Used 2017 Civic Si vs. Used 2012 Infiniti G37s

[jred721]

Cheng,

My wife and I drove a Sport Hatch, Civic Si and Accord 2.0T 6MT last night. And I drove the G37x again.

My opinion, the 1.5T is way too underpowered when considered against anything with sporting intentions. After driving so many cars, I couldn't even imagine wanting to own a 1.5T powered anything (unless it was a Honda Fit!).

The Si and Sport were so very disappointing (remember, I generally show up in a 2016 GTI DSG) they seemed totally gutless. I know, I know, 0-60 in 7 seconds should be competent, but these cars just feel lethargic. Worst of all the Sport and Si are writing checks with their appearance that their powertrains can not cash. Even my non-enthusiast wife was musing over the lack of power the 1.5Ts have.

However, the Accord Sport 2.0T 6MT, now that was a sweet car! The fact the the G37 is available as an AWD or RWD pretty much "kept me real" about the Accord 2.0T, because I was pretty damned excited about this car. Unfortunately, FWD+great power+rain=out-of-control-wheelspin, but when the car hooked up it felt damn good. If I didn't live in a state where it rains perpetually, I would consider the Accord 2.0T (the GTI is great too, but FWD sucks in WA State, lots of wheelspin 75% of the year). I can't see why Honda didn't put the 2.0T in the Si. Realistically, some customers show up in a GTI 2.0T or Focus ST curious about Si and will be totally underwhelmed. Don't get me wrong, aside from the engine the new Hondas are awesome, great chassis, solid feel, high quality, good fuel economy. But when a full size 4x4 truck can blow the doors off of an "Si" I don't think things are right in the world. Hell, I don't think it is right that an Accord can lay utter waste to an "Si" branded Civic.

Accord 2.0T: great great engine and car, too much power for FWD
Civic 1.5T any trim: great great chassis, way underpowered. Not even slightly sporting when smashing on the accelerator.
G37: great great chassis, awesome, proven VQ37HR, excellent reliability, awesome RWD dynamics, cheap to buy 2nd hand.

Also, I'd suggest a Q50 3.0T, they are selling in the $18s around here. Yeah I don't think they have a manual option, but that 3.0 twin turbo is sweet even in the non-Red Sport tune, and a JB4 can turn the 3.0T into a real monster.

It might be my personal opinion, but having owned my share of relatively powerful vehicles and driven the 2018 si, I think calling it underpowered is a way too much of a stretch. Civic SI's have ALWAYS been much less powerful against cars like the GTI, focus ST for a long long time now to the point where if you know anything about cars it's pretty much an accepted fact. But the thing that Honda tries to pitch with it's SI trim is deliver a driver's car which is aimed at the whole experience of driving along with great reliability and practicality. Sure the GTI does those things too, is a great drivers car, and would kill the SI straightaway race, but I feel like the SI has always given a different driving feel when compared to it's competition.

That being said i'd agree that if your looking for raw power the G37, and accord sport 2.0t would obviously beat it out in a heartbeat. But just saying that anyone looking for the kind of power that pushes you back into your seat probably wouldn't be looking at civics in the first place. Also, the V6 and now turbo Accords has always been faster than the Civic SI, just the same way a Toyota Camry V6 would destroy a Toyota Gt86 in a straight line. These are two very different cars made for two very different purposes.

Sponsored

 

[cheng115]

Cheng,

My wife and I drove a Sport Hatch, Civic Si and Accord 2.0T 6MT last night. And I drove the G37x again.

My opinion, the 1.5T is way too underpowered when considered against anything with sporting intentions. After driving so many cars, I couldn't even imagine wanting to own a 1.5T powered anything (unless it was a Honda Fit!).

The Si and Sport were so very disappointing (remember, I generally show up in a 2016 GTI DSG) they seemed totally gutless. I know, I know, 0-60 in 7 seconds should be competent, but these cars just feel lethargic. Worst of all the Sport and Si are writing checks with their appearance that their powertrains can not cash. Even my non-enthusiast wife was musing over the lack of power the 1.5Ts have.

However, the Accord Sport 2.0T 6MT, now that was a sweet car! The fact the the G37 is available as an AWD or RWD pretty much "kept me real" about the Accord 2.0T, because I was pretty damned excited about this car. Unfortunately, FWD+great power+rain=out-of-control-wheelspin, but when the car hooked up it felt damn good. If I didn't live in a state where it rains perpetually, I would consider the Accord 2.0T (the GTI is great too, but FWD sucks in WA State, lots of wheelspin 75% of the year). I can't see why Honda didn't put the 2.0T in the Si. Realistically, some customers show up in a GTI 2.0T or Focus ST curious about Si and will be totally underwhelmed. Don't get me wrong, aside from the engine the new Hondas are awesome, great chassis, solid feel, high quality, good fuel economy. But when a full size 4x4 truck can blow the doors off of an "Si" I don't think things are right in the world. Hell, I don't think it is right that an Accord can lay utter waste to an "Si" branded Civic.

Accord 2.0T: great great engine and car, too much power for FWD
Civic 1.5T any trim: great great chassis, way underpowered. Not even slightly sporting when smashing on the accelerator.
G37: great great chassis, awesome, proven VQ37HR, excellent reliability, awesome RWD dynamics, cheap to buy 2nd hand.

Also, I'd suggest a Q50 3.0T, they are selling in the $18s around here. Yeah I don't think they have a manual option, but that 3.0 twin turbo is sweet even in the non-Red Sport tune, and a JB4 can turn the 3.0T into a real monster.

Yeah I would actually totally agree with you about the difference in power between a g37s and an si (even with a tune).. I am pretty close to closing in on a sweet deal for a used g37s (you can find some used manuals for good prices if you wait patiently), just need to sell my 2016 civic first to get the cash! Definitely would consider the Accord 2.0T but they are all brand new and there is no way I would be able to get that car within my budget.

THANKS for the post! Helps a lot. I am also curious as to why they didn't put that accord 2.0 engine in the Si...

 

[ice raptor]

Yeah I would actually totally agree with you about the difference in power between a g37s and an si (even with a tune).. I am pretty close to closing in on a sweet deal for a used g37s (you can find some used manuals for good prices if you wait patiently), just need to sell my 2016 civic first to get the cash! Definitely would consider the Accord 2.0T but they are all brand new and there is no way I would be able to get that car within my budget.

THANKS for the post! Helps a lot. I am also curious as to why they didn't put that accord 2.0 engine in the Si...

Because the 2.0 engine in the accord is a detuned CTR motor. You do that and it would make no sense to buy a CTR when you can get just a little bit less motor in the SI for way cheaper. I was cross shopping a q50 (g37 but new trim) And my SI. Its not even fair to compare the two cars. But what did it for me was even though i work at the dealership and get prices WAY cheaper then a person on the street. I could buy my SI for even less then just leasing a q50 for 3 years. Do i wish i had that car? Of course. But i am more then happy with my SI. It has everything i want, its brand new so i know if something breaks its my fault and know what i did to it. I wont buy a used care again unless its a certified pre owned. I got burnt to many times with used craigslist cars. The comfort in knowing you were the only one to touch your baby is worth the extra pennies in my opinion

 

[jred721]

Because the 2.0 engine in the accord is a detuned CTR motor. You do that and it would make no sense to buy a CTR when you can get just a little bit less motor in the SI for way cheaper. I was cross shopping a q50 (g37 but new trim) And my SI. Its not even fair to compare the two cars. But what did it for me was even though i work at the dealership and get prices WAY cheaper then a person on the street. I could buy my SI for even less then just leasing a q50 for 3 years. Do i wish i had that car? Of course. But i am more then happy with my SI. It has everything i want, its brand new so i know if something breaks its my fault and know what i did to it. I wont buy a used care again unless its a certified pre owned. I got burnt to many times with used craigslist cars. The comfort in knowing you were the only one to touch your baby is worth the extra pennies in my opinion

Idk if I would say going with the SI is a good option when comparing the accord 2.0t to it. Just because of fact that the 1.5 motor in the SI is already pretty high strung pushing a bit above 200 horsepower stock and doesnt have as much room to grow. Whereas the 2.0 liter motor is detuned as you mentioned and has the potential to make more torque and and HP than the civic type R all in a relatively nicer and roomier package when comparing it to the civic which makes it way more worth it in my opinion.

 

[ice raptor]

Idk if I would say going with the SI is a good option when comparing the accord 2.0t to it. Just because of fact that the 1.5 motor in the SI is already pretty high strung pushing a bit above 200 horsepower stock and doesnt have as much room to grow. Whereas the 2.0 liter motor is detuned as you mentioned and has the potential to make more torque and and HP than the civic type R all in a relatively nicer and roomier package when comparing it to the civic which makes it way more worth it in my opinion.

The cost of the 2.0 accord is also 5+ grand more then the SI cost. So at that price range you are in more options like a audi or pre owned infiniti like the OP wanted.

 

[jred721]

The cost of the 2.0 accord is also 5+ grand more then the SI cost. So at that price range you are in more options like a audi or pre owned infiniti like the OP wanted.

Yeah thats true I get the OP was comparing mainly a used G vs a new si, i was just mainly responding to the part where you said buying an accord over the SI would make no sense because of the engine output.

 

[jhokie]

Truthfully it's almost impossible to compare these 2 cars. But let me ask this question... are you rich?

When comparing the G37 and the Civic SI take a look at this total cost of ownership calculator between the two. For a used 2017 SI vs Used G37 the total difference over 5 years is almost $3,000 per year average in favor of the Si!! So 5 years from now you'll have roughly (I know it's not perfect but this calculator gives you a good general idea) $15,000 more in your bank account if you were to sell the car at that point (since depreciation is factored into the calculation). If you keep driving the cars after 5 years the Civic will become an even better deal since Infiniti maintenance/repair will start accruing rapidly at some point. Even if you put a new Civic Si into this calculator it's still a far better value proposition than the Infinity.

That is truly the niche of the Civic SI. A sporty drivers car that is still economical as hell to drive. If you're at the financial point in your life where you don't need to worry about saving $15,000 over 5 years then honestly why are you even considering a Civic? Just splurge on a better performing and more expensive vehicle. Personally I'm at the point in my life while I wanted a fun car but I really wanted to get something economical so I could save for retirement so the Si made a lot of sense for me.

Edmunds Total Cost of ownership calculations between these 2 cars:

https://www.edmunds.com/infiniti/g-sedan/2013/st-200437361/cost-to-own/
https://www.edmunds.com/honda/civic/2017/st-401714474/cost-to-own/

 

[davemarco]

Idk if I would say going with the SI is a good option when comparing the accord 2.0t to it. Just because of fact that the 1.5 motor in the SI is already pretty high strung pushing a bit above 200 horsepower stock and doesnt have as much room to grow. Whereas the 2.0 liter motor is detuned as you mentioned and has the potential to make more torque and and HP than the civic type R all in a relatively nicer and roomier package when comparing it to the civic which makes it way more worth it in my opinion.

This is actually not at all true. Take a stroll over to our Tuning section of the forums and take a look at what's being done right now. With the SI stock turbo, custom tuned cars have already been pushed to 240 whp and around 350 wtq. Switching to something like PRL's big turbo kit will up the hp to around 340 whp and 300 wtq. No internals required.

The engine on the Accord is also not a de-tuned Type R engine. It's not even close. This article provides a great in-depth write up on the differences: https://jalopnik.com/heres-exactly-what-makes-the-2018-honda-accord-and-civi-1820164645. The TLDR is that there are significant changes to the engine internals on the Type R in order to reliably support the increased power, a completely different fuel system on the Type R (to feed the greatly increased power), and a much bigger turbo on the Type R (TD04 vs RHF5). Since the turbo is different, the Type R engine would also require a larger diameter downpipe, exhaust, etc.

The argument could be made that even with the Accord-spec'ed 2.0T, the SI would still have a higher power ceiling. But consider how few Accord 2.0T's are made relative to the 1.5T found in the SI/CRV. Economies of scale on those mass produced 1.5T's (even the modified SKU in the SI/CRV) would drive their unit costs way, way down. Same story with the associated transmission and other required parts. Bottom line, the Accord engine is nothing close to a Type R engine, and if you were to put an Accord engine (and trans) in the SI, the cost of an SI would skyrocket. With stock SI's making way more power/$$$ with basic bolt-on's and a tune than any SI prior, I think that Honda made the right call.

 

[jred721]

This is actually not at all true. Take a stroll over to our Tuning section of the forums and take a look at what's being done right now. With the SI stock turbo, custom tuned cars have already been pushed to 240 whp and around 350 wtq. Switching to something like PRL's big turbo kit will up the hp to around 340 whp and 300 wtq. No internals required.

The engine on the Accord is also not a de-tuned Type R engine. It's not even close. This article provides a great in-depth write up on the differences: https://jalopnik.com/heres-exactly-what-makes-the-2018-honda-accord-and-civi-1820164645. The TLDR is that there are significant changes to the engine internals on the Type R in order to reliably support the increased power, a completely different fuel system on the Type R (to feed the greatly increased power), and a much bigger turbo on the Type R (TD04 vs RHF5). Since the turbo is different, the Type R engine would also require a larger diameter downpipe, exhaust, etc.

The argument could be made that even with the Accord-spec'ed 2.0T, the SI would still have a higher power ceiling. But consider how few Accord 2.0T's are made relative to the 1.5T found in the SI/CRV. Economies of scale on those mass produced 1.5T's (even the modified SKU in the SI/CRV) would drive their unit costs way, way down. Same story with the associated transmission and other required parts. Bottom line, the Accord engine is nothing close to a Type R engine, and if you were to put an Accord engine (and trans) in the SI, the cost of an SI would skyrocket. With stock SI's making way more power/$$$ with basic bolt-on's and a tune than any SI prior, I think that Honda made the right call.

Ok well I do not know how you came to this conclusion but saying that the Accord engine is nothing close to the Type R engine is completely false end of story (https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a...our-in-hondas-new-accord-and-the-civic-type-r). The article from car and driver literally lists the things that they share including an IDENTICAL compression ratio. There are differences for sure but then again there HAS to be something that differs between a family sedan and a purpose built sports car, and the turbo is smaller because it spools quicker (again better daily driving) and actually makes a much higher torque number at 1500 rpm than the civic type R's engine.

Also, I am aware that the 1.5T can make those power figures but high strung means that there is a threshold for reliably making power in a 1.5T tuned vehicle, and running at such high power figures with stock internals would probably seriously diminish the longevity, and you yourself are saying that the Type R has different internals to RELIABLY support the increased power, so why would running an even smaller 1.5T engine with stock internals at around 87% more than the factory torque possibly be reliable?

My point still stands that the accord 2.0t still shares a considerable amount of internals with the Type R and the if you tune the car within a reasonable constraint, it will make the equivalent power (if not more) of a tuned 1.5t all day long without skipping a beat, and yes have a much higher power ceiling than the 1.5 because as elementary as it sounds, 2.0 is bigger than 1.5 and the higher displacement isn't just put there for fun (there is a reason Honda offers this over the base 1.5 in the accord).

 

[jred721]

Truthfully it's almost impossible to compare these 2 cars. But let me ask this question... are you rich?

When comparing the G37 and the Civic SI take a look at this total cost of ownership calculator between the two. For a used 2017 SI vs Used G37 the total difference over 5 years is almost $3,000 per year average in favor of the Si!! So 5 years from now you'll have roughly (I know it's not perfect but this calculator gives you a good general idea) $15,000 more in your bank account if you were to sell the car at that point (since depreciation is factored into the calculation). If you keep driving the cars after 5 years the Civic will become an even better deal since Infiniti maintenance/repair will start accruing rapidly at some point. Even if you put a new Civic Si into this calculator it's still a far better value proposition than the Infinity.

That is truly the niche of the Civic SI. A sporty drivers car that is still economical as hell to drive. If you're at the financial point in your life where you don't need to worry about saving $15,000 over 5 years then honestly why are you even considering a Civic? Just splurge on a better performing and more expensive vehicle. Personally I'm at the point in my life while I wanted a fun car but I really wanted to get something economical so I could save for retirement so the Si made a lot of sense for me.

Edmunds Total Cost of ownership calculations between these 2 cars:

https://www.edmunds.com/infiniti/g-sedan/2013/st-200437361/cost-to-own/
https://www.edmunds.com/honda/civic/2017/st-401714474/cost-to-own/

Exactly why people choose something like a Civic Si in the first place. The G37 will sound wayyy better than an SI and make more power but in the long term you'll lose much less money on the Civic and maintenance would be cheaper.

 

[davemarco]

Ok well I do not know how you came to this conclusion but saying that the Accord engine is nothing close to the Type R engine is completely false end of story (https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a...our-in-hondas-new-accord-and-the-civic-type-r). The article from car and driver literally lists the things that they share including an IDENTICAL compression ratio. There are differences for sure but then again there HAS to be something that differs between a family sedan and a purpose built sports car, and the turbo is smaller because it spools quicker (again better daily driving) and actually makes a much higher torque number at 1500 rpm than the civic type R's engine.

Also, I am aware that the 1.5T can make those power figures but high strung means that there is a threshold for reliably making power in a 1.5T tuned vehicle, and running at such high power figures with stock internals would probably seriously diminish the longevity, and you yourself are saying that the Type R has different internals to RELIABLY support the increased power, so why would running an even smaller 1.5T engine with stock internals at around 87% more than the factory torque possibly be reliable?

My point still stands that the accord 2.0t still shares a considerable amount of internals with the Type R and the if you tune the car within a reasonable constraint, it will make the equivalent power (if not more) of a tuned 1.5t all day long without skipping a beat, and yes have a much higher power ceiling than the 1.5 because as elementary as it sounds, 2.0 is bigger than 1.5 and the higher displacement isn't just put there for fun (there is a reason Honda offers this over the base 1.5 in the accord).

I got it from the deep dive in the Jalopnik article that was cited in my post. The differences between the 2.0T in the Accord and in the Type R that you disregarded are very significant, not just from a reliability standpoint, but from a power-making perspective as well.

Even if they did use the variant of the 2.0T from the Accord in the SI, the point still stands that it would result in a much more expensive SI. The unit cost of the 2.0T is going to be much higher, if nothing else due to Honda not being able to leverage the same economies of scale and having to incur potential line changeover costs associated with producing them. This would put the SI in a higher price bracket and carry the potential to impact sales. Clearly their business team felt that this would be detrimental.

 

[jred721]

I got it from the deep dive in the Jalopnik article that was cited in my post. The differences between the 2.0T in the Accord and in the Type R that you disregarded are very significant, not just from a reliability standpoint, but from a power-making perspective as well.

Even if they did use the variant of the 2.0T from the Accord in the SI, the point still stands that it would result in a much more expensive SI. The unit cost of the 2.0T is going to be much higher, if nothing else due to Honda not being able to leverage the same economies of scale and having to incur potential line changeover costs associated with producing them. This would put the SI in a higher price bracket and carry the potential to impact sales. Clearly their business team felt that this would be detrimental.

Like I said I acknowledge the differences but

I got it from the deep dive in the Jalopnik article that was cited in my post. The differences between the 2.0T in the Accord and in the Type R that you disregarded are very significant, not just from a reliability standpoint, but from a power-making perspective as well.

Even if they did use the variant of the 2.0T from the Accord in the SI, the point still stands that it would result in a much more expensive SI. The unit cost of the 2.0T is going to be much higher, if nothing else due to Honda not being able to leverage the same economies of scale and having to incur potential line changeover costs associated with producing them. This would put the SI in a higher price bracket and carry the potential to impact sales. Clearly their business team felt that this would be detrimental.

Like I said I acknowledge there are differences but if you read the car and driver article it says "nearly everything that makes up a modern engine is shared" meaning the key components are mostly shared and makes your whole point about "nothing being similar" invalid. And I never said they should put the 2.0t engine in the SI I have no idea where you got that from. I am simply comparing the accord 2.0 to the SI...

 

[cheng115]

Exactly why people choose something like a Civic Si in the first place. The G37 will sound wayyy better than an SI and make more power but in the long term you'll lose much less money on the Civic and maintenance would be cheaper.

If I am looking to buy a used 2011-2013 Infiniti G37s, I wouldn't be too worried about depreciation value. It's already an older car and I would want it for awhile. Obviously with a 2017 civic, you are going to be able to keep the value at a higher rate for longer. The G37s would just be so much better to drive.. I'm actually not sure how much more the maintenance would be because other sites are saying that maintenance isn't incredibly expensive for a G37s. It's not a european/german car so maintenance would be much cheaper. All of the reviews I am reading mention little maintenance (usually just an oil change)

-https://www.yourmechanic.com/estimates/infiniti/g37

 

[jred721]

If I am looking to buy a used 2011-2013 Infiniti G37s, I wouldn't be too worried about depreciation value. It's already an older car and I would want it for awhile. Obviously with a 2017 civic, you are going to be able to keep the value at a higher rate for longer. The G37s would just be so much better to drive.. I'm actually not sure how much more the maintenance would be because other sites are saying that maintenance isn't incredibly expensive for a G37s. It's not a european/german car so maintenance would be much cheaper. All of the reviews I am reading mention little maintenance (usually just an oil change)

-https://www.yourmechanic.com/estimates/infiniti/g37

Your right, the meat of the depreciation is pretty much over but as someone who has owned a G37 coupe the maintainance defenitely took more money out of my pocket compared to a civic, but it's still reasonable for what your getting and not at all as bad as european cars like my mercedes.

 

[CIVICSPORT]

OP a 2012 is a dinosaur. Take the brand new Si with all the tech and warranty. A simple tune will make it as fast as the G37 if thats your concern.

Sponsored