigs in the tC and Jetta. And you'll love the hatch forever.
JHZR2
Staff member
8-10 MPG can be a big difference... though it doesnt seem so in this case...
JMH
JMH
Quote:
Nice attitude.Why don't you find us true, equal, back-to-back comparisons. As you well know, putting two lone numbers from two totally different testing sources is little more than comparing apples and oranges. It’s also pretty interesting that you didn’t come up with actual numbers for an I-4. Do please feel free to show us honest, accurate numbers for the cars I was actually talking about.
The V-6 Accord “only makes marginally more torque than the I4"??? Ummmmm, the V-6 makes 51 ft-lb more torque than the I-4. That’s over 30% more. It’s why Honda bothers to make, and customers shell out a couple grand extra for, the V-6 car. To borrow your own kind words, looks like we’ve established that you don’t know what you’re talking about.
You also stated, “You can spout off about the prius 300 ft-lb electric motor, but I doubt all of that makes it to the wheels. The electric motor's operating rpm range is tiny and as such the torque must be reduced through gearing by the time it reaches the wheels.” Obviously, you don’t know what you’re talking about with respect to Toyota’s HSD design. The torque “curve” of the motor-generators is totally flat. You have 100% torque available from 0-1200 engine rpm. Please do show us an Accord that’s generating 100% torque right off the line. And the PSD (power split device, which actually combines power) allows the motor-gens to continue contributing over a wider rpm band than the spec suggests. And we haven’t even mentioned the additional torque contributed by the HSD’s gas engine, which is over and above the MGs.
Let’s set the magazines aside for a moment – I’ve driven both of these cars, and own an example of one of them. I can tell from your comments that you cannot say the same.
Look, as I stated previously, I didn’t come into this thread to talk about drag racing family sedans. I’m talking about general classes of vehicles. Mike asked a perfectly valid question about the Civic. I responded. I stand by my original statement, that a basic Prius is a valid alternative for a high-end gas Civic, and especially an HCH. Do you have something to say about that?
I don't know what I'm talking about? Have you ever taken any sort of basic mechanical engineering or even physics class? Because it would seem you have not based on the statements you've made.
Funny you mention the V6 being much better;
http://www.vtec.net/articles/article-image?image=58735/03accordexv6_dyno.jpg
Note it makes 175 ft-lbs, compared to the 150 for the previous I4. Hardly an earth shattering improvement. You obviously fail to understand when it's shown that the I4 output is underrated. That means for whatever marketing reason, honda decided to understate the actual output of the accord i4 motor. It makes more power and torque than the paper spec says. The I4 accord may not make 100% torque off idle, but it makes about 85% of max torque off idle all the way to 6000 rpms, which is far more useful when you consider that is how power is actually made.
I am quite familiar with electric machinery, I have taken classes on it. Just because you can pick a number off a toyota press release does not mean you understand the significance nor the application of the number. But please humor me, if the prius motor makes max torque 0-1200 rpms, what happens after 1200 rpm? The electric motor disengages and stops working? The effect of that would be the electric motor would be utterly worthless for any actual assist or driving.
Toyota must obviously have geared the motor to match the engine crankshaft rotation somewhere in the powertrain. Presumably the redline is around 6k rpms for the gasoline motor, so the output must be reduced ~6:1 to match the gasoline engine, suddenly turning the 300 ft-lbs, to about 50 ft-lbs relative to the engine crankshaft.
I could make a bicycle, with a rachet and a long ass breaker bar connected to the wheel, and with that setup I could generate 300+ ft-lbs also. Does that mean I can out accelerate cars? Obviously NO, because the RPM output would be worthless. The same principle for the prius applies here.
Again you are free to show me a prius dyno sheet to show me what output the prius actually makes at the wheels, but we all know so far that you've presented nothing but baseless assertions anyways. Who cares if you've driven both cars, ass dynos are not accurate, so it's irrelevant anyways.
I have issue with your statement that the prius accelerates as well as i4 accords and camrys when in fact it does not. You say you responded, but you responded with bad and misleading information which leaves you open to correction. You say that a 1.5 sec difference between an i4 accord and prius is not significant, but then go on to say the V6 is significantly faster than the i4. When in fact the V6 is about the same 1.5 sec faster over the i4. If anything, the prius is almost certainly one of the top 5 slowest sedans available as a new car today.
Little comparison:
Mazda 3s, Auto: 25/31
Mazda 3i, Auto: 26/34
Honda Civic Auto: 30/40
Scion tC Auto: 23/30
Jetta 2.5 Auto: 22/30
'96 Saturn: 24/34
The Fit is too small. Seems like the people over on the Edmunds boards are saying that the 3s doesn't deliver very good fuel economy, especially in Auto. Less than 34MPG quite commonly.
A word about fuel economy: it won't be the primary focus. However, the fuel economy must be reasonable, in other words, 22/30 for a tC is quite low.
Mazda 3s, Auto: 25/31
Mazda 3i, Auto: 26/34
Honda Civic Auto: 30/40
Scion tC Auto: 23/30
Jetta 2.5 Auto: 22/30
'96 Saturn: 24/34
The Fit is too small. Seems like the people over on the Edmunds boards are saying that the 3s doesn't deliver very good fuel economy, especially in Auto. Less than 34MPG quite commonly.
A word about fuel economy: it won't be the primary focus. However, the fuel economy must be reasonable, in other words, 22/30 for a tC is quite low.
JHZR2
Staff member
please remind us again why the corolla isnt in that list??? For what seems to be a need for a relatively ho-hum vehicle to get from a to b, it seems that a toyota product is a smart choice.
JMH
JMH
Back in February '06 I bought a new 2006 Civic LX sedan with a 5-speed manual trans, negotiated and purchased on the 'net for 16K even plus tax and license.
I just returned from a month-long vacation trip touring the USA with my wife, going from So Cal to PA, to MI and then through SD (Mt. Rushmore) and WY (Yellowstone) then back to CA. I put 7,145 miles on my Civic sedan in 27 days, the car had just over 5K miles on it when I started out. The Civic had a trunk full of luggage, I'd say close to 600 pounds of weight was in the car including passengers.
Most of the time on the interstates I was traveling around 68 MPH (with the cruise control on naturally) even when the speed limits allowed 75 MPH. There were times I traveled 70 to 75, but usually 65 to 68. Also did my share of 20 MPH 2nd-gear driving while sightseeing on slow and winding roads through the forest, plus some stop-and-go in smaller towns along the country highways. About 90% of the trip was on the wide-open interstate highways between 60 and 70 MPH.
Fuel mileage average for the trip using 87 octane (FP60 added)was 40.955 MPG.
The stock 205/55-16 tires were pumped up to the 44 PSI sidewall max. The ride quality was plenty comfortable at that pressure, gotta keep the pressure up there for excellent fuel mileage.
No special tricks, no coasting down hills, just driving normally. I even screamed it up a few long upgrades at 6000 RPMs in 3rd to pass trucks when I needed to. The R18 pulls down the great mileage numbers no sweat, not a lot of torque but the available power was plenty adequate. The worst tank so far has been 30 MPG, I usually average about 31 to 33 in lightly congested city commuting. This was my first nearly pure-highway trip with the engine close to being fully broken-in, city mileage should go up a bit now that it's broken in a bit more.
Road noise was minimal and better than I expected, most of the interstates are pretty smooth. Front seat comfort was very good, the engine was almost silent even while running at 3K RPM most of the time. Oil consumption was 1/2 quart (Havoline 5W-20 dino with LC20) for the 7000+ mile trip. The oil life left on the Maintenance Minder was at 10% at 7,133 miles, on the average every 800 miles it clicked off another 10% during my journey.
I got great mileage and I didn't have to go 55 the whole time to get over 40 MPG. Glad my purchase of the Civic gave me everything I was expecting, very well-refined for a cheap car and a true fuel mileage champ in my eyes.
I just returned from a month-long vacation trip touring the USA with my wife, going from So Cal to PA, to MI and then through SD (Mt. Rushmore) and WY (Yellowstone) then back to CA. I put 7,145 miles on my Civic sedan in 27 days, the car had just over 5K miles on it when I started out. The Civic had a trunk full of luggage, I'd say close to 600 pounds of weight was in the car including passengers.
Most of the time on the interstates I was traveling around 68 MPH (with the cruise control on naturally) even when the speed limits allowed 75 MPH. There were times I traveled 70 to 75, but usually 65 to 68. Also did my share of 20 MPH 2nd-gear driving while sightseeing on slow and winding roads through the forest, plus some stop-and-go in smaller towns along the country highways. About 90% of the trip was on the wide-open interstate highways between 60 and 70 MPH.
Fuel mileage average for the trip using 87 octane (FP60 added)was 40.955 MPG.
The stock 205/55-16 tires were pumped up to the 44 PSI sidewall max. The ride quality was plenty comfortable at that pressure, gotta keep the pressure up there for excellent fuel mileage.
No special tricks, no coasting down hills, just driving normally. I even screamed it up a few long upgrades at 6000 RPMs in 3rd to pass trucks when I needed to. The R18 pulls down the great mileage numbers no sweat, not a lot of torque but the available power was plenty adequate. The worst tank so far has been 30 MPG, I usually average about 31 to 33 in lightly congested city commuting. This was my first nearly pure-highway trip with the engine close to being fully broken-in, city mileage should go up a bit now that it's broken in a bit more.
Road noise was minimal and better than I expected, most of the interstates are pretty smooth. Front seat comfort was very good, the engine was almost silent even while running at 3K RPM most of the time. Oil consumption was 1/2 quart (Havoline 5W-20 dino with LC20) for the 7000+ mile trip. The oil life left on the Maintenance Minder was at 10% at 7,133 miles, on the average every 800 miles it clicked off another 10% during my journey.
I got great mileage and I didn't have to go 55 the whole time to get over 40 MPG. Glad my purchase of the Civic gave me everything I was expecting, very well-refined for a cheap car and a true fuel mileage champ in my eyes.
Difference between 30 mpg and 40 mpg is $34/month based on 20k per year and 2.50/gal. I would think that how one enjoys driving the car would weigh more heavily on their decision. I've been told I'm a cheap ________ sometimes but to me saving a few pennies in gas doesn't make for lost enjoyment in something that's fun to drive. If that's your thing anyway. I guess if economy is most important just buy the Civic and be done with it.
See below, decide for yourself. . .
Outersquare, I am baffled by your disproportionate excitement regarding this topic. I had hoped we could steer the discourse back toward center. Since you’ve claimed that I am incorrect about a number of things, it is only fair that I point out the numerous mistakes in your last post. For example:
1. For the record, I studied physics and chemistry, at the college level, and I have received training in a variety of different technical fields. No, I’m not, however, an engineer.
2. Let’s be fair, and stay with apples-to-apples comparisons. Honda’s advertised torque peak for the I-4 accord is 160 foot pounds at 4000 rpm. The advertised torque peak for the V-6 Accord is 211 foot pounds at 5000 rpm, a 51 ft-lb delta. If you would like to switch to all dyno numbers, that’s fine, but let’s have those numbers for an I-4 under controlled, provably equivalent conditions to those used for this V-6. Dyno results can be as unstable and variable as a weathervane in a tornado. You know that. Your unsupported speculation about Honda advertising low horsepower and torque numbers is just that. Frankly, I’ll take Honda’s official representations as accurate, until we see a lot more, proper quality evidence to the contrary.
3. You state, “But please humor me, if the prius motor makes max torque 0-1200 rpms, what happens after 1200 rpm? The electric motor disengages and stops working? The effect of that would be the electric motor would be utterly worthless for any actual assist or driving.” I’ll take that as an admission that you do not understand how the electric motor-generators are integrated with the remainder of the HSD system. I strongly recommend that you do some study regarding his car’s drive train, as it is obvious that you do not understand how it works. Although an oversimplification, in effect, the large motor-generator is integrated with the outer ring of the planetary gear set which comprises the Prius’ continuously variable transmission (CVT). Through continuous adjustment of the CVT’s “ratios” (it’s “continuously” variable, of course...), this motor-generator’s torque remains available at almost all times.
4. You next state that, “Toyota must obviously have geared the motor to match the engine crankshaft rotation somewhere in the powertrain.” That's wrong, too, see the preceding paragraph.
5. You’re very next statement, “Presumably the redline is around 6k rpms for the gasoline motor, so the output must be reduced ~6:1 to match the gasoline engine. . .” is wrong as well. In fact, the red line on the Prius is 5000 rpm. This engine uses a radical form of Toyota’s variable valve timing (VVT-I) to achieve Atkinson cycle operation through much of its operating envelope. You do understand the Atkinson cycle, I hope? You would further understand, I assume, why this entire drive train, is biased toward relatively low RPM operation.
6. Your 300 foot pound bicycle analogy, while mathematically sensible, is, with all due respect, absurd in this context. It is in no way a fair or accurate description of how the Toyota Prius actually operates, or what it’s like in operation, which I suspect is what you were trying to suggest.
7. I have not simply driven the Prius, I own one. I drive it every day. I drive it in big city commuting traffic, and over long distances on interstate highways. I’ve driven it for hundreds of miles along country highways in southern Alabama and Northwest Florida. I drive it 600-800 miles a week. Make no mistake about it, this car is not a Corvette. On the other hand, my previous car was G35 sedan. I’m no stranger to quick cars, and while the Prius is not especially “quick”, it is equally clear, from experience, that your exaggerated speculation as to its “slowness” is simply inaccurate. Really, why don’t you go to a Toyota dealer and spend 30 minutes test driving one. That might improve your perspective some – and give you some realistic basis to prognosticate about this car’s driving dynamics. Since you haven’t driven one, do you have some dyno evidence to back up your claim that this is one of the slowest sedans available today???
8. In your final paragraph, you also said, “you responded with bad and misleading information which leaves you open to correction.” It looks to me like the very same would apply to much of your last post.
As I also stated previously, this sort of exchange is really pretty worthless. Can we move on and quit being ugly and disrespectful of one another? I’m not a Toyota salesman, and I’m not trying to convince you to purchase (or even like) the Prius. If the car, or the concept, or both are not your cup of tea, don’t buy one. But please, don’t come here and tell me you know my own car better than I do, when you’ve never driven one, and clearly don’t know how it works.
Last edited:
I agree. The best way to compare the difference in fuel economy is by going to www.fueleconomy.gov and converting the mpg values to an annual cost. Then decide whether the car you preferred during test driving is worth the extra expense, if it happens to use more fuel than the most fuel-efficient on your list of considerations.
Mike:
See b-man's post above. As I read it, it seemed like a happy encapsulation of the 10 years with my beloved 88 Civic (though I drive a little faster than he does...
). Especially in light of your revised parameters, I'll just ahead and "vote" directly -- get the Civic! If you sent me to purchase it for you (with your $ of course!), I'd come back with an EX 5-spd manual.
rpn's advice about the fueleconomy.gov site is good. It gives you one consistent source of comparative info collected under the same conditions. You know you usually won't achieve those numbers, the they're still valuable for making apples-to-apples comparisons.
See b-man's post above. As I read it, it seemed like a happy encapsulation of the 10 years with my beloved 88 Civic (though I drive a little faster than he does...
rpn's advice about the fueleconomy.gov site is good. It gives you one consistent source of comparative info collected under the same conditions. You know you usually won't achieve those numbers, the they're still valuable for making apples-to-apples comparisons.
ekpolk was a little misleading in that a Prius isn't as fast as an Accord in a lot of situations. But who uses those for stock car racing anyway? Had that particular Prius driver been less of moron, he would have had no problem keeping up with traffic in the right lane where he should have been driving. That really is more of an idiot-driver story than a too-slow-to-keep-up-with-traffic story!
When my 2001 Sentra extended warrranty runs out in 14 months I will be getting a Civic.
JHZR2
Staff member
I respectfully disagree. $34/month is ~$2000 over a typical 5-year ownership. If I can get away with not worrying about $2000 worth of frivolous lifecycle cost, then I certainly need not be shopping in the economy car segment anyway...
Too often we forget the 'economy' in economy cars... and for these small cars with economy roots, unfortunately when you deviate far from their economy roots, dollarwise, you end up with nothing but a poor deal, in my opinion.
JMH
I drove a new Civic and am happy with my Corolla.
Hated the dumb fake windwing windows which will cause problems with the door seals in the later life of the car.
Hated the Dash and digital speedo.
Look under the hood and Honda needs to learn to have some working room around an engine like Toyota. (its packed in there)
Then we have to come to the price of a Civic. WAY too much for what your getting. I've seen well over 20k Civics BEFORE tax and such added.
After my 1998 Accord and my Dads 2001 Civic, I could not even get my wife to look at a Honda when we were looking for another car.
After 61k with our Corolla, I'll have to say I've very happy. 2 years old, almost 43 mpg AVERAGE MPG since new, never been back to the Stealership for anything and it's running great. All for under 14.5k out the door.
Could not find a 2005 Civic with A/C under $16.7k. Could not find any Civic for $14.5k out the door.. And that was 2 years ago, I know know impossible.
And you can find a Corolla LE for $16.5k out the door with no hassles. If you want 5 speed (good luck, most 5 speeds are CE) then take off a grand.
Just my findings...
Take care, Bill
Hated the dumb fake windwing windows which will cause problems with the door seals in the later life of the car.
Hated the Dash and digital speedo.
Look under the hood and Honda needs to learn to have some working room around an engine like Toyota. (its packed in there)
Then we have to come to the price of a Civic. WAY too much for what your getting. I've seen well over 20k Civics BEFORE tax and such added.
After my 1998 Accord and my Dads 2001 Civic, I could not even get my wife to look at a Honda when we were looking for another car.
After 61k with our Corolla, I'll have to say I've very happy. 2 years old, almost 43 mpg AVERAGE MPG since new, never been back to the Stealership for anything and it's running great. All for under 14.5k out the door.
Could not find a 2005 Civic with A/C under $16.7k. Could not find any Civic for $14.5k out the door.. And that was 2 years ago, I know know impossible.
And you can find a Corolla LE for $16.5k out the door with no hassles. If you want 5 speed (good luck, most 5 speeds are CE) then take off a grand.
Just my findings...
Take care, Bill
- Status
Similar threads
