You are here: Forums Sedans Honda Civic 2008 Honda Civic

2008 Honda Civic

345 messages,  Last post on Sep 04, 2009 at 5:23 PM

You are in the Honda Civic Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Honda Civic, Honda Civic del Sol, Honda Civic CRX, Coupe, Sedan

Messages Page 3 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 35 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#21 of 345 Re: AT Si [thegraduate] by orbit9090 Jul 17, 2007 (8:54 am)
Replying to: thegraduate (Jul 06, 2007 7:28 pm) Replying to: kenlw An Automatic Si seems VERY pointless to me.   The point of an Automatic Si would be to get the upgraded engine and equipment without having the burden of manually shifting.   Why? Well, I suppose spoiled, modern-day teens are finding it very difficult to shift at the same they are simultaneously smoking and sending cellphone text messages. Have you no sympathy for the 'gen-nothing' ers? LOL. Replies to this message: eldaino (Jul 18, 2007 6:44 am) thegraduate (Jul 23, 2007 5:15 pm) orbit9090 (Jul 30, 2007 1:03 pm) jet10000 (Jul 30, 2007 1:32 pm) thegraduate (Jul 30, 2007 2:07 pm) eldaino (Aug 01, 2007 10:24 am)
#22 of 345 Re: AT Si [orbit9090] by eldaino Jul 18, 2007 (6:44 am)
Replying to: orbit9090 (Jul 17, 2007 8:54 am) i know a few manual driving young people who are amazing proficient at texting and driving.   while i agree about the feature content, the engine is the problem.   take a performance model like a VW gti, or sentra se-r; they come with both a type of auto matic transmission and a manual. Why the auto? well because those engines, while having high hp numbers, have LOTS of torque, and DO NOT make their peak hp and tq right before redline like the si does. The si is also lacking significant torque, so a manual totally suits its nature.   Honda is not stupid; they know and understand the limitations and advantages of a high revving high hp engine, and what not to do with it.   Actually, its been proven that if you drive the si like a normal car, aside from the handling, (which still requires you to go quickly) it feels like a normal civic...any true honda enthusiast therefore wouldn't want to pay the premium for the si just for the visual upgrades, seeing as how the automatic tranny would make you not want to drive fast because of how it would hold gears to redline, which in turn makes you use the engine like the regular civics engine, and thus negating the want or need to get the si for 'more motor.'
#23 of 345 New Colors by sivicman Jul 21, 2007 (3:08 am)
I 'd like to see Honda fire the person in charge of their color choices, I've been saying this for years. There colors are so drab and conservative, the garbage can grays and silvers. Honda needs bright colors like Mazda offers to capture that youth buyer. Some of you might remember the bright colors Mopar offered in the early 70's that were awesome. Replies to this message: eldaino (Jul 23, 2007 9:25 am)
#24 of 345 Re: New Colors [sivicman] by eldaino Jul 23, 2007 (9:25 am)
Replying to: sivicman (Jul 21, 2007 3:08 am) bright blues, and bright reds and deep blacks are not exciting? remember, even mazda saves their best colors for the more expensive, sportier trims, the same way honda does.   honda's problem is the way they package base colors with the interiors.   and the honda silver is the BEST silver of all time.
#25 of 345 Re: AT Si [orbit9090] by thegraduate Jul 23, 2007 (5:15 pm)
Replying to: orbit9090 (Jul 17, 2007 8:54 am) As a gen-nothinger myself, I do have sympathy, but the Civic Si with an Automatic would seem like a car with the worst turbo lag you could possibly imagine. The Si simply deserves a manual exclusively (and Honda agrees). There's not enough torque to make the Si a quick car with an automatic. Replies to this message: orbit9090 (Jul 30, 2007 1:03 pm) jet10000 (Jul 30, 2007 1:32 pm) thegraduate (Jul 30, 2007 2:07 pm) eldaino (Aug 01, 2007 10:24 am)
#26 of 345 thanks grad by eldaino Jul 24, 2007 (5:50 am)
i knew i could count on your backup.   actually, there is an engine that that honda made that had similar specs to the k20 in the si. it was called the f20 and it came in european/austrailian/new zeleand accord SiR's.   it was a 2.0 with 180 hp, and made about the same torque, but it was tuned for midrange power and only redlined at about 7200 rpms. and it met its peak torque much earlier than the si did.   Actually grad, this engine is a swap available for your older accord;...you should look into it!
#27 of 345 geesh..... by kenlw Jul 24, 2007 (12:08 pm)
you guys need to realize that not everyone shares your teenlust for slapping a stick all day. Replies to this message: thegraduate (Jul 24, 2007 5:05 pm) eldaino (Jul 25, 2007 1:40 pm)
#28 of 345 Re: geesh..... [kenlw] by thegraduate Jul 24, 2007 (5:05 pm)
Replying to: kenlw (Jul 24, 2007 12:08 pm) Geez, you "other" guys need to realize that having a manual isn't just about racing the 17 year old next to you when the light turns green.   "Us guys" aren't all the same. I have two cars, and both are automatics. They are also well-suited to those transmissions, with reasonable torque peaks and modest redlines. If my Accord had a 8k Redline and max torque above 6,000 RPM, I'd be in a different boat...er...car.   "Teenlust for slapping a stick" is an interesting phrase. I'm 19, and know how to drive a manual, but when car-shopping, an automatic suited me best, as it was more practical in my trafficky commute. Yes, I'm turning 20 next month, and yes, I chose practicality (4-door, 4-cyl, automatic midsize) over a car that one might "lust" after.   Give us some credit. We're not boy racers (well, I'll speak for myself anyway), I just know that the inherent characteristics of the Civic Si engine would make an automatic Si not much quicker than an automatic Civic EX.   If the Civic Si had as much torque as horsepower, I'd definitely feel differently (assuming a fair amount of it was available below astronomical RPMs).
#29 of 345 w.e. by iomatic Jul 24, 2007 (7:26 pm)
I'm over 30 and enjoy MT on the Si. Wouldn't have it any other way. Replies to this message: kork13 (Jul 24, 2007 11:12 pm) drmbb (Jul 25, 2007 6:10 am)
#30 of 345 Re: w.e. [iomatic] by kork13 Jul 24, 2007 (11:12 pm)
Replying to: iomatic (Jul 24, 2007 7:26 pm) Like grad, I'm only 20 yrs, and although I do love taking advantage of the fun that an Si can be, I've always preferred having a MT in any car I drive. For me it's more a choice of having control over the engine or not. When I drive an AT, I often want it to shift in certain ways so that I can accelerate better, or be easier on the engine. However, an AT doesn't give you that freedom, thus the reason I've always favored a manual tranny. There are other reasons, to be sure, but that's my biggest reasoning...   Now, I know that this is gonna spark the argument for those.... I don't even know what they're called, automatics that you can switch over into a "clutchless manual" mode... So I'll throw out my opinion on those now... if you want to be able to sit there and let your car drive you places, get an AT. If you want to have some control over your engine, get a MT. I may be a bit of a purist sometimes, but enough of this stupid fence-sitting madness... Replies to this message: drmbb (Jul 25, 2007 6:10 am)

Messages Page 3 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 35 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Sedans Honda Civic 2008 Honda Civic