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

[Sir Osis of Liver]

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?

My Passat is manual. It's only off boost if I let the revs drop below 1500 or so. It's not an issue.

[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?

My Passat is manual. It's only off boost if I let the revs drop below 1500 or so. It's not an issue.

I'm sure that's the case but Honda is probably not targeting this model for the quick and hard shift crowd, if this is the fuel sipping champion of the Civic product line. I bet the auto is tuned to never go above 1500 rpm unless you really floor it. Now, just imagine the possibilities if they did stick the manual in it. It would be every boy racer's dream.

[quadzilla]

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?

My Passat is manual. It's only off boost if I let the revs drop below 1500 or so. It's not an issue.

I'm sure that's the case but Honda is probably not targeting this model for the quick and hard shift crowd, if this is the fuel sipping champion of the Civic product line. I bet the auto is tuned to never go above 1500 rpm unless you really floor it. Now, just imagine the possibilities if they did stick the manual in it. It would be every boy racer's dream.

Yep, stalling it at every light while trying to show off. 

Considering the number of people that don't want a manual and pretty much every automatic having shifting capability.....only 5 people will really care if they put a manual in it.

[Solstice2006]

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?

My Passat is manual. It's only off boost if I let the revs drop below 1500 or so. It's not an issue.

Didn't realize it was manual.  In all of Ontario, there are only 2 manuals (in the past 2 years), both TDI!

[Ontariodriver]

I wonder if Honda were inspired by the fusion. 

[Solstice2006]

I don't see anything similar...

[johngenx]

I don't see anything similar...

They're both cars.

[Ontariodriver]

I don't see anything similar...

They're both cars.

The plastic treatment around the headlights is the same. Both cars have same eye brow look.

[johngenx]

The plastic treatment around the headlights is the same. Both cars have same eye brow look.

You just described most cars sold today - it's the current look.

[quadzilla]

But wait....They both have four wheels that are round. I also noticed they have four doors. He might be onto something here.

[Ontariodriver]

The plastic treatment around the headlights is the same. Both cars have same eye brow look.

You just described most cars sold today - it's the current look.

No not really - eye brow wise - It's looks awful - Well it looks fusion inspire to me. Anyways - I hate this cheap plastic chrome shove Willy nilly all over cars. As if to add style - It doesn't work IMO. Less hope it phases out soon - Just like the fake silver plastic consumer products did.

But wait....They both have four wheels that are round. I also noticed they have four doors. He might be onto something here.

 

[Snowman]

I don't see anything similar...

They're both cars.

 

[RaHorakhty]

All cars today look the same. Only the front fascia and tail light treatments vary. Everything else, little difference. When I say all cars I mostly refer to sedans and sedan-based coupes. Strangely, only minivans today all have their own distinct styling, which is the opposite of the 90s when all minivans looked identical.

[fixer]

Too bad Honda, the 2016 Cruze looks better inside and out.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

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?

My Passat is manual. It's only off boost if I let the revs drop below 1500 or so. It's not an issue.

Didn't realize it was manual.  In all of Ontario, there are only 2 manuals (in the past 2 years), both TDI!

Yup, it's a bit of a unicorn. I was all set to get a Golf TSI, but I ended up liking the Passat better. The dealer was anxious to get it off the lot, which helped.

[mnztr]

I am glad to see the return of the Civic hatch. It always puzzled me why Honda deleted this from the North American market when others (including Honda with the Fit) were proving the hatch was still very popular in this segment. Hatches are DA BOMB!!!!

[CountOfGamble]

I am glad to see the return of the Civic hatch. It always puzzled me why Honda deleted this from the North American market when others (including Honda with the Fit) were proving the hatch was still very popular in this segment. Hatches are DA BOMB!!!!

If they would only add the Civic Tourer Wagon, the line up of Civic models would be top notch. But nooooo, we have the HRV and CRV.  I want more cargo space and I want to sit low to the ground. Too much to ask?

[SKYMTL]

Too bad Honda, the 2016 Cruze looks better inside and out.

I initially laughed at that.  Then I looked at the new Cruz and felt stupid about laughing.  You are bang on.  Now if only Chevy would offer it in a hatch. 

[Blueprint]

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.

I will bring my Golf TDI - it will smoke the competition.

[Solstice2006]

Too bad Honda, the 2016 Cruze looks better inside and out.

I initially laughed at that.  Then I looked at the new Cruz and felt stupid about laughing.  You are bang on.  Now if only Chevy would offer it in a hatch.

They do....

http://www.autos.ca/general-news/2016-chevrolet-cruze-hatchback-coming-to-north-america/