2017 Civic Si Instrumented Test Results (0-60, 1/4 Mile) [Car and Driver]

[HondaPro]

Makes perfect sense.. takes time to shift a manual. But it's fun. Days of Si being performance increase are over unless you Flashpro. But then again you can Flash Pro a EXT ExL Touring, Hatch Lx Ex Sport ect ect,,

Wow, so its slower by 0.1 to 60mph from a rolling start than the Sport Hatch CVT. Makes no sense....

Sponsored

 

[Design]

Rolling start performance is largely irrelevant on turbo MT's. CVTs can maximize throttle response and minimize lag by keeping RPMs in the sweet spot at any speed.

Regardless, let's at least keep this to more of an apples to apples comparison:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-honda-civic-hatchback-15t-manual-test-review

C/D TEST RESULTS - 2017 Civic Hatch Sport:
Zero to 60 mph: 7.0 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 17.0 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 27.2 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 7.7 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 11.7 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 8.5 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.2 sec @ 94 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 131 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 160 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad*: 0.93 g

 

[zx2down]

Rolling start performance is largely irrelevant on turbo MT's. CVTs can maximize throttle response and minimize lag by keeping RPMs in the sweet spot at any speed.

Regardless, let's at least keep this to more of an apples to apples comparison:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-honda-civic-hatchback-15t-manual-test-review

The weird part is the Sport has a 0-60 of 7.0 vs the Si's 6.3, but the Sport is only showing .4 slower in the quarter, but somehow 1.1sec slower to 100? So its is slower, then the Sport almost catches the Si then slows down again?

I wonder how this would have gone if the tests were on the same day and the Sport had Eagle F1's also. It sounds like a Sport is a drivers race for an Si.


It's also interesting that the Sport is .9 seconds faster 30-50, but 50-70 .2 slower? Weird for having the same gearing.

 

[ronmcdon]

Id really like to see how well it does on a road course, especially in comparison to its competitors. Also very curious what summer tires are used.

Not surprised w the 0-60 but i dont think thats the car's forte.

 

[zroger73]

It's also interesting that the Sport is .9 seconds faster 30-50, but 50-70 .2 slower? Weird for having the same gearing.

Possibly the result of Honda's tuning the Si to develop torque at a higher engine speed than the Sport 6MT?

Sport 6MT
177 lb-ft @ 1,900 - 5,000 RPM

Si
192 lb-ft @ 2,100 - 5,000 RPM

 

[Metfanant]

It's tough to make apples to apples comparisons in magazine tests...so many variables...drivers, locations, weather conditions...

Makes perfect sense.. takes time to shift a manual. But it's fun. Days of Si being performance increase are over unless you Flashpro. But then again you can Flash Pro a EXT ExL Touring, Hatch Lx Ex Sport ect ect,,

Unless you're talking about hitting the brakes, turning the steering wheel, or doing just about any of the multitude of performance related tasks other than pure straight line speed...

But who cares about those things right?

Possibly the result of Honda's tuning the Si to develop torque at a higher engine speed than the Sport 6MT?

Sport 6MT
177 lb-ft @ 1,900 - 5,000 RPM

Si
192 lb-ft @ 2,100 - 5,000 RPM

Probably also has to do with the different turbo...likely takes a little more to spool up

 

[HondaPro]

I look at it this way. I rarely accelerate over 60mph and the Si is only reaching 60mph 1/2sec sooner compared to a basic 1.5T civic. 1/2 sec is not something anyone will notice without a stopwatch. But the Si does add style and sporty appeal. That alone is worth the extra $600 over a base EXT. IF you are an average manual driver? You will actually be slower than a base cvt 1.5T civic. Anyone can push a petal down but not everyone can shift like a pro. These guys at Car and Driver are Pros and 1 out of 20 Si drivers would have the skill to accelerate like they do.

Remember the 2015 Si 50 to 70mph vs 1.5T stock EXT video from Hondata? How the CVT walked away? Well I believe based on numbers we have here it would be the same story. Sorry 2017 Si guys.. lol

0-60: 6.3s
0-100: 15.9s
1/4 mile: 14.8 @ 96 mph
Roadholding: 0.97g
70-0 braking: 159ft
Curb Weight: 2897lbs.

 

[Design]

No offense to anyone here, but I think this discussion exemplifies the one-dimensional logic of the average consumer. As I mentioned in another thread, HP is the first and last thing to run through their mind. Things like steering weight, turn-in, lateral acceleration, or engagement mean very little to all but the most picky of enthusiasts.

I think this is why dealers will have a tough time selling this car on optics alone. Which in turn will drive down OTD pricing over time. It's a good car but a tough sell (at face value at least) over the currently discounted EX-T or Hatch Sport.

That said, the gripes seem comparatively few among those who've had actual seat time in the Si. So word of mouth could help here a bit.

 

[neteng101]

... straight line acceleration is just a small piece of the package

Unfortunately that's one of the simplest figures for the average person to understand, and its one of the few items you can sort of feel in a test drive. The Si may not be underpowered but the powertrain's lack of a more striking exhaust/engine note and the way the 1.5T just makes power once the turbo spools up plus the lack of jump right off the line due to the 1.5T being a small engine without its turbo spooled up can lead to a perception in test drives that the car lacks sufficient oomph, especially for the Si which is billed as the sporty Civic.

What people don't realize is that loud exhausts get old after a while, and while its harder to effectively use VTEC type power of older Honda engines on the road, your butt dynometer can feel the surge more distinctly from VTEC engagement. The gentler nature of this Si is going to work against it selling more to the fast & furious type tuner crowd... this 10th gen Si appeals even more to an older crowd and grown up demographic.

For $100/month more, the younger buyers will pick up hotter, less practical rides like the WRX... they're not looking at total cost OTD or creature comforts or fuel mileage. The gym I go to always has a small fleet of WRXs and a few BRZs/FRSs, the Si is much less common just like the Focus ST. I've seen more STIs than Si in the past few years there.

Honda seems to have a way of missing out on their target demographics - cars like the Fit and now defunct Element meant to target young buyers ended up selling to older demographics.

 

[Joescivic]

So a smidge quicker than the previous si and a hair quicker than the normal Civic 10

What was the previous gen 0 to 100mph ?

2013 Si coupe:
0-60 6.1 sec
1/4 mile 14.6 @ 96.5 mph

9th gen had differences from 2012, 2013, and then the 2014-2015 version

 

[dmitri]

2013 Si coupe:
0-60 6.1 sec
1/4 mile 14.6 @ 96.5 mph

Looks like these numbers are from Motor Trend and they haven't tested the new one yet. Not saying the new one is quicker; just pointing out difference in sources, which does often result in different 0-60 numbers.

(Can't find C/D's test of the 2013 Si, either... If anyone can, please post!)

 

[davemarco]

Unfortunately that's one of the simplest figures for the average person to understand, and its one of the few items you can sort of feel in a test drive. The Si may not be underpowered but the powertrain's lack of a more striking exhaust/engine note and the way the 1.5T just makes power once the turbo spools up plus the lack of jump right off the line due to the 1.5T being a small engine without its turbo spooled up can lead to a perception in test drives that the car lacks sufficient oomph, especially for the Si which is billed as the sporty Civic.

What people don't realize is that loud exhausts get old after a while, and while its harder to effectively use VTEC type power of older Honda engines on the road, your butt dynometer can feel the surge more distinctly from VTEC engagement. The gentler nature of this Si is going to work against it selling more to the fast & furious type tuner crowd... this 10th gen Si appeals even more to an older crowd and grown up demographic.

For $100/month more, the younger buyers will pick up hotter, less practical rides like the WRX... they're not looking at total cost OTD or creature comforts or fuel mileage. The gym I go to always has a small fleet of WRXs and a few BRZs/FRSs, the Si is much less common just like the Focus ST. I've seen more STIs than Si in the past few years there.

Honda seems to have a way of missing out on their target demographics - cars like the Fit and now defunct Element meant to target young buyers ended up selling to older demographics.

These are fair points. I myself did back to back test drives of the 2017 SI and the 2018 WRX on the same curvy back roads course. The WRX actually *felt* much less "punchy" on the throttle, and when taking sudden curves at higher speeds, it clearly had much more roll. I know that objectively, the AWD on the WRX should help to keep the power down better in the curves, and the larger engine should grant it far greater acceleration. But the manner of the power delivery in the WRX was far smoother and felt less exciting to me. Also the transmission on the WRX was nowhere near the quality of the SI's; far more friction in the shifts, and second gear was a huge PITA to shift quickly and smoothly.

Yet even in spite of all of that, I find that the farther in time that I get from my test drives, the more that I objectively see the WRX as the better choice. Just goes to show that there's a large gap between specs on paper and the actual driving experience, and that the complete package of a car is more than just the sum of its parts.

 

[ronmcdon]

No offense to anyone here, but I think this discussion exemplifies the one-dimensional logic of the average consumer. As I mentioned in another thread, HP is the first and last thing to run through their mind. Things like steering weight, turn-in, lateral acceleration, or engagement mean very little to all but the most picky of enthusiasts.

I think this is why dealers will have a tough time selling this car on optics alone. Which in turn will drive down OTD pricing over time. It's a good car but a tough sell (at face value at least) over the currently discounted EX-T or Hatch Sport.

That said, the gripes seem comparatively few among those who've had actual seat time in the Si. So word of mouth could help here a bit.

Great post. I can only hope that people shopping for the CTR have a similar perspective.

Imo, if you're passionate about splitting hairs over 0-60 times and the stat is a priority to you, there are a lot better choices that serve that purpose.

I'm fairly optimistic the Si would do alright sales wise, as Id like to think the current gen is more commercially accessible to the avg consumer than the prior Si models. I think it would have been far more of a financial success had the Si been sold as some sort of performance package that would be available along with an automatic transmission.

 

[HondaPro]

I test drove 2 different 2017 Si and I felt more power 0-40 in sport mode and enjoyed the interior refresh and style refresh over all. If you can drive a manual there is something fun about shifting and hearing the sound of the engine wine out. The seats really hug you. I also like that the Si has lane watch. That feature is great when changing lanes. But if I had to say what is my perfect choice? It would be a Si hatch.

 

[kritz]

Looks like these numbers are from Motor Trend and they haven't tested the new one yet. Not saying the new one is quicker; just pointing out difference in sources, which does often result in different 0-60 numbers.

(Can't find C/D's test of the 2013 Si, either... If anyone can, please post!)

2012 test with summer tires.

http://media.caranddriver.com/files...iver2012-honda-civic-si-coupe-road-test-2.pdf

Sponsored