Lacking Character - My (long) Si Review

VarmintCong

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2016
Threads
49
Messages
1,640
Reaction score
869
Location
Taiwan
Vehicle(s)
2023 Ford Focus ST Line X (sold 2020 Si sedan)
Country flag
Coming from a turbo SAAB, it took me a long time to get used to the peaky VTEC screamer in my TSX, so I'm sure the same will happen to others going from VTEC to turbo.
I'm sort of the opposite, went from a '97 GSR sedan to a 3.0L inline six (330i). The BMW motor was a nice combo of low end torque and screaming top end.

I love the 1.5L turbo in my hatch, it suits it well, but in an Si I'd be more excited by a new N/A motor w/ 8000+ rpm redline, that'd be something to get excited about.
 

veejayy

Member
Joined
May 24, 2017
Threads
5
Messages
13
Reaction score
5
Location
Jersey
Vehicle(s)
Civic coupe turbo
Country flag
OP- thanks. I have 15Si and had 07Si and 11Si. I love all of them.
Here is the problem- natural aspiration is dead. Winding it out is going away. It is a cryin shame.
I am about the visceral experience if I am going to buy a sporty type of car. The beauty about the Si was that for very cheap you could have that.
It sounds like it has gotten more sophisticated in handling and competency but lost something in the fun from your point of view. Why so damn quiet??

I test drove a Fiesta ST the other day.There is a visceral cheap car that just makes you want to laugh!
I will soon test the Si but if it does not make me laugh then maybe add FiST to my garage along with my 15 Si.
 

warrendeath

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2016
Threads
16
Messages
404
Reaction score
198
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2017 Honda Civic Type-R 'Hellbat'
People get extremely defensive here when the Civic is questioned. I think Honda went EXTREMELY underwhelming with it this time around. So much so that I've abandoned it, and considered other options. I just don't see it this time around.
 

zx2down

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2015
Threads
27
Messages
615
Reaction score
434
Location
Philly
Vehicle(s)
2014 Altima 2.5 S
People get extremely defensive here when the Civic is questioned. I think Honda went EXTREMELY underwhelming with it this time around. So much so that I've abandoned it, and considered other options. I just don't see it this time around.
Because it was Honda of America's project, not Honda of Japan. I read it as they wanted to release the R and no Si and HoA insisted their was one so HoJ said fine... Make one. Which why it almost a partsbin car.
 


takemorepills

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2015
Threads
9
Messages
703
Reaction score
310
Location
Seattle
Vehicle(s)
1987 Prelude Si
Country flag
Man, reading everyone's input on the Si has me noticing a few trends:

"man it gets good MPG" yeah, because it makes less power with a much smaller engine than other 2.0T choices make. It goes without saying that the smaller engine making less power should get better MPGs.

"I considered other cars, but I chose an Si for reliability". OK, one thing first, if you lose a race to a more powerful "unreliable" 2.0T car, at least that car was reliable enough to be running just fine to put an ass-whomping on the 1.5T.
And secondly, everyone who claims "Honda reliability" is seriously either a blind fan boy, or someone innocently buying into the mystique of Hondas from the 90's, because: http://www.motortrend.com/cars/honda/civic/2016/2016-honda-civic-touring-review-update-2/ Their 2016 Civic 1.5T failed to start TWICE before 11K miles. WTF are you guys smoking? The Si is "more reliable" what do y'all have a crystal ball? If a new car failed to start on my wife TWICE in ONE YEAR, that car would be GONE. And I keep hearing the GTI specifically called out about reliability, but:
http://www.automobilemag.com/news/2015-volkswagen-golf-gti-four-seasons-wrap-up/
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2015-volkswagen-gti-long-term-road-test-wrap-up-review
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/volk...volkswagen-golf-gti-review-long-term-verdict/
Never ONCE did those horribly unreliable (and first model year to boot!) GTI tested by 3 different sources, one up to 40K miles, fail to operate properly during their testing. I can put my wife in those cars and not worry it won't start like the Civic 1.5T. And the start failure isn't isolated, it is reported quite often here too...hmmm.....:hmm:

The 1.5T has a lot of potential, the less aggressive Civics and the CR-V are mighty fine daily drivers. I'm sure Honda will sort out the reliability demons (or will they?) But the Si really should be more aggressive. OR, just throw a damn automatic option at it already!
 

warrendeath

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2016
Threads
16
Messages
404
Reaction score
198
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2017 Honda Civic Type-R 'Hellbat'
Because it was Honda of America's project, not Honda of Japan. I read it as they wanted to release the R and no Si and HoA insisted their was one so HoJ said fine... Make one. Which why it almost a partsbin car.
Right. Just disappointing with how they've treated this, since day one. Hiding everything behind numerous doors, keeping everything under lock and key. For this? I get most of the reviews are positive, but I haven't really seen anything to make me go get one. Let alone beat the competition. This competes with the Focus ST, GTI, etc. Sure, they are a bit more money, but I think way better deals.
 

takemorepills

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2015
Threads
9
Messages
703
Reaction score
310
Location
Seattle
Vehicle(s)
1987 Prelude Si
Country flag
Oh yeah, and about the tuning thing:
http://www.automobilemag.com/news/honda-limited-2017-civic-si-power-increase-engine-longevity/
Seems Honda realizes the 1.5T shouldn't be pushed very far. You may be able to throw tunes at the 1.5T to make it competitive, but Honda will be watching for tunes in regards to warranty issues. When your warranty is over, tune away! But, any tuned 2.0T is just gonna whomp the 1.5T even worse, no matter how you tune it. Because way down on displacement.
 

Regi_Derrick

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2015
Threads
6
Messages
72
Reaction score
86
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Vehicle(s)
2014 Ford Fusion
Country flag
Honda's already admitted that the 1.5t was used to save $ and the HP was limited because of reliability. Each time they do stuff like this the first thing they mention is "value" or "value for the money." Who are they? Hyundai? Kia? Remember when Honda just built the best product available at a price that was obtainable? I do. This whole "value" proposition with the SI just doesn't add up to me honestly. It's a sad cop out...and it shows. Build it (RIGHT) and they will come. Build it (Wrong) and you'll have to discount the shit out of them to move them. I get the feeling the Civic SI will be getting some heavy discounts in a few months.

How long have we been waiting for the SI? Almost two years?!? It took Honda two years to basically develop a Civic SI with the CR-V's turbo/engine, sportier dampers, sport seats (that look and feel cheap) and a spoiler. Honda is so cheap that the SI doesn't even get its own unique colors anymore. Honda is so cheap that they even dropped the navigation option on the Si in the US....Honda is so cheap that they basically took the Sport and Sport Tourings alloy wheels, refinished them and rehashed the bumpers to save money...but couldn't even be bothered to offer the Sport Tourings LED headlights. Yea it's all about the benjamin's baby!

Meanwhile Ford, VW and even Hyundai offer performance variants that can go from basically bare bones to loaded to the gills. The Honda exec was NOT lying when he admitted the 1.5t was used to save cost...I guess offering more than one variant of the SI was also a measure to save costs as well...but even that doesn't make sense!

You can really tell that Honda was embarrassed. The SI "Concept" debuted at LA last year, with accessory wheels and a "unique" red paint that didn't even make it to production. They admitted it would have a 1.5t, but refused to elaborate on power figures. They claimed it would be the "Most powerful SI ever" so folks begin to speculate that it would have at least 210-225 hp...we ended up with 205 and somehow the "Most powerful SI ever" talk mysteriously disappeared when we finally saw the production version.

When the damn thing was released we got a 2 minute video of it driving around, no real press conference, no real hype, because there is none. The consequences of compromise realized. Honda in a nutshell these days. Especially Acura.

Every major competitor (with the exception of the Sentra Nismo and Elantra Sport) offers a 2.0t. Most of the competition offers a hatchback variant. All of them offer optional feature content....from simple things like Navigation all the way up to power seats, leather, and more. Honda provides us with an SI Sedan and Coupe, no hatchback, less HP than all of them and no option for even navigation, cheap cloth seats etc. all equipped with a 1.5t that will have marginally better performance than a Civic EX 1.5t 6MT (which will probably be dropped so the SI doesn't look so deliberately desperate) while not even offering things like LED headlights. All the competition offers either HIDs or LEDs and has for years! GTIs and Focus STs have offered leather for years!

I don't buy for a second that the 2.0t would have increased the price of the Civic SI by more than maybe 2K bucks...and if it did, so what? Build a PRODUCT worthy of the PRICE, NOT a product that's a "good value" full of compromises. Honda is no doubt going to be using the 2.0t in the Accord and probably some other products (perhaps the Pilot, next TLX, ILX, RDX, etc.) even if Honda lost some money on the front end putting the 2.0t in the Civic, they'd recoup it eventually. Putting the 2.0t into the Civic couldn't cost nearly as much as the spectacularly huge failures that are the Crosstour, ZDX, ILX, RLX and CR-Z debacles that we've endured for the last ten years.

Honda lacks real direction and real focus because they are spending too much time trying to save $2 instead of building the absolute best product and it is frustrating. That's evidently clear when the Honda exec admits that Honda might consider a variant between the SI and Type R if the market demands it. It's pretty clear that the market already does...VW and Ford have offered the ST and GTI in various trim levels with various options for numerous years with much success. We basically got to wait for this SI to fail again before Honda finally offers what they should have offered in the first place: An SI with the detuned 2.0t with two trim levels. Si Base and Si Touring. It really is that simple.

Keep the SI base as is. Equipped the Si Touring with everything (maybe even Honda sensing) that the Touring/Sport Touring sedan/hatchbacks offer.

Instead we get a Civic 1.5t that's gone on the market with less hp than all its major competitors, can't be equipped with the content of all its competitiors, won't be as fast or as fun as all of those competitors but when it fails, Honda MIGHT think about offering a variant between the SI and Type R? I think if anything if it fails we may never see anymore SI's. Honda will blame it on a lack of interest...they'd be right. Few people might be compelled to go with a Civic SI that offers nothing really tangible over the Civic EX 1.5t and has to compete with its faster, more fun and better equipped competition based on "value" and not real merits that matter to enthusiasts.

The disaster that was the 9th gen Civic should have been enough for Honda to never compromise so much on the Civic again. So much for this being the "Epic Civic" it took two years for Honda to come up with an SI that still can't match the competition. Competition that is all DATED. A new WRX, a new ST and in a few years a new GTI will be here after all. Honda used to revolutionary, lately they've been reactionary. Not a good place to be IMO.

I've seen this "Value" philosophy happening over and over again with Honda. From the ILX to the TLX (an exec recently admitted that the updated TLX didn't get new engines because of "costs" as well) the RDX (which has been under-equipped and cheap feeling since its last redesign has always been too full of compromises next to all of the competition), the RLX, CR-Z and even the 9th gen 2012 Honda Civic.

Worthless efforts that either failed out of the gate (CR-Z Crosstour ZDX), had to have MASSIVE updates to remain competitive (2012 Civic) or have to have huge incentives to move them (RLX, ILX, TLX.) The 9th gen civic was so bad that it only lasted 4 years.

All of this proves the point: Going cheap only ends up costing you more and tarnishing your reputation in the long run. If you're going to do something, do it RIGHT the first time.

Every SI and Type R competitor manages to offer a pocket rocket (Focus ST/WRX/GTI) and a super pocket rocket (Focus RS/STI/Golf R) instead of Honda doing it right the first time, they may end up offering three variants of a Civic, when virtually EVERY competitor manages to offer two! How does this strategy in the end save any costs? We don't need an Si-R or a Type-S or whatever Honda would call it. We simply need an SI that can compete with its basic competition on merit, on features, on performance, with excellent handling. It doesn't matter that the SI has never been about "Power" the SI has to evolve, just as the competition has had to evolve. Markets and their perceptions change. Honda is getting left in the dust. It was OKAY for Honda to operate in a vacuum when they were cream of the crop...its not okay when my Fiesta has more content than a Civic SI and its performance variant offers an engine that is bigger the SI's!

The compromise is always because of "costs" as if consumers wouldn't be willing to pay MORE for the better product in the first place. Have you seen the incentives they are putting on the TLX and ILX these days? I hear folks getting 6K off sticker on the TLX...probably wouldn't have to do that if you'd built a compelling product like the 3rd gen TL in the first place. Compromising ends up costing Honda more in the long run with TLX's needing 6K off to move, ILX's and RLX's rotting on the lots and an NSX that's overly complicated and not selling all that well either.

Its disappointing. Even the mainstream stuff disappoints (Civic and CR-V are the sole exceptions) I need a midsize SUV for work (I travel in the medical field) took out the CR-V and liked a lot about it. Wished it offered the 2.0t in Touring trim and a panoramic roof (like every other major competitor these days and like the Canadian CR-V Touring manages to have) but it doesn't. Test drove the Pilot and was totally underwhelmed with its feature content, the interior design and materials and most of all the looks. The Pilot is bland. I'm buying a Kia Sorento SX in the fall. It looks better, handles just as well, has way more content, has better interior materials and a more upscale design and cost the same (if not more) outside of space and gas mileage, I prefer the Sorento in every way over the Pilot. I would have never said that 10 years ago, but it's true today.

Nothing stands out, nothing is "unique" about the Honda products, the feature content levels are meh at best. I just don't find the cars impressive anymore. Honda rarely fails with the Accord (exception 8th gen) so I still have some hope that fundamentally the next Accord will be sound...but the packaging will probably still be terrible (I'm looking at you Accord Sport with 4 speakers, no sunroof, push button start or lane watch)

I've got a little extra money for something fun....wanted to trade in the Fiesta for something "unqiue" the SI has the styling that I like (surprisingly.) I drove a red SI sedan yesterday and loved everything about it but the content levels, overall cheapness of the seats, and the 1.5t engine. Three strikes and you're out! Right?

IF I go with a "pocket rocket" I'd go for the competition...something more fun to drive, better equipped (but near the same price with discounts) like a Golf GTI. Funny thing is, that even WITHOUT those discounts, I still would choose the GTI. Why? Because it offers the content, performance, character and fun factor that the SI I drove yesterday is sorely lacking. Sometimes it really is true that you "Get what you pay for"

Honda can keep the so called "value" I want something that can compete with the GTI/ST, offers good styling that's not over the top (I'm talking about you, overwrought Civic Type R) with Honda reliability. A 1.5t SI ain't it! Honda knows it, too! That's why we are seeing articles about "why the SI's power was capped" if the product is compelling you don't have to make excuses!


I'm tired of being disappointed with Honda. They used to be my family's brand. Mom owned at least 5...starting back in 1983 before I was even born. Grandma had two. My aunt had three. I had two Accords (1991 and 2007) Grandma's passed on, mama drives a Kia Sedona now (and my Fiesta while I'm on the road) and my aunt has a Camry. I own a Fusion and a Fiesta. None of us are interested in anything Honda builds at the moment. The "Value proposition" hasn't worked for us. We've moved on to other brands that actually offer more "value" in the way of styling, content, fun factor (except the Camry) and even price over the Honda equivalent. There was no compelling reason for my mother to chose the Odyssey over the new Sedona when she couldn't deal with the styling or lack of content for the price and there was no compelling reason for my aunt to go with an Accord when she could get the Camry for less money with the same reliability. Honda's play on "value" isn't working, especially for Acura. It's actually killing Acura's reputation and seriously compromising Honda's.

Honda lost me in 2014 when I bought my Fusion...its been a good car. I've tried to come back to Honda several times....from the Civic Hatchback that either comes equipped with a stick in basic trims or a CVT with all the goodies, to an Accord that offers a Sport trim that looks better than every other trim outside of the Touring but comes with a 4 speaker stereo, no push button start or even a sunroof. To a Honda Pilot that is so bland that it looks and feels like a minivan and has one of the blandest interiors I've ever seen in my life. To an SI that offers less content, less power and less "fun" than all of its competition that is soon to be replaced. I took a chance on Ford twice and have been relatively happy. I'm taking a chance on Kia next. Damn shame really, Honda, damn shame.
 
Last edited:

warrendeath

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2016
Threads
16
Messages
404
Reaction score
198
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2017 Honda Civic Type-R 'Hellbat'
Honda's already admitted that the 1.5t was used to save $ and the HP was limited because of reliability. Each time they do stuff like this the first thing they mention is "value" or "value for the money." Who are they? Hyundai? Kia? Remember when Honda just built the best product available at a price that was obtainable? I do. This whole "value" proposition with the SI just doesn't add up to me honestly. It's a sad cop out...and it shows. Build it (RIGHT) and they will come. Build it (Wrong) and you'll have to discount the shit out of them to move them. I get the feeling the Civic SI will be getting some heavy discounts in a few months.

How long have we been waiting for the SI? Almost two years?!? It took Honda two years to basically develop a Civic SI with the CR-V's turbo/engine, sportier dampers, sport seats (that look and feel cheap) and a spoiler. Honda is so cheap that the SI doesn't even get its own unique colors anymore. Honda is so cheap that they even dropped the navigation option on the Si in the US....Honda is so cheap that they basically took the Sport and Sport Tourings alloy wheels, refinished them and rehashed the bumpers to save money...but couldn't even be bothered to offer the Sport Tourings LED headlights. Yea it's all about the benjamin's baby!

Meanwhile Ford, VW and even Hyundai offer performance variants that can go from basically bare bones to loaded to the gills. The Honda exec was NOT lying when he admitted the 1.5t was used to save cost...I guess offering more than one variant of the SI was also a measure to save costs as well...but even that doesn't make sense!

You can really tell that Honda was embarrassed. The SI "Concept" debuted at LA last year, with accessory wheels and a "unique" red paint that didn't even make it to production. They admitted it would have a 1.5t, but refused to elaborate on power figures. They claimed it would be the "Most powerful SI ever" so folks begin to speculate that it would have at least 210-225 hp...we ended up with 205 and somehow the "Most powerful SI ever" talk mysteriously disappeared when we finally saw the production version.

When the damn thing was released we got a 2 minute video of it driving around, no real press conference, no real hype, because there is none. The consequences of compromise realized. Honda in a nutshell these days. Especially Acura.

Every major competitor (with the exception of the Sentra Nismo and Elantra Sport) offers a 2.0t. Most of the competition offers a hatchback variant. All of them offer optional feature content....from simple things like Navigation all the way up to power seats, leather, and more. Honda provides us with an SI Sedan and Coupe, no hatchback, less HP than all of them and no option for even navigation, cheap cloth seats etc. all equipped with a 1.5t that will have marginally better performance than a Civic EX 1.5t 6MT (which will probably be dropped so the SI doesn't look so deliberately desperate) while not even offering things like LED headlights. All the competition offers either HIDs or LEDs and has for years! GTIs and Focus STs have offered leather for years!

I don't buy for a second that the 2.0t would have increased the price of the Civic SI by more than maybe 2K bucks...and if it did, so what? Build a PRODUCT worthy of the PRICE, NOT a product that's a "good value" full of compromises. Honda is no doubt going to be using the 2.0t in the Accord and probably some other products (perhaps the Pilot, next TLX, ILX, RDX, etc.) even if Honda lost some money on the front end putting the 2.0t in the Civic, they'd recoup it eventually. Putting the 2.0t into the Civic couldn't cost nearly as much as the spectacularly huge failures that are the Crosstour, ZDX, ILX, RLX and CR-Z debacles that we've endured for the last ten years.

Honda lacks real direction and real focus because they are spending too much time trying to save $2 instead of building the absolute best product and it is frustrating. That's evidently clear when the Honda exec admits that Honda might consider a variant between the SI and Type R if the market demands it. It's pretty clear that the market already does...VW and Ford have offered the ST and GTI in various trim levels with various options for numerous years with much success. We basically got to wait for this SI to fail again before Honda finally offers what they should have offered in the first place: An SI with the detuned 2.0t with two trim levels. Si Base and Si Touring. It really is that simple.

Keep the SI base as is. Equipped the Si Touring with everything (maybe even Honda sensing) that the Touring/Sport Touring sedan/hatchbacks offer.

Instead we get a Civic 1.5t that's gone on the market with less hp than all its major competitors, can't be equipped with the content of all its competitiors, won't be as fast or as fun as all of those competitors but when it fails, Honda MIGHT think about offering a variant between the SI and Type R? I think if anything if it fails we may never see anymore SI's. Honda will blame it on a lack of interest...they'd be right. Few people might be compelled to go with a Civic SI that offers nothing really tangible over the Civic EX 1.5t and has to compete with its faster, more fun and better equipped competition based on "value" and not real merits that matter to enthusiasts.

The disaster that was the 9th gen Civic should have been enough for Honda to never compromise so much on the Civic again. So much for this being the "Epic Civic" it took two years for Honda to come up with an SI that still can't match the competition. Competition that is all DATED. A new WRX, a new ST and in a few years a new GTI will be here after all. Honda used to revolutionary, lately they've been reactionary. Not a good place to be IMO.

I've seen this "Value" philosophy happening over and over again with Honda. From the ILX to the TLX (an exec recently admitted that the updated TLX didn't get new engines because of "costs" as well) the RDX (which has been under-equipped and cheap feeling since its last redesign has always been too full of compromises next to all of the competition), the RLX, CR-Z and even the 9th gen 2012 Honda Civic.

Worthless efforts that either failed out of the gate (CR-Z Crosstour ZDX), had to have MASSIVE updates to remain competitive (2012 Civic) or have to have huge incentives to move them (RLX, ILX, TLX.) The 9th gen civic was so bad that it only lasted 4 years.

All of this proves the point: Going cheap only ends up costing you more and tarnishing your reputation in the long run. If you're going to do something, do it RIGHT the first time.

Every SI and Type R competitor manages to offer a pocket rocket (Focus ST/WRX/GTI) and a super pocket rocket (Focus RS/STI/Golf R) instead of Honda doing it right the first time, they may end up offering three variants of a Civic, when virtually EVERY competitor manages to offer two! How does this strategy in the end save any costs? We don't need an Si-R or a Type-S or whatever Honda would call it. We simply need an SI that can compete with its basic competition on merit, on features, on performance, with excellent handling. It doesn't matter that the SI has never been about "Power" the SI has to evolve, just as the competition has had to evolve. Markets and their perceptions change. Honda is getting left in the dust. It was OKAY for Honda to operate in a vacuum when they were cream of the crop...its not okay when my Fiesta has more content than a Civic SI and its performance variant offers an engine that is bigger the SI's!

The compromise is always because of "costs" as if consumers wouldn't be willing to pay MORE for the better product in the first place. Have you seen the incentives they are putting on the TLX and ILX these days? I hear folks getting 6K off sticker on the TLX...probably wouldn't have to do that if you'd built a compelling product like the 3rd gen TL in the first place. Compromising ends up costing Honda more in the long run with TLX's needing 6K off to move, ILX's and RLX's rotting on the lots and an NSX that's overly complicated and not selling all that well either.

Its disappointing. Even the mainstream stuff disappoints (Civic and CR-V are the sole exceptions) I need a midsize SUV for work (I travel in the medical field) took out the CR-V and liked a lot about it. Wished it offered the 2.0t in Touring trim and a panoramic roof (like every other major competitor these days and like the Canadian CR-V Touring manages to have) but it doesn't. Test drove the Pilot and was totally underwhelmed with its feature content, the interior design and materials and most of all the looks. The Pilot is bland. I'm buying a Kia Sorento SX in the fall. It looks better, handles just as well, has way more content, has better interior materials and a more upscale design and cost the same (if not more) outside of space and gas mileage, I prefer the Sorento in every way over the Pilot. I would have never said that 10 years ago, but it's true today.

Nothing stands out, nothing is "unique" about the Honda products, the feature content levels are meh at best. I just don't find the cars impressive anymore. Honda rarely fails with the Accord (exception 8th gen) so I still have some hope that fundamentally the next Accord will be sound...but the packaging will probably still be terrible (I'm looking at you Accord Sport with 4 speakers, no sunroof, push button start or lane watch)

I've got a little extra money for something fun....wanted to trade in the Fiesta for something "unqiue" the SI has the styling that I like (surprisingly.) I drove a red SI sedan yesterday and loved everything about it but the content levels, overall cheapness of the seats, and the 1.5t engine. Three strikes and you're out! Right?

IF I go with a "pocket rocket" I'd go for the competition...something more fun to drive, better equipped (but near the same price with discounts) like a Golf GTI. Funny thing is, that even WITHOUT those discounts, I still would choose the GTI. Why? Because it offers the content, performance, character and fun factor that the SI I drove yesterday is sorely lacking. Sometimes it really is true that you "Get what you pay for"

Honda can keep the so called "value" I want something that can compete with the GTI/ST, offers good styling that's not over the top (I'm talking about you, overwrought Civic Type R) with Honda reliability. A 1.5t SI ain't it! Honda knows it, too! That's why we are seeing articles about "why the SI's power was capped" if the product is compelling you don't have to make excuses!


I'm tired of being disappointed with Honda. They used to be my family's brand. Mom owned at least 5...starting back in 1983 before I was even born. Grandma had two. My aunt had three. I had two Accords (1991 and 2007) Grandma's passed on, mama drives a Kia Sedona now (and my Fiesta while I'm on the road) and my aunt has a Camry. I own a Fusion and a Fiesta. None of us are interested in anything Honda builds at the moment. The "Value proposition" hasn't worked for us. We've moved on to other brands that actually offer more "value" in the way of styling, content, fun factor (except the Camry) and even price over the Honda equivalent. There was no compelling reason for my mother to chose the Odyssey over the new Sedona when she couldn't deal with the styling or lack of content for the price and there was no compelling reason for my aunt to go with an Accord when she could get the Camry for less money with the same reliability. Honda's play on "value" isn't working, especially for Acura. It's actually killing Acura's reputation and seriously compromising Honda's.

Honda lost me in 2014 when I bought my Fusion...its been a good car. I've tried to come back to Honda several times....from the Civic Hatchback that either comes equipped with a stick in basic trims or a CVT with all the goodies, to an Accord that offers a Sport trim that looks better than every other trim outside of the Touring but comes with a 4 speaker stereo, no push button start or even a sunroof. To a Honda Pilot that is so bland that it looks and feels like a minivan and has one of the blandest interiors I've ever seen in my life. To an SI that offers less content, less power and less "fun" than all of its competition that is soon to be replaced. I took a chance on Ford twice and have been relatively happy. I'm taking a chance on Kia next. Damn shame really, Honda, damn shame.

I agree with this novel.


I was seriously considering the Si or the Type R. I haven't been wowed by anything. The Focus ST, WRX, GTI and a few other have been far more impressive.
 


Regi_Derrick

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2015
Threads
6
Messages
72
Reaction score
86
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Vehicle(s)
2014 Ford Fusion
Country flag
I agree with this novel.


I was seriously considering the Si or the Type R. I haven't been wowed by anything. The Focus ST, WRX, GTI and a few other have been far more impressive.
I rarely post these days because I try to give Honda the benefit of the doubt...but it is really upsetting when you have a brand that has the ability to do SO MUCH and SO MANY great things and they continue to fail and stumble because of a lack of direction. It's like a teacher who has a kid with potential but he can't seem to get it together. Honda has always been my favorite brand...I just want to see them be competitive and stop trying to be so cheap. Nowadays I don't really have a favorite anymore.
 

dmitri

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2016
Threads
18
Messages
1,151
Reaction score
1,495
Location
Atlanta, GA
Vehicle(s)
2017 Civic Si sedan
Country flag
I drove a red SI sedan yesterday and loved everything about it but the content levels, overall cheapness of the seats, and the 1.5t engine. Three strikes and you're out!
That was buried inside an excruciatingly meticulous and lengthy reiteration of what's so utterly wrong with Honda in general and the Si in particular. "Loved everything about it" but a few (important to you) things.

So leather seats and 2.0 would make this car perfect, but without them, even though you loved everything (else) about it, it's a complete and total failure in every respect that doesn't measure up to any of it's competition in any way, and is a sign of Honda's imminent demise as a car manufacturer? :D

Lots of good points in your write-up; just found it a bit... out of balance, I guess.

Also, if we follow the "three strikes and you're out" maxim, -- are you suggesting your Ford Fusion doesn't have it's own "three strikes"? :)
 
Last edited:

neteng101

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2016
Threads
7
Messages
459
Reaction score
268
Location
NJ
Vehicle(s)
2017 Honda Civic Hatchback Sport Touring
Country flag
Lots of good points in your write-up; just found it a bit... out of balance, I guess.
If you're counting parts, there are tons of parts that goes into building an engine, so the 2.0 might seem like a single line item but in a car, the engine makes or breaks a car for most people. The rest can be forgiven though, cheap seats, who cares.

American Honda is a gutless entity, they don't know how to make Type-Rs, their pet projects generally have been utter disasters - the stupid ill conceived ILX that no one wants to buy, the ZDX and Crosstour that have gone the way of the dodo bird, they got their demographics totally wrong for the Element but there was a market for those and they killed it anyways cause it failed to reach their target demographics.

Regardless of official excuses of the 2.0 being too expensive - I assure you the real reason they went with the 1.5 is more for emissions and CAFE numbers. AHMC has some of the worse mgmt tree huggers on the planet and they're HQed in the crazy land of CARB.
 

LoveToDrive

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2016
Threads
2
Messages
253
Reaction score
253
Location
CT
Vehicle(s)
2016 LX MT, 2015 Si (RIP)
If you're counting parts, there are tons of parts that goes into building an engine, so the 2.0 might seem like a single line item but in a car, the engine makes or breaks a car for most people. The rest can be forgiven though, cheap seats, who cares.
I never realized that until now, but I have another test drive today and I am going in with an open mind. :)

Regardless of official excuses of the 2.0 being too expensive - I assure you the real reason they went with the 1.5 is more for emissions and CAFE numbers. AHMC has some of the worse mgmt tree huggers on the planet and they're HQed in the crazy land of CARB.
This may be a polarizing opinion, but I prefer not to use that term because it insinuates that caring about the greenery on Earth is a bad thing. Taking care of environment is important for everyone: Clean water, air, and land are necessary for our survival. Having a good MPG IS a nice thing for DD so that we are not making gas station stops so often. However, my point is that if car manufacturers sell overwhelmingly more fuel efficient vehicles, the tiny tiny world of sport/y cars wouldn't make much dent. Despite being an advocate for the environment, I feel it should be okay to make less fuel efficient vehicles available to people, if the trade off is to have exciting cars. There are other ways to make a huge dent in cleaner air on which we are not working.
 

zroger73

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2017
Threads
56
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
4,544
Location
United States
Vehicle(s)
2019 MX-5 Miata GT-S, 2021 Ridgeline RTL-E
Country flag
Honda's already admitted that the 1.5t was used to save $ and the HP was limited because of reliability. Each time they do stuff like this the first thing they mention is "value" or "value for the money." Who are they? Hyundai? Kia? Remember when Honda just built the best product available at a price that was obtainable? I do. This whole "value" proposition with the SI just doesn't add up to me honestly. It's a sad cop out...and it shows. Build it (RIGHT) and they will come. Build it (Wrong) and you'll have to discount the shit out of them to move them. I get the feeling the Civic SI will be getting some heavy discounts in a few months.

(The rest of the long post clipped)
Dang. I better get a refund on the Si I just bought before it ruins my life and kills all kittens.
Sponsored

 


 


Top