Anyone had an 8th/9th gen Si?

[Zeffy94]

I'm looking at cheapish manual cars for a second car and was wondering if anyone had a 9th gen Si. I had a 2013 LX previously so I know the 9th gen platform very well. Does anyone have any impressions on what it's like? Shifting wise? I want the old N/A Honda experience with the k24 where you have to rev the engine to get it to do anything.

Also an 8th gen Si is another option. They are cheaper but it seems like people are split on whether or not the 8th or 9th gen was better (since the 9th gen cut a lot of corners on the 2012 model especially).

I'm not worried about reliability - I know the K series is tested and as long as it has had maintenance done it should be good to go. Transmission though I'm unsure. I know of the 2nd gear issue (or was it 3rd?) but I feel like that could be a bit overblown. Main thing I'm looking for is how the transmission feels along with the performance. Ride quality would be good to know as well.

Thanks for any help!

Sponsored

 

[gxl]

I've had a 9th gen LX, almost bought a 9th gen Si, 10th Si, and now a CTR. My brother has an 8th gen Si he keeps with his CTR.

I only drove his Si briefly but I remember it feeling more raw if that makes sense, def awesome revving it out when he's driving it. Someone else will need to speak on the shifter, but it felt kinda wobbly but very smooth to me, might be due to age. Probably can put in something for acuity to change that. Livability/comfort improves with each gen. All reliable in my view, gas is okay I suppose. I never heard my brother mention grinding on the 8th gen, so it might be one of those occasional things not worth mentioning. Clutch is heavier than the current gen for sure.

 

[Zeffy94]

I've had a 9th gen LX, almost bought a 9th gen Si, 10th Si, and now a CTR. My brother has an 8th gen Si he keeps with his CTR.

I only drove his Si briefly but I remember it feeling more raw if that makes sense, def awesome revving it out when he's driving it. Someone else will need to speak on the shifter, but it felt kinda wobbly but very smooth to me, might be due to age. Probably can put in something for acuity to change that. Livability/comfort improves with each gen. All reliable in my view, gas is okay I suppose. I never heard my brother mention grinding on the 8th gen, so it might be one of those occasional things not worth mentioning. Clutch is heavier than the current gen for sure.

My friend test drove a 10g Si and I was with him and it certainly seemed much more civilized than I thought it was going to be. I don't think the 10g will be in my price range when I start looking but some early 17s might depending on the mileage.

 

[boosted180sx]

i had a 2015 SI.
its not as rev happy/crazy sounding under vtec as the 8th gen SI is. It's a lot more easier to drive around town though cause of the more low to mid torque.

i enjoyed my time with it. I had it for 2 years before i traded it in for the CTR.

 

[nick_takov]

I had 2015 SI and it was fun and all, never had any mechanical issues in about 3 years of ownership and about 70k miles , bought it brand new and i beat on it since zero miles didnt even break it in lol. I drove my buddies 8th gen as well a lot and 9th is much much better daily, more comfortable, suspension is softer and nicer for day to day driving (it is pretty sporty dont get me wrong but just more refined than 8th gen) , nicer inside etc etc. and more torquey with k24 and easier to live with. 8th gen is more fun in my opinion tho but worse as daily by a little nothing to crazy.

I traded 9th for s2000 because I bought 03 Accord as a daily and oh boy was s2000 fun.

I had to let go off S2000 because I wasn't driving it much and double payments didn't make much sense to me, plus limited parking space , I now daily the Type R because I gave my younger brother the Accord last summer and he totaled it, he was okay but the car wasnt lol

Im debating same as you should I pick up 8th gen SI for the winter and daily driving because I racked up miles on the Type R , just hit 40k and being FBO doesnt help on fuel bill as well as I go through brakes and tires every 15k-ish miles and I hate to see it caked up in the salt in the winter.

 

[tacthecat]

Have had a '12 Si sedan since Jan 2012 95,000+ miles - love it.
It was the only '12 Civic recommended by CR.
Like/love everything about it. Torque is very good when in the right gear. Pulls hard to rev limiter.
Clutch and shifter are butter smooth (but be sure to change MT fluid at about 60k as it gets very stiff going into 1st in cold weather; butter smooth after 5 or 10 minutes)
Only wear item is rear brake pads and rotors - on 3rd set, +1 caliper mostly salt corrosion issues
Lifetime mpg is the low 30s (32.9)(lo 29 high 40 on full tank) hand calculated.

 

[Zeffy94]

Have had a '12 Si sedan since Jan 2012 95,000+ miles - love it.
It was the only '12 Civic recommended by CR.
Like/love everything about it. Torque is very good when in the right gear. Pulls hard to rev limiter.
Clutch and shifter are butter smooth (but be sure to change MT fluid at about 60k as it gets very stiff going into 1st in cold weather; butter smooth after 5 or 10 minutes)
Only wear item is rear brake pads and rotors - on 3rd set, +1 caliper mostly salt corrosion issues
Lifetime mpg is the low 30s (32.9)(lo 29 high 40 on full tank) hand calculated.

Did not know that about the '12 Si. I thought the 2012 Civic was just universally derided all around.

I had 2015 SI and it was fun and all, never had any mechanical issues in about 3 years of ownership and about 70k miles , bought it brand new and i beat on it since zero miles didnt even break it in lol. I drove my buddies 8th gen as well a lot and 9th is much much better daily, more comfortable, suspension is softer and nicer for day to day driving (it is pretty sporty dont get me wrong but just more refined than 8th gen) , nicer inside etc etc. and more torquey with k24 and easier to live with. 8th gen is more fun in my opinion tho but worse as daily by a little nothing to crazy.

I traded 9th for s2000 because I bought 03 Accord as a daily and oh boy was s2000 fun.

I had to let go off S2000 because I wasn't driving it much and double payments didn't make much sense to me, plus limited parking space , I now daily the Type R because I gave my younger brother the Accord last summer and he totaled it, he was okay but the car wasnt lol

Im debating same as you should I pick up 8th gen SI for the winter and daily driving because I racked up miles on the Type R , just hit 40k and being FBO doesnt help on fuel bill as well as I go through brakes and tires every 15k-ish miles and I hate to see it caked up in the salt in the winter.

If I could have my CTR back AND my Mazda3 I would take it in a heartbeat, but that's not happening so I figured why not get back into a Civic if I can since I want another MT car.

i had a 2015 SI.
its not as rev happy/crazy sounding under vtec as the 8th gen SI is. It's a lot more easier to drive around town though cause of the more low to mid torque.

i enjoyed my time with it. I had it for 2 years before i traded it in for the CTR.

How's the clutch feel - light? Similar to the CTR?

 

[boosted180sx]

How's the clutch feel - light? Similar to the CTR?

lighter than the ctr. maybe in between ctr and the 10th SI. Very easy to drive around town.
8th gen is more fun, 9th gen is more comfortable and has a better interior imo.

i supercharged mine and had about 275 whp so it hauled decently fast too.

 

[tacthecat]

Did not know that about the '12 Si. I thought the 2012 Civic was just universally derided all around.

If you can get hold of the February 2012 CR the Si review starts on page 58 - it's 3 pages & I have it.
Here's their video it says similar things.
https://www.consumerreports.org/vid.../1275174585001/2012-honda-civic-si-road-test/

 

[charleswrivers]

My RSX type-S had a K-series engine very similar to its power and being rev-happy when compared to the 8th gen Si, though it lacked a LSD. It was worlds more fun to drive than my ‘15 Si. The ‘15 Si was a competent car... but it wasn’t that exciting and I’d never care to own or even drive one again. I’d love to get behind the wheel of an RSX again. If I could do it over, I’d of not passed up a used gen 8 over a steeply discounted new gen 9 Si.

Some folks may like gen 9 Sis and that’s fine. Mine bored me to tears and I got rid of it as soon as these gen 10s came out.

 

[Zeffy94]

My RSX type-S had a K-series engine very similar to its power and being rev-happy when compared to the 8th gen Si, though it lacked a LSD. It was worlds more fun to drive than my ‘15 Si. The ‘15 Si was a competent car... but it wasn’t that exciting and I’d never care to own or even drive one again. I’d love to get behind the wheel of an RSX again. If I could do it over, I’d of not passed up a used gen 8 over a steeply discounted new gen 9 Si.

Some folks may like gen 9 Sis and that’s fine. Mine bored me to tears and I got rid of it as soon as these gen 10s came out.

What didn't you like about it? Was it just the characteristic of the engine?

If you can get hold of the February 2012 CR the Si review starts on page 58 - it's 3 pages & I have it.
Here's their video it says similar things.
https://www.consumerreports.org/vid.../1275174585001/2012-honda-civic-si-road-test/

Thanks, seems like of all the 9th gen pre facelifts the Si was the one to get.

lighter than the ctr. maybe in between ctr and the 10th SI. Very easy to drive around town.
8th gen is more fun, 9th gen is more comfortable and has a better interior imo.

i supercharged mine and had about 275 whp so it hauled decently fast too.

I remember my 9th gen interior and it was decent, but I had an LX so it wasn't too special to start.

 

[charleswrivers]

What didn't you like about it? Was it just the characteristic of the engine?

So far as the car itself, aesthetically I though the interior looked more upscale. It is an Acura vs Civic... but it’s a 10 year older design as well. I liked the seats better in the RSX. The RSX had a BOSE system that, while mediocre for a branded system, was still much better than the 9th gens “house brand” which is similar to ours. I liked the analog instrument cluster better in the RSX vs the Civic. The 9th gen infotainment system looks similar to gen 10s but lacks functionality. The VTEC “light” tree was super gimmicky in the 9th gen. The “power meter”? C’mon... that’s more gimmicky than a 80s 300zx. No Android Auto/Apple Car play. No screen mirroring... though there is an HDMI in, but it’s crazy clunky. It’s a worthless screen other than the mandated backup camera. Nav was an option... but Nav as an option doesn’t matter anymore these days.

The K24Z7 does has more torque down low from the higher displacement, but given the higher vehicle weight, it didn’t feel much spunkier. Flashes will let the K24Z7 reach 7500 vice the stock 7000. The K20A2 revved to 8100... and reflashes raised it to 8600. It shared the valve train of that eras R which had that rev limit... so it felt like a no-risk proposition. Engine note and power delivery was just wild and fun. The K24Z7 felt linear and plenty strong... but just wasn’t special. To me.

 

[Zeffy94]

So far as the car itself, aesthetically I though the interior looked more upscale. It is an Acura vs Civic... but it’s a 10 year older design as well. I liked the seats better in the RSX. The RSX had a BOSE system that, while mediocre for a branded system, was still much better than the 9th gens “house brand” which is similar to ours. I liked the analog instrument cluster better in the RSX vs the Civic. The 9th gen infotainment system looks similar to gen 10s but lacks functionality. The VTEC “light” tree was super gimmicky in the 9th gen. The “power meter”? C’mon... that’s more gimmicky than a 80s 300zx. No Android Auto/Apple Car play. No screen mirroring... though there is an HDMI in, but it’s crazy clunky. It’s a worthless screen other than the mandated backup camera. Nav was an option... but Nav as an option doesn’t matter anymore these days.

The K24Z7 does has more torque down low from the higher displacement, but given the higher vehicle weight, it didn’t feel much spunkier. Flashes will let the K24Z7 reach 7500 vice the stock 7000. The K20A2 revved to 8100... and reflashes raised it to 8600. It shared the valve train of that eras R which had that rev limit... so it felt like a no-risk proposition. Engine note and power delivery was just wild and fun. The K24Z7 felt linear and plenty strong... but just wasn’t special. To me.

Thank you for the assessment Charles! How did you like the RSX compared to your 10th gen Si? It is unlikely I can afford one of those but l've had a limited experience in the 10g Si so far and did like what I saw, mainly in the driving characteristics and interior (although, the 1.5T seems less fun to me than just revving the piss out of it).

When I had my L15 motor in my coupe touring, paired with the CVT, I thought it was great personally. From what I've seen though with a manual it becomes a lot more fun, however it almost seems like a tune is required because of pesky revhang. Now, since this would be a second car, I'd would be willing to modify it just because my Mazda is my primary car and I'm keeping it mostly stock.

 

[charleswrivers]

Thank you for the assessment Charles! How did you like the RSX compared to your 10th gen Si? It is unlikely I can afford one of those but l've had a limited experience in the 10g Si so far and did like what I saw, mainly in the driving characteristics and interior (although, the 1.5T seems less fun to me than just revving the piss out of it).

When I had my L15 motor in my coupe touring, paired with the CVT, I thought it was great personally. From what I've seen though with a manual it becomes a lot more fun, however it almost seems like a tune is required because of pesky revhang. Now, since this would be a second car, I'd would be willing to modify it just because my Mazda is my primary car and I'm keeping it mostly stock.

RSX still felt like I was driving a small car because it was based on a 7th gen Civic. This 10th gen is about the size of an Accord from that RSXs era and never feels small... light... and tossable like that little car. Maybe the wheelbase was a lot shorter... I don’t know. The gen 10 Civic just feels... slower to respond? Insulated from excitement? Hard to describe. The RSXs lack of a LSD was telling on launches and hard cornering, and would understeer more readily, but it felt more eager to push it hard in cornering. I’ve never been able to push this gen 10 to understeer like the RSX. Engine note was terrific. I mean... really. Power was good, though the lack of torque would make it feel like a bit of a comparative slug under 6000 RPMs. I can’t recall ever getting under 30 mpgs over the course of a tank and actually touched 41 mpgs when I did an interstate trip from upstate NY to Boston and back. Very efficient little car.

There just very, very different in size and power delivery... and the RSX is kind of obsolete entry-luxury that’s aged well in my eyes and was a very clean looking car in and out. It still sported a 100 hp/liter engine on paper, though it was really more like a 165-175 whp engine from the factory. It was more of a 2+2 arrangement with a functional but tight backseat. When we had out first kid, we had a rear facing car seat back there which worked but got old quickly and I’d not pick a coupe over a sedan these days. It’s lack of low end torque made the few time I took 3 passengers in it, adding around 500 lbs worth of extra people-weight very noticeable driving kindly. I want to say it made something like 130 ft-lbs on a dyno... so my current Si more than doubles that.

Just really different. Good in some ways. Bad in others. The gen 9 Sis were just too watered down IMO. They used K24s to good effect for CRVs and Accord... and had a slightly hopped up one for the Accord Sports but it was just too mild an K-series variant to invoke any real emotion from me.

I’m at my spouse-agreed-upon 4 car limit. I would love to get an RSX or maybe even try a Prelude as it was the only Honda non-sports car I really liked but couldn’t afford in the 90s as a teen. As we’ve gotten older and have more cash, she’s gotten less interested in having older vehicles. I just the timing belt/water pump in the Odyssey and plan to let it go 5-7 more years which will put is solidly past 10 years. Anytime I mention getting a 20 year old Honda for a few grand as a toy these days, I get vetoed... and I can’t do w/o the old truck for woods stuff and ditching the Z would be a bad move.

RSXs had the A2 engine for years and a Z1 engine the last couple that made more actual output though it may not look it because of the SAE change. 8th gen Civics, the Z3 variant. All were high revving ~100hp/liter K20s. The current K20C2 is a pale comparison of those. I also had a base RSX with a A3 engine with the same output and low redline like a C2. It was a very good engine. Plenty of power. Efficient. It was not exciting, however... and when pushed hard it lacked the extra ~1500 RPM of screaming revs and 40 hp that made the A2 engine very special.

 

[Shankmeyster]

I loved my 2010 Si. That gen's K20 was so much fun and easily moddable.

Sponsored