http://autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=102867
New Civic, and the CRX is coming back!
-
MinisterofDOOM
- Moderator
- Posts: 30928
- Joined: Wed May 19, 2004 5:51 pm
- Car: 1962 Corvair Monza
1961 Corvair Lakewood
1974 Unimog 404
1997 Pathfinder XE
2005 Lincoln LS8
Former:
1995 Q45t
1993 Maxima GXE
1995 Ranger XL 2.3
1984 Coupe DeVille - Location: The middle of nowhere.
Re: New Civic, and the CRX is coming back! (Jesda)
THAT THING IS UGLY!!!
What is with this new trend of teeny tiny hoods? The windshield is IN FRONT of the front tires!!! It looks like crap.
Man...I used to like honda. But now...They're giving is a rebadged econobulge as an accord, and pricing the real accord up by putting Acura badges on it. They've effectively turned VTEC into some wierdo superpower in the minds of 99% of consumers. They think that EVERYTHING with four doors must be offered as a coupe, too (note that all the coupes are even uglier than their sedan counterparts). Their cars are ugly, and they're more worried about having that "Low Emissions Vehicle" sticker in the left rear window than they are about how well the sum of the parts work together.
Honda used to be a great brand. Now they're just becoming another lemming, following the other brands in circles.
As for the CRX...It had damn well better look good, and look like a CRX (and NOT look like the current mundane wedge that is the Si). Of course, it won't. It'll have squinty chinese-eye-ball headlights like EVERYTHING does now, it'll have too-small wheels wells, it'll have a vertical hatch and the hood and windshield will be the same plane--just watch. It'll be a fugly POS with a l337 DOHC VTEC four cylindar well under 2 liters that can't out accelerate a triple-trailer UPS truck..
What is with this new trend of teeny tiny hoods? The windshield is IN FRONT of the front tires!!! It looks like crap.
Man...I used to like honda. But now...They're giving is a rebadged econobulge as an accord, and pricing the real accord up by putting Acura badges on it. They've effectively turned VTEC into some wierdo superpower in the minds of 99% of consumers. They think that EVERYTHING with four doors must be offered as a coupe, too (note that all the coupes are even uglier than their sedan counterparts). Their cars are ugly, and they're more worried about having that "Low Emissions Vehicle" sticker in the left rear window than they are about how well the sum of the parts work together.
Honda used to be a great brand. Now they're just becoming another lemming, following the other brands in circles.
As for the CRX...It had damn well better look good, and look like a CRX (and NOT look like the current mundane wedge that is the Si). Of course, it won't. It'll have squinty chinese-eye-ball headlights like EVERYTHING does now, it'll have too-small wheels wells, it'll have a vertical hatch and the hood and windshield will be the same plane--just watch. It'll be a fugly POS with a l337 DOHC VTEC four cylindar well under 2 liters that can't out accelerate a triple-trailer UPS truck..
Why don't you just go buy a used SE-R? They've had them for two years. Honda's just barely getting in the game.bassinasilvia wrote:The LSD sounds excellent though.
-
vicQ45
- Posts: 1303
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 4:43 pm
- Car: 1979 Cadillac Eldog, 1987 Wagovan, 1968 Firebird 400
Re: New Civic, and the CRX is coming back! (MinisterofDOOM)
couldn't have put it better myself!MinisterofDOOM wrote:THAT THING IS UGLY!!!
What is with this new trend of teeny tiny hoods? The windshield is IN FRONT of the front tires!!! It looks like crap.
Man...I used to like honda. But now...They're giving is a rebadged econobulge as an accord, and pricing the real accord up by putting Acura badges on it. They've effectively turned VTEC into some wierdo superpower in the minds of 99% of consumers. They think that EVERYTHING with four doors must be offered as a coupe, too (note that all the coupes are even uglier than their sedan counterparts). Their cars are ugly, and they're more worried about having that "Low Emissions Vehicle" sticker in the left rear window than they are about how well the sum of the parts work together.
Honda used to be a great brand. Now they're just becoming another lemming, following the other brands in circles.
As for the CRX...It had damn well better look good, and look like a CRX (and NOT look like the current mundane wedge that is the Si). Of course, it won't. It'll have squinty chinese-eye-ball headlights like EVERYTHING does now, it'll have too-small wheels wells, it'll have a vertical hatch and the hood and windshield will be the same plane--just watch. It'll be a fugly POS with a l337 DOHC VTEC four cylindar well under 2 liters that can't out accelerate a triple-trailer UPS truck..
Why don't you just go buy a used SE-R? They've had them for two years. Honda's just barely getting in the game.
-
flohtingPoint
- Posts: 3564
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 2:46 pm
- Car: 2004 Z16 Corvette Z06
- Location: Washington DC
- Contact:
-
vicQ45
- Posts: 1303
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 4:43 pm
- Car: 1979 Cadillac Eldog, 1987 Wagovan, 1968 Firebird 400
seriously, every time i look at that thing, it gets uglier. makes my accord start to look like an m45. i still couldn't ever justify the price of s civic. if i want basic econo-trash, i can get a brand new kia with their warranty for 6k. better than paying 14k msrp for their ultra-base "value coupe" i find it amazing that ANYONE would pay this, but aparrently i'm in the minority these days.
-
PantherRacer
- Posts: 9408
- Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 1:32 pm
- Car: 1992 Nissan Skyline R32 RB20DET Sedan
- Location: The Moorish Throne of Atlantis
- Contact:
Re: (vicQ45)
the civic front now looks like a saturn mixed wit hsomething else...the rear looks like they tried to steal the styling of the maxima/altima.....The civic has now become a confused mass of metal, glass, plastic an w/e else they use to make that abomination with....
The CRX is getting the K20? great! now ricers will believe they are invincible...that is, if it doesn't look like something that drops out of my a** when I eat some unknown chinese food..... (when it comes to chinese food stick with what you know lol)
The CRX is getting the K20? great! now ricers will believe they are invincible...that is, if it doesn't look like something that drops out of my a** when I eat some unknown chinese food..... (when it comes to chinese food stick with what you know lol)
-
1991S13
- Posts: 1230
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 5:59 pm
- Car: '91 240sx Coupe, '00 QX4 4x4, '02 Sentra Spec V
- Contact:
Re: (PantherRacer)
No, the first people to buy them will be old couples who are enviromentally concious and want good gas mileage. Give it 5 years or so, then the next generation of ricers will get a hold of them.PantherRacer wrote:The CRX is getting the K20? great! now ricers will believe they are invincible...
MinisterofDOOM, I agree with you 100%. The way the new Civics look makes me actually appreciate the styling of the 3rd gen Civics. If Honda wants to bring anything back, bring back the Prelude. And get rid of their sad excuse for a truck. It seems like everyone who owns Honda cars praises their VTEC, and everyone with a Honda Ridgeline bought it because there is a trunk underneath the bed.
-
Florida240sx
- Posts: 11114
- Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 7:17 am
- Car: 1993 Nissan 240SX Hatch 5spd
2012 Nissan Altima S coupe 2.5 - Location: DeLand FL
I personally do not like the new Nissans. My biggest problem with Nissan right now is their mileage is somewhat poor. Example, a new 2.5 Nissan Altima gets 24/31 with 175hp. A new Honda Accord DX gets 26/34 with 160hp. The Altima is lighter by about 50lbs. However, the Accord is priced about $1500 less for the base model. (source: edmunds.com)
My grounds for saying I would most likely choose the Accord is the better mileage, lower cost, and for a car for me and my fiancee to share I would rather take the better reliability.
I also read recently about the new 1.8L Honda Civic engine, and I will say that it is classic Honda engineering. It displaces more than the old 1.7L, makes more power, but they reduced the part count, reduced the cost, reduced the weight of the engine, and gets better mileage. (source: sorry I can't remember, but it was an article on the next generation Honda 4cylinder hybrid)
If you compare apples to apples, the 1.8L Sentra engine gets 126HP, so the new Honda's 1.8L getting 140HP, I would say if I were the market for a new car I would seriously consider this over a Sentra.
Of course this is all pure speculation until I actually walk into a dealer ready to buy and test vehicles. I hope to be in that position with my wife in a few years, and this will be OUR car, we will probably get a sedan. Naturally, I kinda wish I could buy a Saturn Sky but that probably won't happen.
Don't get me wrong, I love my 240SX, but I am just not in love with the current Nissan offerings.
My grounds for saying I would most likely choose the Accord is the better mileage, lower cost, and for a car for me and my fiancee to share I would rather take the better reliability.
I also read recently about the new 1.8L Honda Civic engine, and I will say that it is classic Honda engineering. It displaces more than the old 1.7L, makes more power, but they reduced the part count, reduced the cost, reduced the weight of the engine, and gets better mileage. (source: sorry I can't remember, but it was an article on the next generation Honda 4cylinder hybrid)
If you compare apples to apples, the 1.8L Sentra engine gets 126HP, so the new Honda's 1.8L getting 140HP, I would say if I were the market for a new car I would seriously consider this over a Sentra.
Of course this is all pure speculation until I actually walk into a dealer ready to buy and test vehicles. I hope to be in that position with my wife in a few years, and this will be OUR car, we will probably get a sedan. Naturally, I kinda wish I could buy a Saturn Sky but that probably won't happen.
Don't get me wrong, I love my 240SX, but I am just not in love with the current Nissan offerings.
-
MinisterofDOOM
- Moderator
- Posts: 30928
- Joined: Wed May 19, 2004 5:51 pm
- Car: 1962 Corvair Monza
1961 Corvair Lakewood
1974 Unimog 404
1997 Pathfinder XE
2005 Lincoln LS8
Former:
1995 Q45t
1993 Maxima GXE
1995 Ranger XL 2.3
1984 Coupe DeVille - Location: The middle of nowhere.
Re: (dfw240_EE)
I personally think the current Sentra is not among the frontrunners of the compact crop. I'd take a Mazda3 or a Civic over one any day. If we get into SE-R territory, it's different--I love the QR. But for base econo models, the Sentra sucks.
I know the QG is capable of making more power. I don't understand why it's not offered a different tuning levels. They need more options than the low output QG18 and the ultra sport oriented QR25.
As for the Accord/Altima comparison, there just isn't one.Yeah, the Accord has a lower base price, but the Altima is more car by a long shot. Take a look at what options are available for what car. Compare COMPARABLY EQUIPPED models before you start throwing prices around. Both base models are likely (I'm checking now, just so I don't post inaccuracies) not comparably equipped. The honda will be ultra-stripped. The Altima likely includes far more amenities that have to be paid for as options on an Accord.
I've driven Inspires. They suck. The ride is crap, and the engine is wheezy. They're also baboon-a**-ugly, at least IMO. The rear seat is uncomfortable, and there's no leg room.
Quote »Example, a new 2.5 Nissan Altima gets 24/31 with 175hp. A new Honda Accord DX gets 26/34 with 160hp. The Altima is lighter by about 50lbs. However, the Accord is priced about $1500 less for the base model. (source: edmunds.com)[/quote]Again, you're absolutely not accounting for WHERE power comes in. Peak power does not mean ANYTHING. The Inspire's engine (I refuse to use the Accord name. It's not one. The badge changes nothing.) makes power for the last teeny bit of it's tachometer. It sucks for heavy traffic, and it's wheezy at high revs, even though that's where it makes it's power.The QR, on the other hand makes hp AND TORQUE quite low. And then it KEEPS making it, on up the tach. Plenty of power whenever you need it. Yes, only 15 more PEAK hp. But measure power made at 2500 RPM and you'll see the difference is much more drastic.If you're worried about fuel economy, you shouldn't be comparing it based on those power numbers. To get anywhere close to the Alty's power out of the Inspire, you have to have the pedal to the floor and be at the high end of the tach. That's TERRIBLE for gas milage. The QR makes it low, where economy is best, and it doesn't need to be floored through the rev range to get to it's power.The two engines are completely different in their means of making power. It's almost like comparing gasoline economy to propane or diesel economy. You have too look beyond the numbers.
I know the QG is capable of making more power. I don't understand why it's not offered a different tuning levels. They need more options than the low output QG18 and the ultra sport oriented QR25.
As for the Accord/Altima comparison, there just isn't one.Yeah, the Accord has a lower base price, but the Altima is more car by a long shot. Take a look at what options are available for what car. Compare COMPARABLY EQUIPPED models before you start throwing prices around. Both base models are likely (I'm checking now, just so I don't post inaccuracies) not comparably equipped. The honda will be ultra-stripped. The Altima likely includes far more amenities that have to be paid for as options on an Accord.
I've driven Inspires. They suck. The ride is crap, and the engine is wheezy. They're also baboon-a**-ugly, at least IMO. The rear seat is uncomfortable, and there's no leg room.
Quote »Example, a new 2.5 Nissan Altima gets 24/31 with 175hp. A new Honda Accord DX gets 26/34 with 160hp. The Altima is lighter by about 50lbs. However, the Accord is priced about $1500 less for the base model. (source: edmunds.com)[/quote]Again, you're absolutely not accounting for WHERE power comes in. Peak power does not mean ANYTHING. The Inspire's engine (I refuse to use the Accord name. It's not one. The badge changes nothing.) makes power for the last teeny bit of it's tachometer. It sucks for heavy traffic, and it's wheezy at high revs, even though that's where it makes it's power.The QR, on the other hand makes hp AND TORQUE quite low. And then it KEEPS making it, on up the tach. Plenty of power whenever you need it. Yes, only 15 more PEAK hp. But measure power made at 2500 RPM and you'll see the difference is much more drastic.If you're worried about fuel economy, you shouldn't be comparing it based on those power numbers. To get anywhere close to the Alty's power out of the Inspire, you have to have the pedal to the floor and be at the high end of the tach. That's TERRIBLE for gas milage. The QR makes it low, where economy is best, and it doesn't need to be floored through the rev range to get to it's power.The two engines are completely different in their means of making power. It's almost like comparing gasoline economy to propane or diesel economy. You have too look beyond the numbers.
I think the big caveat there is that I will decide when I actually test drive. Don't worry, I won't rush and I will try Sentra, Altima, Accord, Civic, Corolla, Aveo, Malibu, Five Hundred, Focus, Caliber if it comes out, Camry, Sonota, Rio, Spectra, everything a dealer will let me get my hands on. The proof is in the tasting!
Caliber: http://www.autoweek.com/files/...1.jpgThe Dodge Durango and the Toyota Matrix had a baby.
I can live with the Accord's appearances, and I go by the price base models. The reason being is taht I don't give a damn for what comes with the car. This is for what I would buy. You are talking to the sick pervert who picked a specific 240SX BECAUSE it did not have power locks, power windows, spoiler, sunroof etc. You are talking to the madman who recently had his Nissan broken into, 4 speakers stolen, and my first reaction is "might as well lose the stereo now" instead of "let's replace the speakers".
As far as the claims for engine power, I am not buying it, that the K24 only gets its best acceleration at the top RPM's. I found these dyno graphs:
http://www.sportcompactcarweb....ojser/http://sohc.vtec.net/article_f...o.gif
It is pretty hard finding stock dynos out of all the people bragging about their modded engines, but this should be close enough. Both engines seem to have very similar curves. They both have very broad torque bands and horsepower curves that skyrocket to the redline, with the QR25 peaking off about 750RPM later. This is very characteristic of a modern variable valve timing (and in the VTECs case, variable lift, I am unaware if the Nissan system has variable valve lift) engine.
However, let's just leave it at this, and accept that when we do come to the point to purchase a car, we will just pick the car that is right for us.
Oh, and wish me luck at the job fair next Saturday I have been working a temp job programming a project for a month and a half now. It provides enough money to keep me living and to save, but by the very nature of temporary, it must end and by the way things look soon.
Caliber: http://www.autoweek.com/files/...1.jpgThe Dodge Durango and the Toyota Matrix had a baby.
I can live with the Accord's appearances, and I go by the price base models. The reason being is taht I don't give a damn for what comes with the car. This is for what I would buy. You are talking to the sick pervert who picked a specific 240SX BECAUSE it did not have power locks, power windows, spoiler, sunroof etc. You are talking to the madman who recently had his Nissan broken into, 4 speakers stolen, and my first reaction is "might as well lose the stereo now" instead of "let's replace the speakers".
As far as the claims for engine power, I am not buying it, that the K24 only gets its best acceleration at the top RPM's. I found these dyno graphs:
http://www.sportcompactcarweb....ojser/http://sohc.vtec.net/article_f...o.gif
It is pretty hard finding stock dynos out of all the people bragging about their modded engines, but this should be close enough. Both engines seem to have very similar curves. They both have very broad torque bands and horsepower curves that skyrocket to the redline, with the QR25 peaking off about 750RPM later. This is very characteristic of a modern variable valve timing (and in the VTECs case, variable lift, I am unaware if the Nissan system has variable valve lift) engine.
However, let's just leave it at this, and accept that when we do come to the point to purchase a car, we will just pick the car that is right for us.
Oh, and wish me luck at the job fair next Saturday I have been working a temp job programming a project for a month and a half now. It provides enough money to keep me living and to save, but by the very nature of temporary, it must end and by the way things look soon.
-
HashiriyaS14
- Posts: 14298
- Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 8:02 pm
- Car: '95 Nissan 240SX
'08 Honda Accord
'08 Honda NPS50
'03 Kawasaki Ninja 250
'60 Honda Super Cub - Location: DC Metro Area
- Contact:
Wow....lots in this thread to respond to.
I sort of like the new Civic coupe, aside from the grille....I happen to like those headlights, better than the wierdo vertical headlights everyone else is using.
A K20 in the new CRX would be fantabulous, assuming they make the car light enough.
I like the EP3 Hatch present-gen Si. I don't think it looks goofy at all, aside from maybe the headlights....
As for "making power across the range", yes, that'd be important to me in a car designed primarily for daily commuting.....it would not really be in the LEAST BIT important to me in something like a CRX, Civic Si, or CTR....not at all, not one bit...
Take an ITR for example, all that matters is the performance characteristics between 7000-8500rpm, because you're going to have it there all the time when you're driving fast, and when you're not driving fast, you don't care.
So yes, I hope to hell they put some gawdawfully high-strung 4cyl into the new CRX, make it weigh 2500lbs or so, and fit a factory 6MT onto it.
I sort of like the new Civic coupe, aside from the grille....I happen to like those headlights, better than the wierdo vertical headlights everyone else is using.
A K20 in the new CRX would be fantabulous, assuming they make the car light enough.
I like the EP3 Hatch present-gen Si. I don't think it looks goofy at all, aside from maybe the headlights....
As for "making power across the range", yes, that'd be important to me in a car designed primarily for daily commuting.....it would not really be in the LEAST BIT important to me in something like a CRX, Civic Si, or CTR....not at all, not one bit...
Take an ITR for example, all that matters is the performance characteristics between 7000-8500rpm, because you're going to have it there all the time when you're driving fast, and when you're not driving fast, you don't care.
So yes, I hope to hell they put some gawdawfully high-strung 4cyl into the new CRX, make it weigh 2500lbs or so, and fit a factory 6MT onto it.