Unofficial 2016 Civic (WHP) dyno, 0-60 mph and quarter mile time

[17CivicTypeR_Brian]

The turbo has some seriously strong kick to it, I'd love one, if the Si wasn't coming...

Same thing- except for me TypeR

Sponsored

 

[buriram]

0-60 6.5 seconds is nowhere near Lazy lol

 

[the1dynasty]

My 2006 stock Si put down no less than 190hp in completely stock form... I ran it at the track several times and I don't think there were many people to ever break into the 14s while being 100% stock... So this number doesn't seem realistic to me but it does sound like it could come close...

 

[JF2KPNSX]

This time VTEC mean Variable Timing Electronic Control(which mean VTC) don't have "Lift", so VTEC can be used for marketing.
Besides, High performance variation of this 1.5T does have VTEC ONLY EXH CAM SIDE(like EU Civic Type R), Because Honda don't need vtec to produce low-end torque anymore since they have turbo.

 

[jks]

...I'm guessing a 6MT would be even quicker but then it probably wouldn't achieve the 40mpg number...

I'm fairly certain the 6MT would beat the CVT in steady-state gas mileage. Yes I know that CVTs have a higher top gear ratio and I know that the manufacturers usually rate their CVT mpgs higher, but CVTs have a lot of friction and CVTs are a high-profit item vs the 6MT for the auto companies. Here's a recent test by Wayne Gerdes over at CleanMPG of the Honda HR-V manual vs CVT. These auto vs manual results are typical with other cars:

 

[takemorepills]

I'm fairly certain the 6MT would beat the CVT in steady-state gas mileage. Yes I know that CVTs have a higher top gear ratio and I know that the manufacturers usually rate their CVT mpgs higher, but CVTs have a lot of friction and CVTs are a high-profit item vs the 6MT for the auto companies. Here's a recent test by Wayne Gerdes over at CleanMPG of the Honda HR-V manual vs CVT. These auto vs manual results are typical with other cars:

You do realize, that the actual authority, that actually puts the numbers on the window stickers usually gets better MPGs for CVT than MT? It doesn't surprise me one bit that either group could "game" the results either way, but Wayne Gerdes doesn't get his name onto the window stickers of new cars. It's great that Wayne can get these numbers and make an infographic for them, but just like the EPA results, everyone's results will vary.

 

[the1dynasty]

You do realize, that the actual authority, that actually puts the numbers on the window stickers usually gets better MPGs for CVT than MT? It doesn't surprise me one bit that either group could "game" the results either way, but Wayne Gerdes doesn't get his name onto the window stickers of new cars. It's great that Wayne can get these numbers and make an infographic for them, but just like the EPA results, everyone's results will vary.

You do realize the epa numbers are estimates by your statement and actual numbers are usually better for Honda vehicles... The MT can easily get better MPG for at least a couple reasons... First being the curb weight is usually less on the MT... The driver controls the shifts...

I'm not saying this is the case with every car but in most Honda history, the MT easily bests their CVT and Autos... Time will tell and since the touring doesn't offer a 6MT option, I'll be getting the CVT...

 

[takemorepills]

You do realize the epa numbers are estimates by your statement and actual numbers are usually better for Honda vehicles... The MT can easily get better MPG for at least a couple reasons... First being the curb weight is usually less on the MT... The driver controls the shifts...

I'm not saying this is the case with every car but in most Honda history, the MT easily bests their CVT and Autos... Time will tell and since the touring doesn't offer a 6MT option, I'll be getting the CVT...

The EPA numbers are the only estimates that have the validity to be posted on the window sticker. It does not matter that Wayne was able to come up with numbers showing his results of MT/CVT. You can NOT care about Wayne's numbers because he didn't even present all of the other metrics that go along with fuel economy. The EPA actually standardizes acceleration rates, load, temp, wind, humidity, etc. For all we know, Wayne could have intentionally lead footed the CVT and granny drove the MT to make his point.

 

[firsthonda]

Manual or auto all I know is I like honda's CVTs but I am still hoping for a 8 dcT with paddle shifters on my Si ha best of both worlds

 

[jks]

The EPA numbers are the only estimates that have the validity to be posted on the window sticker. It does not matter that Wayne was able to come up with numbers showing his results of MT/CVT. You can NOT care about Wayne's numbers because he didn't even present all of the other metrics that go along with fuel economy. The EPA actually standardizes acceleration rates, load, temp, wind, humidity, etc. For all we know, Wayne could have intentionally lead footed the CVT and granny drove the MT to make his point.

Wayne's goal is to get the best mileage possible from whatever he's driving, whether it's auto or manual, and he's very good at it. He's probably the most skilled hypermiler out there. In that regard, he always requests the manual version of a test vehicle because he knows he can get better FE results than with the auto. Sometimes, of course, a manual isn't available but his test results, when he's able to test both auto and manual, are very instructive. I don't think an auto has ever won a real-world steady-state fuel economy test against a manual. And that's saying a lot because some manufacturers sabotage their manuals with short final gearing (Honda is guilty of this in the Fit, for instance.) The 2016 Honda sedan 6M turn 2400 rpm @ 65, so this should return excellent highway FE.

The EPA fuel economy numbers are good for comparison purposes sometimes, but the EPA doesn't always test the cars. It often just rubber stamps whatever numbers the manufacturers submit and the numbers the manufacturers submit are sometimes only calculations. This is why Ford submitted calculated EPA numbers for its hybrid cars that nobody could achieve--not even the hypermilers like Wayne Gerdes. So it's good to have bloggers like Wayne out there doing actual real-world driving that call out phony EPA numbers.

 

[PirelliPZero]

There are cases to be made for both sides of the MT vs CVT fuel economy debate, but I think it is best summed up as stated above, "Your mileage may vary."

In the past, the MT had weight and gearing in its favor. Now with the countless-speed autos and CVTs, gearing is often no longer an advantage of MT. In fact, many manuals are being geared with more performance-biased ratios, as the manufacturers assume that people buying manuals are interested in a more spirited drive. As far as weight, that advantage has also nearly disintegrated. The Civic 6MT saves a mere 9lbs over the CVT version! (Despite the typo on Honda’s site.)

As far as the EPA ratings go - standardized as they are - what are the standard shift points for manual cars? And whatever those fixed shift points are, wouldn’t they be far from ideal for the majority of cars, varied as they are in combinations of engine type, gear ratios, and vehicle weight, etc? An example of the impact of shift points: Honda’s CRX HF was offered with an available shift indicator light (SIL). This light came on ridiculously low - like as low as 1500rpm - asking you to upshift. The EPA “tested” both the HF with the SIL and without - and concluded a 4mpg gain from the SIL model! An official 4mpg higher EPA rating - due to change of shift points. (Or more accurately, due to the vehicle's offering of a prompt which suggests when the driver should shift.)

So the EPA rating isn’t the be-all and end-all either. But this goes back to the argument of manuals - where does the driver shift? In Wayne Gerdes’ case, obviously he knows exactly how and when to shift to extract the maximum economy from it. That’s his specialty. For the average driver - which honestly I believe knows very little about efficient driving - this would not be the case. (They certainly aren’t shifting at 1500rpm, are they?) And in Jeff-from-TOV’s case, he knows himself enough to conclude that were he driving a manual instead of a CVT, he certainly wouldn’t be hitting 40 mpg, if only because he would naturally be driving it more spiritedly.

Automatics have the benefit of shifting to higher gears very early - if “shifting” at all - without having to rely on or prompt the driver to do so in hopes of him obeying. Further, the computer-controlled automatic has a better connection to the computer-controlled drivetrain, thereby able to maximize efficiency. Of course, the last step is to get rid of the driver altogether, removing the last bit of control from the least fuel-efficient part of the system. An autonomous car will get better fuel economy than Wayne Gerdes every day of the year.

I guess I could have lead with that. “The driver is the least efficient part of the operation.” Which is exactly why everyone's mileage is different.

 

[the1dynasty]

I thought the car guage shows white when not being efficient and really green when being efficient... Those are prompts of when to shift and if the driver oays attention for the first few drives on the MT, they could easily get better FE by following those shift indicators...

I do agree the driver is the big variable...but epa means nothing in real world IMO... It's why Ford has really high ratings and Hondas are always conservative... I managed 35.6mpg in my 2006 Civic Si on a road trip from south Florida to New Jersey... The car was EPA rated at 32mpg... And I was cruising at 90mph most of the way... Those were actual fuel calculations with a 200lb passenger and almost 400lbs of equipment and luggage...

I'd say that a driver of a MT car can best a selfdriving car with a similar setup...

 

[takemorepills]

I'll bet you at some point, "self driving cars" or cars that are either mostly or totally autonomous will start receiving very weak gas, gas/hybrid or electric drivetrains that are just sufficient enough to perform their duty. Any human driven vehicles will not be able to touch the MPGs of autonomous vehicles.

 

[PirelliPZero]

I thought the car guage shows white when not being efficient and really green when being efficient... Those are prompts of when to shift and if the driver pays attention for the first few drives on the MT, they could easily get better FE by following those shift indicators...

No, they are completely different. A shift light is proactive. The Eco Assist is reactive - an after-the-fact grading system ("good" or "bad").

All you need to do is watch the myriad of Civic acceleration videos on YouTube to see that at no point during acceleration does the Eco Assist turn green and prompt the driver how to get max efficiency or give any indication of when he should shift. It will only glow green after the driver has already performed relatively efficient driving techniques. It can help coach drivers on how to improve efficiency over time, but it simply does not share the same function or results of a vehicle-specific manufacturer-programmed shift light.

 

[Design]

I'm fairly certain the 6MT would beat the CVT in steady-state gas mileage.

I don't think many are going to argue that since many modern MTs have a long top gear for hwy efficiency. But how many drivers use 6th relative to their total commute? I think we all agree that average real world results are far from static. And that's where CVT has historically outperformed MT.

I haven't dissected the 2.0 MT but I'm willing to bet those previous 5 gears are close ratio (which also is why I prefer MT).

Sponsored