Civic 2.0 ktuner vs stock 1.5

gtman

Senior Member
First Name
Mitch
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Threads
328
Messages
16,661
Reaction score
24,352
Location
USA
Website
www.civicx.com
Vehicle(s)
2017 Cosmic Blue EX-L Sedan
Vehicle Showcase
2
This nonsense is getting old. The sad thing is there are probably some people here that believe the garbage you spout off.

You talk about your 2.0 NA like it's a hot rod. 158hp with minimal torque isn't beating the turbo. It's nearly a second and a half slower to 60.
Sponsored

 
Last edited:

xbbnx

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2017
Threads
60
Messages
882
Reaction score
914
Location
Houston TX
Vehicle(s)
2022 Si, 2017 Si (past), 2015 Si (past)
Country flag
This nonsense is getting old. The sad thing is there are probably some people here that believe the garbage you spout off.

You talk about your 2.0 NA like it's a hot rod. 158hp with minimal torque isn't beating the turbo. It's nearly a second and a half slower to 60.
The guy is either a troll or is completely delusional. Car and Driver got the 1.5T to 60mph in 6.8 seconds, while they got the 2.0NA to 60mph in 8.2 seconds. Thats a whole 1.4 seconds difference! Here's how big that disparity is, it'll be like comparing a stock Si to a stock Type R in a straight line.
 

gtman

Senior Member
First Name
Mitch
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Threads
328
Messages
16,661
Reaction score
24,352
Location
USA
Website
www.civicx.com
Vehicle(s)
2017 Cosmic Blue EX-L Sedan
Vehicle Showcase
2
No. Annoying would be 1,300 posts and only 300 thanks. Just saying.
 

charleswrivers

Senior Member
First Name
Charles
Joined
Nov 3, 2017
Threads
43
Messages
3,736
Reaction score
4,468
Location
Kingsland, GA
Vehicle(s)
'14 Odyssey, '94 300zx, 2001 F-150
Vehicle Showcase
1
Country flag
No. Annoying would be 1,300 posts and only 300 thanks. Just saying.
Sweet mother of god. I just looked at my post count.

I think I'm going to take 2020 off. I'd of finished my degree a year ago typing-wise if I'd devoted forum-energy to BS-random-college-paper energy. :banghead:
 

gtman

Senior Member
First Name
Mitch
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Threads
328
Messages
16,661
Reaction score
24,352
Location
USA
Website
www.civicx.com
Vehicle(s)
2017 Cosmic Blue EX-L Sedan
Vehicle Showcase
2
Sweet mother of god. I just looked at my post count.

I think I'm going to take 2020 off. I'd of finished my degree a year ago typing-wise if I'd devoted forum-energy to BS-random-college-paper energy. :banghead:
Yeah but look at how many fellow CivicX'ers appreciate your wisdom and forum energy. :thumbsup:

Back to the topic at hand. I don't know why there's even an ongoing debate about the 1.5T versus the 2.0 NA. In a race, the turbo wins. That doesn't mean I don't think the 2.0 isn't a fine/fun engine, it is. Is a CVT more fun than a manual? Absolutely not. Again, no debate.

Time to move on to something else like Lunar Silver being the best color. :p
 
Last edited:


dallasjhawk

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2016
Threads
24
Messages
4,174
Reaction score
4,124
Location
Royse City, TX
Vehicle(s)
2016 Civic EX-T, 2015 Acura RDX AWD Tech
Vehicle Showcase
1
Country flag
L M F A O, 600 rpm? Thats literally below idle, we idle at 700. you got more than a few screws loose. We are all happy to talk 2.0, we just aren't going to entertain these delusional opinions you have
 

Maroco

Senior Member
First Name
Martin
Joined
Oct 22, 2019
Threads
4
Messages
624
Reaction score
552
Location
Tulsa Oklahoma
Vehicle(s)
2012 Honda civic lx 2020 civic si
Country flag
L M F A O, 600 rpm? Thats literally below idle, we idle at 700. you got more than a few screws loose. We are all happy to talk 2.0, we just aren't going to entertain these delusional opinions you have
My thoughts too. Makes me wonder what he launches at when racing these other civics. My si doesnt even like to pull away below 1k rpm
 

mvela

Senior Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Sep 13, 2018
Threads
17
Messages
1,178
Reaction score
630
Location
Orange, Tx
Vehicle(s)
2018 Honda Civic sedan lx 6mt and 2018 Honda Civic hatchback ex auto
Country flag
The guy is either a troll or is completely delusional. Car and Driver got the 1.5T to 60mph in 6.8 seconds, while they got the 2.0NA to 60mph in 8.2 seconds. Thats a whole 1.4 seconds difference! Here's how big that disparity is, it'll be like comparing a stock Si to a stock Type R in a straight line.
I think that 0-60 in the 2.0 is for the cvt. The 6 speed is actually faster. By how much is depending on the driver and how good the tires are. I know my 2.0 manual sucked off the line with factory tires. It would literally spin through all of first gear. So I upgraded my tires and now I can launch like I want to. It made a huge difference. I think on factory tires and rims the manual did 7.8 to 60 and that’s spinning. With the new tires probably dropped it to 7.2. And when I tuned it with the ktuner it dropped it even more
 

Bosco72

Senior Member
First Name
Albert
Joined
Jul 5, 2019
Threads
18
Messages
149
Reaction score
72
Location
New jersey
Vehicle(s)
2019 Civic coupe sport
Country flag
I can't believe the 2.0 auto is that slow.i put mine in s mod and it feels much better
 

gtman

Senior Member
First Name
Mitch
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Threads
328
Messages
16,661
Reaction score
24,352
Location
USA
Website
www.civicx.com
Vehicle(s)
2017 Cosmic Blue EX-L Sedan
Vehicle Showcase
2
I think on factory tires and rims the manual did 7.8 to 60 and that’s spinning. With the new tires probably dropped it to 7.2.
My guess is you won't shave off .6 seconds 0-60 from better tires alone on a base stock 2.0 NA. Maybe a tenth or two. On the other hand, get a set of lightweight, smaller diameter wheels and you might be on to something due to lower gearing and less unsprung weight.

Here's my beef with comparing 0-60 times from car to car even with the same engine. There are just too many factors including unsprung weight, ambient temps, road condition, elevation, humidity, driver weight, timing equipment, reaction time, on and on. Overall I think a 1/4 mile on a drag strip is a better comparison, but still, you have the same variables.

Comparing a car (1.5T) with substantially more hp and especially tq to a lower power car (2.0NA) in terms of 0-60 is a bit silly.

Bottom line is, I enjoy my 1.5T/CVT/TSP Stage 1 combo and it's a nice car to drive. And you guys with the 2.0 have a fun to drive car, too.
 
Last edited:

mvela

Senior Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Sep 13, 2018
Threads
17
Messages
1,178
Reaction score
630
Location
Orange, Tx
Vehicle(s)
2018 Honda Civic sedan lx 6mt and 2018 Honda Civic hatchback ex auto
Country flag
My guess is you won't shave off .6 seconds 0-60 from better tires alone on a base stock 2.0 NA. Maybe a tenth or two. On the other hand, get a set of lightweight, smaller diameter wheels and you might be on to something due to lower gearing and less unsprung weight.

Here's my beef with comparing 0-60 times from car to car even with the same engine. There are just too many factors including unsprung weight, ambient temps, road condition, elevation, humidity, driver weight, timing equipment, reaction time, on and on. Overall I think a 1/4 mile on a drag strip is a better comparison, but still, you have the same variables.

Comparing a car (1.5T) with substantially more hp and especially tq to a lower power car (2.0NA) in terms of 0-60 is a bit silly.

Bottom line is, I enjoy my 1.5T/CVT/TSP Stage 1 combo and it's a nice car to drive. And you guys with the 2.0 have a fun to drive car, too.
Yes they are both fun. I actually own both. But the question was 2.0 with ktuner vs stock 1.5t. I think if it’s manual vs manual then the 1.5t will win. A cvt vs cvt then the 1.5t will win again. But a manual 2.0 with ktuner vs a stock 1.5t cvt are really close. I know this because my 2.0 just happens to be a 2.0 manual with a ktuner, and my 1.5t cvt is bone stock and they are really close. Here are both of mine
Honda Civic 10th gen Civic 2.0 ktuner vs stock 1.5 BFB56FB2-FF92-4EA1-A94E-FABCB367B918
Sponsored

 


 


Top