Topic: 2016 Honda Civic Sedan is revealed and Honda means business

[EV-Light]

I am not sure how I feel about the looks...it feels too Acuraish to my eyes and that weird angle in the back mmmm I don't know what to think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The Mighty Duck]

But what's with the lack of manual for the turbo?

I'm really hoping this turns out not to be the case... The S2000 was manual only, the Civic Si is STILL manual only... Honda is obviously a company that appreciates the manual transmission. And I have to think they know their customer base and know that a turbo engine + manual transmission would be very popular (although in fairness, it might only be popular among the teenagers and 20-somethings buying these cars third and fourth hand, not those buying them new).

The new car certainly looks fantastic, and the power plants sound great. I can't get over how big it is for a "compact" car, though.

[rrocket]

 And I have to think they know their customer base and know that a turbo engine + manual transmission would be very popular

Which is why they are saving the manual+turbo for their Civic Type R

[Danno001]

Call me an old fart, but where are the knobs and buttons on the radio?

How many old farts buy Civics?

 

[mazdaman007]

I like it a lot ! Much better than the current Mazda3 (and I say that as a die-hard Mazda fan).

I like the crisp wedgy/angular profile over the 3's swoopy curves and long hood (I know it's not really that long but to me it appears that way with the base of the windshield set back behind the front wheels and the fact that the hood flattens out a bit before it meets the windshield).

I know most of this is probably due to the long 4-2-1 headers required for the SkyActiv engines with their high compression ratios but it just leaves me cold. It's weird to me because the new Mazda2 with the 1.5 SkyActiv doesn't seem to suffer as much as the 3 in this regard.

[JRM]

The sloped rear roof lends itself nicely to a hatchback.  Access to the trunk looks challenging.  Yet another over styled 4 door sedan trying to be a coupe.

[Kris78]

Finally! After two and a half generations Civics Honda understood double deck dashboard is wrong...

I really, really like the two tiered dash. This looks far too normal now.

...but then, I also liked the window switch placement in my old HHR.

My favourite part of the new interior is that storage cubby under the center console. This is such a no brainer for added storage that I'm shocked that it hasn't become as ubiquitous as a cupholder.

[redman]

Honda has noted that the 1.6 turbo will be optimized for fuel economy. The 2.L naturally aspirated engine will be the more powerful choice of the two. Yet no F.E. number have been released.

Find it interesting that Honda is not making the turbo variant that more powerful option, maybe unlike others who claimed power and F.E. from their turbo variants, Honda has decided to keep the boost low in order to achieve a marketable F.E. gain.

[Noto]

Call me an old fart, but where are the knobs and buttons on the radio?

This is Honda's way of saying:

...to JY.

How many old farts buy Civics?

A lot.  Literally, a LOT.

My Gawd, the lower trims look cheap as sh!t in comparison...that actually looks delightfully rental-car-eque.  The 2013+ model's interior looked better.



However, the changes to this model are incredible.  And those new headlights?  Sounds like Honda is saying:

...to Toyota (the Corolla in particular).

Finally, a Civic to compete with the Corolla and the Mazda3.  The new Elantra is going to be a thing of beauty, too.  Such a good time to be alive. 

Honda has noted that the 1.6 turbo will be optimized for fuel economy. The 2.L naturally aspirated engine will be the more powerful choice of the two. Yet no F.E. number have been released.

Find it interesting that Honda is not making the turbo variant that more powerful option, maybe unlike others who claimed power and F.E. from their turbo variants, Honda has decided to keep the boost low in order to achieve a marketable F.E. gain.

Source?  I bet you're wrong on the basis of the 2.0 being the new 'base' engine.  No way they're going to throw a less powerful engine in as 'optional' equipment for minor fuel economy gains.

I'd wager the 2.0L will target the Mazda3's 155hp, and the 1.5T (not 1.6 as you suggest) will target the usual suspects (a la Ford's 1.5T, or Nissan's 1.6T, VW's 1.8T, etc) around 180hp.  I would think it unlikely that the 1.5T from Honda as the optional engine will target GM's 'new' 1.4T rating of 150hp...though it's possible hp numbers will be similar between the 1.5T and the 2.0, with the turbo having gobs more (i.e. like, 30) torques.



And

To the Lancer, which must simply die at this point.  Hell, if Mitsu tried to update it, it could still only hope, at best, for Acura RLX-like sales numbers.

[greengs]

Call me an old fart, but where are the knobs and buttons on the radio?

This is Honda's way of saying:

...to JY.

How many old farts buy Civics?

A lot.  Literally, a LOT.

My Gawd, the lower trims look cheap as sh!t in comparison...that actually looks delightfully rental-car-eque.  The 2013+ model's interior looked better.



However, the changes to this model are incredible.  And those new headlights?  Sounds like Honda is saying:

...to Toyota (the Corolla in particular).

Finally, a Civic to compete with the Corolla and the Mazda3.  The new Elantra is going to be a thing of beauty, too.  Such a good time to be alive. 

Honda has noted that the 1.6 turbo will be optimized for fuel economy. The 2.L naturally aspirated engine will be the more powerful choice of the two. Yet no F.E. number have been released.

Find it interesting that Honda is not making the turbo variant that more powerful option, maybe unlike others who claimed power and F.E. from their turbo variants, Honda has decided to keep the boost low in order to achieve a marketable F.E. gain.

Source?  I bet you're wrong on the basis of the 2.0 being the new 'base' engine.  No way they're going to throw a less powerful engine in as 'optional' equipment for minor fuel economy gains.

I'd wager the 2.0L will target the Mazda3's 155hp, and the 1.5T (not 1.6 as you suggest) will target the usual suspects (a la Ford's 1.5T, or Nissan's 1.6T, VW's 1.8T, etc) around 180hp.  I would think it unlikely that the 1.5T from Honda as the optional engine will target GM's 'new' 1.4T rating of 150hp...though it's possible hp numbers will be similar between the 1.5T and the 2.0, with the turbo having gobs more (i.e. like, 30) torques.



And

To the Lancer, which must simply die at this point.  Hell, if Mitsu tried to update it, it could still only hope, at best, for Acura RLX-like sales numbers.

Engines for sedan and power ratings have been announced.

Lower trims get the base 2.0L NA engine rated at 158hp.
Higher trims get the 1.5T rated at 174hp.

I haven't been able to find tq ratings buy my guess is the 1.5T will have much higher tq than 2.0

[CSH]

Anything on the Si or Type  R?

[Noto]

Find it interesting that Honda is not making the turbo variant that more powerful option, maybe unlike others who claimed power and F.E. from their turbo variants, Honda has decided to keep the boost low in order to achieve a marketable F.E. gain.

Source?  I bet you're wrong on the basis of the 2.0 being the new 'base' engine.  No way they're going to throw a less powerful engine in as 'optional' equipment for minor fuel economy gains.

I'd wager the 2.0L will target the Mazda3's 155hp, and the 1.5T (not 1.6 as you suggest) will target the usual suspects (a la Ford's 1.5T, or Nissan's 1.6T, VW's 1.8T, etc) around 180hp. 

Engines for sedan and power ratings have been announced.

Lower trims get the base 2.0L NA engine rated at 158hp.
Higher trims get the 1.5T rated at 174hp.

Called it

[Sir Osis of Liver]

I dunno. Honda seem to be followers at this point. Nothing new or groundbreaking. Meh.

I've never cottoned to the egg shaped hatch. I'm glad a hatch is coming, but the styling compromises the practicality. Meh.

[Noto]

What's that, JY?  You want me to come and help with 5-way comparo of the new Civic, Corolla, Jetta, Mazda3, and Elantra (all in sedan format and with top trims)?

Very well...I'll check my schedule:  Yup, all clear.

[Minou]

158 and 174 HP from vtec.net but not official yet.  158 could well be derived from 143 X 2.0/1.8 = 158.  The 2.0 is the non DI R20 from ILX fame.  Itself a very undersquare version of the R18, itself an undersquare version of the R16.  So contrary to the PR, not a "new" engine but new to the Civic yes.  Reminds me of the 4th-5th and 6th gen with the 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7 family all based on the same 85mm bore. 

Otherwise, it's a return to a 270 cm wheelbase of the 2006-10 but the new car definitely appears to be longer overall.  I'm not sure about the lower hip point as well.  Honda may well target the 10th gen to teenagers in the US but old farts buy them overhere...  Oh well, they can now migrate to Honda's CUV's.

[Noto]

I'm not sure about the lower hip point as well.  Honda may well target the 10th gen to teenagers in the US but old farts buy them overhere...  Oh well, they can now migrate to Honda's CUV's.

...HR-V for the relative 'win'.

[hoodlum]

158 and 174 HP from vtec.net but not official yet.  158 could well be derived from 143 X 2.0/1.8 = 158.  The 2.0 is the non DI R20 from ILX fame.  Itself a very undersquare version of the R18, itself an undersquare version of the R16.  So contrary to the PR, not a "new" engine but new to the Civic yes.  Reminds me of the 4th-5th and 6th gen with the 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7 family all based on the same 85mm bore. 

Otherwise, it's a return to a 270 cm wheelbase of the 2006-10 but the new car definitely appears to be longer overall.  I'm not sure about the lower hip point as well.  Honda may well target the 10th gen to teenagers in the US but old farts buy them overhere...  Oh well, they can now migrate to Honda's CUV's.

Honda mentioned it in their streamed video.  They didn't say the actual HP but said the 2.0L would have 15 additional HP and the turbo 31 additional HP over the 1.8l.  The 158 and 174 were calculated from the 148hp in the 1.8l.

[Minou]

158 and 174 HP from vtec.net but not official yet.  158 could well be derived from 143 X 2.0/1.8 = 158.  The 2.0 is the non DI R20 from ILX fame.  Itself a very undersquare version of the R18, itself an undersquare version of the R16.  So contrary to the PR, not a "new" engine but new to the Civic yes.  Reminds me of the 4th-5th and 6th gen with the 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7 family all based on the same 85mm bore. 

Otherwise, it's a return to a 270 cm wheelbase of the 2006-10 but the new car definitely appears to be longer overall.  I'm not sure about the lower hip point as well.  Honda may well target the 10th gen to teenagers in the US but old farts buy them overhere...  Oh well, they can now migrate to Honda's CUV's.

Honda mentioned it in their streamed video.  They didn't say the actual HP but said the 2.0L would have 15 additional HP and the turbo 31 additional HP over the 1.8l.  The 158 and 174 were calculated from the 148hp in the 1.8l.

You mean the 143 HP in the 1.8.

[Danno001]

How many old farts buy Civics?

A lot.  Literally, a LOT.

12 is a LOT to me.

[RaHorakhty]

I'm not surprised that the turbo is auto only. Everytime you have to lift off the gas to shift with a manual, you lose turbo boost and it takes time to spool back up again, whereas with the auto, which provides quick shifts and requires no gas pedal lift, that thing can keep spinning even at slightly above idle revs, giving you plenty of torque with a good fuel economy return. Unless, Honda added a no-lift shift option, like the old Cobalt SS turbo had, but if they did that, why would anyone need to spend the extra five grand to move up to the Si?