B16aDasher

yeah, honda maybe losing the horsepower war. SI is still a fun car to drive tho.

clemsonhatch

Just curious what cars you are thinking?

FijiBlueFG2

Texasnick, what you feel to realize is the potential of the Si.

Sure it may only be roughly 200hp, but for a 2.0L engine to push 200hp NA is quite impressive. The only other vehicle that comes close to that ratio is the Shelby Cobra GT500KR

You could pay $80K for a 6.0L Mercedes SL-500 that doesn't even reach 400hp. It's probably a, "better vehicle".

But would you rather pay four times the price of an Si for a vehicle that makes less than 2/3rds of how much power it should put out?

As for the three cars you will mention, I bet most of them are slower and/or heavier than the Si, and all of them will be FI.

RICO_

Doesn't count......it's a Supercharged 5.4L V8

C6 ZO6 comes close though....7.0L 505HP = 72HP/liter

Uhlig

The one you speak of is a 5.0 liter V8... although the HP numbers aren't astounding, you're right.

The 6.0 liter on the other hand puts out 604BHP and a ground thumping 738 ft/lbs of torque.

Pricey, but, powerful and def. reaches the 100hp per liter.

Edit: Nevermind, you guys are talking N/A. I saw the Cobra there and assumed FI was involved... whoops.

Kidnkorner

100 HP per liter NA isn't exclusive to Honda anymore the 2008 M3 is in the club, and the 2008 Hyabusa makes 151.5 per liter, 197 BHP @ 1340cc's.

RICO_

Spoonman hereby approves of this thread.



Noone will ever defeat spoonman.

texasnick

I fail to realize nothing. I know the potential of a 3 lobe k series. You think that F/I cars somehow don't have this "potential"? LMAO....look at the "potential" of an SRT-4.

Good lord, its like talking with a bunch of retards. HP/Liter is the dumbest argument I have ever heard for the "what's the better car?".

and the three cars I would rather have (yes, they are F/I who gives a ****) are

Cobalt SS
MS3
MkV GTi
....if we're talking about sub $25k FWD sports cars. You know what, **** it, I'd rather have an SRT-4 over a civic Si too....yeah, I said it.

I didn't mean to come on here and get the fanboys all butthurt. The k20z3 is a GREAT motor. Unfortunately, the civic Si is a lot more than just a motor.

ok....so by your reasoning the AP1 is a better car than the AP2 because it uses a 2 liter instead of a 2.2? I guess Honda is stupid for changing the engine and not meeting their 120hp/liter prerequisate then huh?

jonssonar

A) this thread is retarded, no way is the Honda SI comparable to the Honda DX/LX/EX. That being said, it isn't that different when compared to the full spectrum of automobiles. Its 1.5 seconds faster on the 1/4 and a better track car... thats it.

I am tired of hearing about Honda Civic SI drivers defending their cars by saying that it is in a "class of its own". It isn't.

Si is a low torque car, and for the $$$ spent, it isn't close to being the fastest for its money. MS3 and GTI come to mind. Just because they have turbo engines doesn't mean they are any different dollar for dollar.

vladd

potential doesn't matter for everybody; some people actually buy the car for what the car is, not what it could be. why does potential matter when it costs money to get there? for example, to get the hp of a ms3 out of an si, you'll have to spend MORE money on the si than on a stock ms3. although i own an si myself, i find your guys' arguments pretty funny here. who cares what the hp/l of the si is compared to other cars; the point is, it's only 197 hp. the hp/l is the oldest argument in the book for having an underpowered car (not saying that the si is underpowered, but you people seem to think that, and are now making excuses for it).


as texasnick has pointed out, just because the si doesn't have a turbo doesn't put it in a different class than other cars such as the ms3. price dictates the class more than anything, and the si is right in there with other cars such as the ms3, srt4, etc.

your argument against the media testing cars doesn't make much sense. are you saying that magazines set up 1/4 mile strips with cones in some parking lot somewhere, instead of taking the car to a regular track? what're you on, man? i bet the drivers at magazines such as motor trend are better than most people on here, since testing cars is what they do for a living. you can't say you're better than them unless you're a pro yourself.

Kidnkorner

Rod ratio and piston dwell time dictates that, mostly. You can have all the torque, for speed I'll take the high rpm horse power. If I need to pull a trailer i'll buy a RAM.

If you want to make HP in a small displacement engine you either have to add forced induction or design the engine to turn higher rpms. Plain and simple. Any Small displacment NA engine making more torque than honda motors has a rod ratio condusive for toqure.

square_1

Don't compared your R18 to the K20A3. Totally different man. Those motors are nothing alike.

I have an 03 EP3.

I could have easily bought a used WRX, SRT4, etc for the price I spent on my used EP3 but I opted for a car that gets good gas mileage (can easily pull 30MPGs when granny driving) is sporty, fun, not too expensive to mod and has good aftermarket support, looks good (SRT 4 IS A NEON!), has a semi decent interior (suede seats that always get me compliments, SRT has manual windows and both SRT4 and WRX have very cheap interiors), etc.

My friend bought a brand new WRX in 07 and we were all astounded that my little civic had a way sicker interior, way better sounding stock stereo, NOT mid 90s Ford green gauges, lower road noise, etc. Yeah... It isn't as fast but if I wanted to build a fast cheap car I would just turbo B an EG hatch or something.

They are good cars. Not ridiculously fast, but fun to drive. That's what matters.

And as for the Mazdaspeed 3... Any car that makes that ridiculous amount of power but still has hard time breaking into the 13s should be scrapped. Should have made it AWD instead of the stupid boost limiting in 1st and 2nd and they probably would have had a way faster and higher selling car. Little heavier and a little worse gas mileage but you gotta pay to play.

vladd

funny you mention that, i was set on getting a 06-07 wrx wagon until i test drove one and realized the si has a MUCH nicer interior. also not a big fan of how the engine sounds, everytime i hear a subaru it's hard not to think of a civic running on 3 cylinders. still love how the wrx looks though.

Kidnkorner

Ok then ask your self this; How many cars are making 197 BHP or more?
Of these vehicles how many are using forced induction, using 2 or more cylinders or 500 cc's more displacement?

And those cars are 2-6k more in price

My argument makes perfect sense because I have been to a few "road tests", and been to an editing room.

Yes, that is exactly what they do. They measure out distances, set up cones for various tests, set up expensive measurement equipment and perform these tests. Did you know most of the results written in magazines are often averages with the highest and lowest results tossed out?

Some do take cars to tracks, but track time is expensive and not every car is TRACK tested. The cars that get track time are those whose price tag are significantly higher or the car is being pitted against several competitors. Additionally cars that get track time are usually vehicles that are receiving a lot of press attention and being well received by the public. Usually if a car gets track tested the manufacturer is paying for it.

100miles+

how you gonna call me an idiot, you probably base what you say off of **** you read on the interwebz and the magoooozines so STFU and go back to where you came from.

An R18 even with a turbo is barely at the 200 mark give or take a few HP.

vladd

turbo or not, the si's competitors make more power, period. not sure what you're arguing here? the si is the slower car in its class in a straight line.

just out of curiousity, what magazine's road test did you go to? i was under the impression that motor trend did all their 1/4 testing at a track, and that they published their very best time. could be wrong though. no idea how other magazines do it.

Kidnkorner

Yeah, because motor trend is the be all end all media source on testing cars.

I'd expect those cars to out perform the Si, they cost more and make more power.

vladd

nice edit there. i'd say motor trend is a pretty solid source of information, as they've been around for 50+ years and have tested pretty much every single car sold in the u.s. within that time. did you have a better source in mind? so i take it that the quarter mile made of cones wasn't done by a major magazine then, correct? you still haven't mentioned the name.

FijiBlueFG2

You take a GTI, remove the turbo, and you have a POS.

You take a SRT4, remove the turbo, and you have a POS.

You take a Cobalt SS, remove the turbo, you have a POS.

You take a MS3, remove the turbo, you have a POS.

If these companies cannot build a NA vehicle that can compete on the same level as a NA Honda, they do not deserve to be in the same class. Would you put a RWD sports coupe and a FWD passenger sedan in the same category if they are the same price?

Honda COULD release a Mugen-built F/I FD2 Mugen RR, and have a vehicle more than capable of competing with Evos and STis, on the track and the strip. Dodge and Chevy cannot shake a stick at that. Volkswagen has the R32, but thats a 6-banger. The SRT-4 can drive in a straight line, but the second you try and take a turn, forget about it.

And for the record a WRX will barely pull on a stock EM2.


SRT4 Losing to a CRX
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeh3g2d5CsE

K5^

http://www.supercars.net/cars/3570.html

This concept is supercharged, but according to the article, its not an iteration of the RR but a totally different car in its own respect.

i-VTEC_DOHC

sorry i dont mean to come in a try to diss everybody, but this thread has gotten way off topic. the op was comparing the standard civics to the si. i think thats what we need to focus on instead of arguing about who else makes 100hp/l or this other stuff about what car will compare to the si. but i will defend my si by saying that yes, its pricey for what you get, but i bought it for what it is, i love the exterior, the color, interior, its more than comfortable to drive, the gas mileage you get for the performance it has, and i havent seen any other car that gets 30+mpg and runs in the 14 second range that i know of, and the miscellaneous features it has. but to be quite honest, i would pick my si over any other car you guys are comparing it to. especially the cobalt ss. domestic cars have the worst interior you could ever imagine. its like all the same round button radios get passed through to every domestic car. but the interior is what sells the car. cuz thats what you see the most. cuz i know if i could afford a $125,000 car and i love the exterior but the interior isnt what i really like, or the seats are uncomfortable, you bet your ****ing *** im jumping back in my si.

vladd

so what made you the official judge of what car deserves to be in the class? guess what? if you remove the engine out of an si, you have a pos. i hope you're not really that stupid. all of the cars you mentioned above are fwd, not rwd, so i have no idea why you'd think to stick that statement into this. do you realize how expensive the mugen rr would be here? it'd easily be $30k+, well into sti/evo territory. do you realize how shitty the sales on that car would be? worse than on the mugen si, that's for sure. for that price i bet dodge and chevy could easily make an equal competitor, but guess what, we're not talking about $30k+ cars here. we're talking about low $20k's cars. in this price range, the si has less power than all of its competitors.

and to top it off, you include a video of a srt4 and a crx racing. i'll admit, i'm not wasting the time to watch the video, but $100 says the crx isn't stock if it won the race. what's the point of that video? is the crx a car that's now sold new, and is it stock? no? didn't think so.

RICO_

Jeeeez.....this god damn thread could go 200 pages and this little argument would still not be resolved. If you people would rather have a Speed3, Cobalt SS, SRT, or whatever other freakin car you'd rather have......then GO OUT AND GET THE F*CKER AND GTFO of HERE and go ********** to your torque wonders. The Si isn't going ANYWHERE.....it will still be here long after GM and Dodge decide to do away with their budget racer cars.

Just f*ckin can it already!!

2008fijibluesi

LOL. The R18 has a better HP/L ratio than the Z06. But that doesn't mean anything. You and I both have been in many threads where we talk about and pretty much slobber on the Z06.


That's it?!?!?! Are you serious? 1.5 seconds in 1/4 mile is an eternity. Stock, I was running within a second of stock EVOs and I would never say our performance is "close".

This thread was about R18 Civics/Civic Si. Compared to the R18 Civics, the Si is in a class of it's own.


First of all...the GTi (equipped with a straight manual trans) does not perform leaps and bounds above the Si. In a drag race (with equally skilled drivers) the GTi would win but a ****hair. It's a driver's race. Sure, with the DSG, the car is a rocket, but that transmission alone (without a single other option) brings the GTi's base price over $24k. Any question of which performs better goes out the window when a corner approaches. Stock for stock and price for price (even though the base GTi w/crappy stereo & manual is still more than the Si), the GTi can't touch the overall performance of the Si.

Now...on to the rest of you. I take stock in what all of you say. And all of you make good points. Most of what you say is factual, and you just have different interpretations of those facts.


I love the Si, but HP/L really doesn't mean **** anymore. Honda fan boys have been spanking off to HP/L since the B16 (with 160 hp aka 100hp/l) was introduced. Honda hasn't really done anything new or overally exciting since then. Sure it's exhilarating to drive but when the car can't make any power before 6k, the motor is not longer efficient. I wouldn't trade my car for the world because I love it's redline, but boosted cars (and cars with torque) make power more efficiently. They don't need to redline to get moving, thus they use less gas. To have an exciting ride in an Si, it's engine needs to be tightly wound in the upper regions of the RPMosphere, but gas mileage drops hard. Honda builds great engines and I'm a Honda fan, but they are honestly falling behind.

Point of this thread Si is greater than the non-Si (performance-wise). End of discussion.

IT GUY

I'd like to see you expand on some of these points. How do YOU measure efficiency?