Last post on Sep 30, 2008 at 11:37 AM
You are in the Honda Civic
What is this discussion about?
Honda Civic, Coupe, Sedan
#33 of 39 Re: TORQUE [tiger72]
Jun 03, 2008 (10:29 am)
Well, I was basically responding to posts like #20 that recommended Honda do something like the Sentra and offer an automatic, maybe with reduced peak power.
The Sentra wouldn't lose all the fun because it has a lot more low-RPM power to play with, and automatics typically find the highest gear they can comfortably perform what the driver's foot expects. With a Civic, if running down a two-lane road in a "fun" way (i.e.: fast), and you let off the gas, the an automatic will go back to lower-RPM versus the high-RPM you were doing when you gunned it down the next straightaway. From that low RPM, the Sentra will still have some punch, while the Civic would be left waiting for the downshift to get it back "on-cam" and making its high-revving power.
With a manual, you can leave the Civic on-cam while not actually using the gas pedal, and will be immediately ready for the next big acceleration burst.
#34 of 39 Re: TORQUE [thegraduate]
Jun 03, 2008 (11:31 am)
Great explanation. I own an 06' automatic Civic and a friend of mine owns an automatic Sentra Se-R and I definitely agree with what you are saying.
I guess it is time to move to the manual Si when my lease is up.
#35 of 39 Re:auto/manual
Sep 26, 2008 (10:38 am)
some of you seem to be be ignoring the fact that just because you COULD get an automatic you can still get a manual if you wanted. It's not an either/or situation. It's called an option....
btw, some folks can't "learn" to drive a manual. They have no right arm.
#36 of 39 Re:auto/manual [kenlw]
Sep 28, 2008 (7:26 am)
I knew someone who drove one with his prosthetic.
#37 of 39 Re:auto/manual [kenlw]
Sep 28, 2008 (12:00 pm)
We're just explaining why they aren't very plausible with this extreme powertrain tuning. I'm not ignoring a thing.
#38 of 39 Re:auto/manual [thegraduate]
Sep 30, 2008 (10:44 am)
my comments weren't directed at you in particular, it's just the way the forum is set up... but 2L or 1.8L, it's still a 4 cylinder civic for pete's sake. Some folks would gladly trade "performance" for a bit of power.
even tossing 25-30% with an auto, the 2L would still give you more power than the 1.8L (with auto). It's just that simple. Even tho personally i am perfectly able to use a manual and have in years past, my present needs just don't warrant a manual. (Driving 60-80 miles a day in Houston traffic isn't exactly cut out for performance of any type! ...endurance, yes, performance, no....)
Granted, the lack of torque at useable speeds would remain a handicap for most normal drivers, there's just no getting around the fundamental shortcomings of a high-rpm, low torque power plant for most urban drivers, manual or auto. Altho the auto would exacerbate the problems, it would still provide a bit more power for those that want it.
#39 of 39 Re:auto/manual [kenlw]
Sep 30, 2008 (11:37 am)
A more plausible engine for this car, if you wanted an automatic, would be the 2.0L from the Acura CSX (in Canada).
2.0L i-VTEC I-4
155hp at 6,000 RPM
139lb-ft at 4,500 RPM