2012 Civic Scores too Low to be "Recommended by Consumer Reports"

[101lifts2]

http://autos.yahoo.com/news/consumer...commended.html

lulz

I agree that the interior build quality of Civics nowadays is garbage.

[Homeslice]

OK, but if it was the Si version you wanted, does Ford or Chevy have anything that competes with that? No.

[Mikey]

Originally Posted by Homeslice

OK, but if it was the Si version you wanted, does Ford or Chevy have anything that competes with that? No.

Ford is buiding an SVT Focus

Of course, for the price tag of a Civic Si, you can have a 300+hp, 30mpg V6 Mustang or Camaro.

The Civic Si fanboys are fucking retarded. All of them. The Civic is, and always has been, an economy car (and not a very good one, at that). Trying to pretend it's something else is foolish and ridiculous.

[Homeslice]

Originally Posted by Mikey

Ford is buiding an SVT Focus

Of course, for the price tag of a Civic Si, you can have a 300+hp, 30mpg V6 Mustang or Camaro.

The Civic Si fanboys are fucking retarded. All of them. The Civic is, and always has been, an economy car (and not a very good one, at that). Trying to pretend it's something else is foolish and ridiculous.

I could also say that pretending a Mustang/Camaro is a sportscar is foolish. They're muscle cars that have been forced into handling decently. They were built off platforms shared with sedans, not dedicated sportscar platforms like Porsches, Miatas, etc.

At least with Civics you are starting with a lighter base, so it's easier to make it handle.

I would honestly rather have the new Civic Si (much improved over last year's), than a V6 Mustang/Camaro. With a V6 Mustang/Camaro you don't get the top brakes/suspension, and people can easily tell it's not the top model, so you look like a poser or a secretary. Also I'm quite sure that a Civic Si handles better, and is almost as fast, as those cars.

[Mikey]

Originally Posted by Homeslice

I could also say that pretending a Mustang/Camaro is a sportscar is foolish. They're muscle cars that have been forced into handling decently. They were built off platforms shared with sedans, not dedicated sportscar platforms like Porsches, Miatas, etc.

At least with Civics you are starting with a lighter base, so it's easier to make it handle.

I would honestly rather have the new Civic Si (much improved over last year's), than a V6 Mustang/Camaro. With a V6 Mustang/Camaro you don't get the top brakes/suspension, and people can easily tell it's not the top model, so you look like a poser or a secretary. Also I'm quite sure that a Civic Si handles better, and is almost as fast, as those cars.

You're delusional.

Here's a little tip for you: There's no such thing as a FWD sportscar.

The Mustang and Camaro are not and never were sportscars. They are Ponycars. It's nice of you to point out the heritage, as it's a damn sight better than the Civic, notably from a performance standpoint.

I'm off now to check performance numbers, but think about this: if you ask 100 people whether they would rather have a Civic Si or a Mustang or Camaro, what do you think you'd get?

[Homeslice]

Originally Posted by Mikey

I'm off now to check performance numbers, but think about this: if you ask 100 people whether they would rather have a Civic Si or a Mustang or Camaro, what do you think you'd get?

Are you asking specifically about V6 Mustangs/Camaros?

Because if you are, I think you'd be surprised by the results.

I've met/spoke to tons of Honda 'fanboys' who diss Mustangs/Camaros all the time.

[LeeNetworX]

Originally Posted by Mikey

The Civic is, and always has been, an economy car (and not a very good one, at that).

Based on personal experiences, I would disagree with it not being a good economy car; my wife's Civic was a great little car for what it was. And my '89 CRX Si I had (essentially a Civic) was pretty much bullet proof. I was just about to turn 200,000 trouble-free miles when I got T-boned in that car 12 years ago. Other than normal maintenance, neither car had a problem. Both had excellent fuel economy. Ergonomics were good (not great, but good). Interior quality was good. Fit and finish of body panels was good.

[Mikey]

Originally Posted by LeeNetworX

Based on personal experiences, I would disagree with it not being a good economy car; my wife's Civic was a great little car for what it was. And my '89 CRX Si I had (essentially a Civic) was pretty much bullet proof. I was just about to turn 200,000 trouble-free miles when I got T-boned in that car 12 years ago. Other than normal maintenance, neither car had a problem. Both had excellent fuel economy. Ergonomics were good (not great, but good). Interior quality was good. Fit and finish of body panels was good.

My apologies, I was unclear with my statement. Civics used to be good economy cars.

That shit has been over for a good decade. They keep adding too much crap to them in the name of luxury, and have sacrificed economy as a result. Today's Civic is overpriced, underperforming, and doesn't get near the fuel economy of a Civic from the mid-90's.

[Homeslice]

Whatever you say chief. I guess every Civic Si owner bought it just because it's a Honda. They couldn't have possibly bought it because they liked it.

To me, the way a car feels & responds to the wheel is more important than how fast it accelerates or how much lateral G it generates. And no muscle car will ever feel like a small car.

LOL @ 3,500 lbs for a V6 Mustang (and 3,800 for a V6 Camaro ).

[Mikey]

Originally Posted by Homeslice

LOL @ 3,500 lbs for a V6 Mustang (and 3,800 for a V6 Camaro ).

LOL @ 200 hp for Civic Si.

I can play this game all day, and the Honda loses every time.