It had its problems and it was ugly as sin, but so much for Honda 'performance'. Honda Civic SiR to be dropped in Canada http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/041111-2.htm So this leaves Honda's compact offering topping out at 127hp when all the other manufacturers have 160-170hp. I keep hearing rumors of a K20 in the Civic but nothing yet. Its amazing how much Honda has lost touch.
Fucking ugly god damned car. . . now, if they would just rethink the reverb and ditch that hunk of shit, things might start to get better.
Because you still pay a premium for an 'Ahhhhcura'. And some people don't find the RSX all that attractive either. Not that the SiR was any better. The RSX is too tall and too heavy.
I believe Honda is playing it smart right now with the ever growing gas prices. Sure it sucks not to have the horsepower, but the idea of history repeating itself comes to mind when you see what the other manufactures are doing and the worlds gas prices. Remember the late 60's when the horsepower war was in full effect, 435 hp Corvette (really producing over 500), big blocks galore and then bang, gas prices got crazy and then the stricter emission laws followed. In the mid 70’s a corvette had a mere 170 hp at best. But guess who sold the most cars? At almost 50 bucks a barrel i think we are on the verge of this again. I mean at bmw we are about to bring out this year a 505 hp v10 4 door sedan. Awesome car yes, but I don't for see this car getting much better then 20 mpg........
I don't think things will be as drastic as the 70's there Stuie. We've come a long way since the days of installing toilet bowls as carbs. Modern fuel injection and electronic engine controls virtually guarentee we will have hp, AND mpg on the street. Maybe Honda is just tired of being called a ricer car
I don't think gas is the big problem here. All the "sport compacts" (man i hate that term) are actually quite fuel efficient, and in fact all hondas are U-LEV. The problem with the SiR hatch is that is has the same specs as the previous gen SiR's. In 1999, a 15 second civic that pulled mid .8 g's on the skidpad was hot shit. But now, in the wake of 13 second neon's and awd turbos and the much cheaper 15 second cars, the SiR is out of place. Ideally, the Type-R would have been great. I would have bought one in a heartbeat. But Honda wouldn't import that car becuase it would compete with the RSX Type S (the major focus). So, it's an expensive and relatively slow car, which simply isn't that attractive any more. Most folks would prefer to buy, for example, a Sentra Spec-V which is cheaper, faster, and lower insurance. Or, for $3k more, the honda guys can buy an RSX-S (8k redline, faster, more luxurious, etc.)
Well, it looks like it's going to get worse for Honda enthusiasts before it gets better. According the current issue of "CAR" magazine, the next generation NSX project has been cancelled, there is no S2000 replacement on the drawing board (and given the age of that car, they should be a couple of years into the developement cycle.) Also, the Integra Type R is supposed to be discontinued and there is no replacement planned for the Civic Type R when the current model is refreshed. Basically, Honda is a fairly small company, and they claim that there is more money, more advantage to the company and it just makes better business sense for them to focus on the new Hybrid and Fuel-cell vehicles, and high-margin segments they are missing out on like trucks. So, every time you see one of those Honda fullsize trucks that they just announced, you can think it for killing the NSX...
Actually that's quite the opposite. If Honda can make money selling full-sized trucks and SUVs then they can afford to continue to make such products as the NSX and S2000. That's how it works, the PROFIT is in the larger-volume vehicles and they lose money on the Halo cars that give the brand it's image.
Yes, I realize that. It is, for example, why Porsche brought the Cayenne to market. However, Honda is already one of the most profitable manufacturers i the world (second only to Toyota last time I checked). But, they are a relatively small, and independently minded company. This seems to be as much about the company having the size and resources to only focus on X number of projects at a time, and the more profitable ones (of course) get the focus. Honestly, I can't fault Honda at all. It's exactly what I'd do.
It's what you'd do if you wanted to make money and not have to sell out to another, larger company that would dilute your philosophies and make you into something you weren't. That's why BMW came out with the X5 instead of a replacement for the M1.. it's good business sense if you want to stay independent. Sucks that it works that way, but that's how it is. One could say "But, they already have the chassis and they already have the engine..." Right, but certify it, emissions test it, crash it, etc... It adds up.
Exactly right. That's why I don't fault Honda at all... and I don't hold the X5 against BMW and the Cyanne against Porchse... it's what they have to do to stay independent and make money. To the point you made about all the costs... the NSX is the perfect example. Great car, but due to the volumes and all the costs involved,the price is so high that nobody buys them. Honda sells about 15 of them a month...
That's 15 a month WORLDWIDE. That isn't cost-effective to produce a car like that, is it? In some cases, yes... you need a product like that to draw interest to your brand and to develop technology that will be available in the future. The sad thing is, in the case of the NSX, is that it fell so far behind in the development cycle that the MDX, Oddysey, and TL all offer up motors that are VERY nearly as powerful in terms of HP and TQ... but they are mainstream vehicles. That makes the NSX look like a horrible value, which it currently is. It was great when it came out, but look at Porsche.. they keep putting power under the decklid of the 911 without changing it's look (except, of coruse, this year...) and offering up better, faster models to complete the range. Honda slept on the NSX, giving us just one option and not giving it a significant power increase (despite offering the 3.2L engine in manual-shift models). For a model like that to perform it's duty, to draw attention to the brand, you have to update it and keep it ahead of the competitors. That's Honda's fault, there. The S2000 still has a chance, they did dull it down a bit with the 2.2L motor but they could still come out with an R model or something to help regain interest (not that much has been lost, but... Z4 and Boxster are better plus revised or soon to be) but they won't. They seem to not care about very obvious market trends. Maybe they know something I don't, or maybe they are banking on the 255hp Accord V6 Hybrid's 37mpg impressing the hell out of people. Who, I don't know... but they can't forget the performance vehicles if they want to keep people interested.
i don't find anything wrong with the weight, speed, hp, torque, height, or handling!!! everybody wants more power but this thing comes with a lot to start you off, and i'm happy with it
All depends what you want to do with it. They're great on the street. On the track or slalom you'd be better off with an older Honda with a newer powerplant. Granted thats not a 100% fair comparrison but I'm only talking about what I look for in a car.
I agree. I think the decision to go with struts up front was bad one. The SIR/RSX is tall, heavy. No doubt they can be made to work, but its not as easy as it once was. A mid 90's CX hatch with a built 2l VTEC would be sweet I think.
Never say never, a Mac strut front end can work, and does very effectivley. Although it can be a bit more painful the lower you go.
I know the struts *can* work, but they will never do as well as upper/lower A arm. Look at Realtime, as soon as they could get their hands on a TSX with A arms, the RSX with struts was history. Honda was well known for their suspension design, they went away from it to save money and IMO their "sport" FWD cars all suffered.
If MacStruts are such a poor design, please explain Porsche and BMW... and how they have some of the best handling cars in the world.
Yes they do. But as I said they can be made to work, but they are a compromise, always. Also the problem is mostly with FWD stuff, as the axle has to get to the wheel, this cuts off the bottom of the shock and takes away useable shock travel.
Here's interesting, though with the discontinuation of the hatch here it probably doesn't matter much. Spy shots of the 06 Civic: http://www.channel4.com/4car/gallery/spy-shots-2004/H/honda-civic.html Its got a bit of a bubble butt but generally its got a lot more pleasing shape than the current hatch. I hope they don't slap some fugly trim or headlights on it.
Oh man that's really, really ugly. They had it right with the 96-00 hatch as far as style is concerned.
the SiR is not much of a looker off the showroom floor but it has load of potential.. the only reason why they are dropping the sir in canada is lack of sales for this little hatch.. the coupe did scores, but this thing barely sells.
