New Civic

galvo_clare · 08-04-2017 8:57am

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

It was removed to make way for the Independent suspension. It's a small trade off for better handling.

Actually, it was the fuel tank that was moved. It was under the front seats, now it's in the normal place under the rear seats.
It allows them to drop the front seats by around 35mm.

Pacifico · 08-04-2017 7:29pm

Any sign of the 1.5L in dealers yet?

Phil.x · 08-04-2017 9:58pm

JoeA3 wrote: »

It's as ugly as sin, worse than it's predecessor and that's a fair achievement. Surprised anyone would test drive one on that basis alone tbh.

I think the 9th gen is super looking, better than the 10th.

CiniO · 08-04-2017 11:49pm

Augeo wrote: »

the 50 to 70 mph times would be indicative of mid range punch etc....the dash to 100kph isn't overly relevant to everyday driving.

Indeed not everyone does sprint 0-100km/h on every traffic lights - I agree.
And I also agree that 50-70mph (or around 80km/h to 120km/h) acceleration is very important in everyday driving.

But I'm yet to see a car X which would do better 80km/h to 120km/h than car Y, but yet have worse 0-100km/h than car Y.

It's nearly impossible except in some extreme gearing setups which are not really available in stock cars.

As a rule of thumb, if car X does 0-100km/h quicker than car Y, then it also means that car X will do 50km/h to 80km/h quicker than car Y, as well as 80km/h to 120km/h quicker than car Y.

CiniO · 08-04-2017 11:52pm

GustavoFring wrote: »

To get the performance from the 1.8 you have to really rev it. If you don't I find it quite dead. For pottering about the mid range on the 1l feels a lot stronger.

So what you're saying is that in everyday driving you don't want to rev the engine high to unleash the real performance and judge the car by its low rev performance?

Why would anyone not want to rev the engine to get the performance if it's needed?

dazza161989 · 08-04-2017 11:58pm

Pacifico wrote: »

Any sign of the 1.5L in dealers yet?

Ya there's one in the dealership where I work. Took it home for a night last week, serious poke in it for a 1.5! The 1 litre is a cracking car aswell. Sign of the times turbo petrol, hybrid & full electric is the way it's all going. I prefer the styling of the new model to the previous but that's my opinion. From what the sales team tells me they are selling quite well.

colm_mcm · 09-04-2017 12:13am

CiniO wrote: »

So what you're saying is that in everyday driving you don't want to rev the engine high to unleash the real performance and judge the car by its low rev performance?

Why would anyone not want to rev the engine to get the performance if it's needed?

The noise!

09-04-2017 10:38am

CiniO wrote: »

................

As a rule of thumb, if car X does 0-100km/h quicker than car Y, then it also means that car X will do 50km/h to 80km/h quicker than car Y, as well as 80km/h to 120km/h quicker than car Y.

I think when a 1.8 nasp is being compared to a 1.0 turbo the later will be faster in the mid range relative to it's 0 to 60 dash.
and the chap said everyday driving. Dropping from 5th to 4th for overtaking etc, not doing 0 to 60 sprints.

Also just under 9 sec to 90 and just over 10 secs to 60 aren't wildly different to start with.

colm_mcm · 09-04-2017 10:54am

If you're compring like with like the civic 1.8 would be 8.6 to 60 and the 1.0 would be 10.4 for a base model and into the 11s once you add some equipment.

2 seconds in the difference is over 20% to be fair.

It's do agree that the turbo would certainly be more effortless due to more torque. In the same way that a diesel would be.

Also to get those figures on the 1.8 you'd be screaming it, which is a pain in everyday driving.

GustavoFring · 09-04-2017 12:45pm

CiniO wrote: »

So what you're saying is that in everyday driving you don't want to rev the engine high to unleash the real performance and judge the car by its low rev performance?

Why would anyone not want to rev the engine to get the performance if it's needed?

The 1.8 is pretty weak unless you rev it and when you do it's very, very rough and noisy. For an everyday car I would rather a car with a decent mid range than one I need to rev out to extract any meaningful go yes so in this situation with those two specific engines I would prefer the 1 litre.

If you drive in a relaxed fashion it's a better everyday car for most people with more accessible performance. if you prefer to rev the engine out then the 1.8 is quicker overall but you pay the price with noise.

Ron Scott · 11-04-2017 3:20pm

Honda are advertising the entry level one (smart 1.0) at €23,750 but 2 dealers I have spoken to have it at €25,250. Why would this be would anyone know ?

sozbox · 11-04-2017 3:45pm

Ron Scott wrote: »

Honda are advertising the entry level one (smart 1.0) at €23,750 but 2 dealers I have spoken to have it at €25,250. Why would this be would anyone know ?

Delivery and related charges

colm_mcm · 11-04-2017 6:25pm

€1250 is a lot for that!

noelf · 11-04-2017 7:50pm

colm_mcm wrote: »

â‚¬1250 is a lot for that!

Perhaps metallic paint as well..

corks finest · 12-04-2017 12:59am

bazz26 wrote: »

Cannot take to the exterior styling myself, just looks like over styled for the sake of it imo.

Nag,love the looks

Ardennes1944 · 12-04-2017 6:39am

I dont find the 1.8 has a lack of power low down at all. Yeah it doesnt fling you back into the seat but it was more than enough go without revving it to 7k.

But it does have a buzzy engine noise abouve 4k I will admit.

I think the styling of the Civics are fantastic, at least they have done and are continuing to try something different.

You get a reliable, reasonably quick, good looking (based on tastes) and comfortable car

OldMrBrennan83 · 12-04-2017 6:57am

This post has been deleted.

noelf · 12-04-2017 1:43pm

Gru · 26-04-2017 12:02pm

How are people finding it to live with?(looks aside) Going to have a spin in the 1.0 smartplus this evening to see whats its like.

sozbox · 26-04-2017 2:14pm

Gru wrote: »

How are people finding it to live with?(looks aside) Going to have a spin in the 1.0 smartplus this evening to see whats its like.

The carpet in mine has come away on the drivers side, warranty used to fix that.

Makes me wary about build quality.

Otherwise no complaints.

Gru · 26-04-2017 10:38pm

I was very impressed with the drive. Felt nice and energetic and seemed to handle well. Things like the lane assist are pretty nice too. Ill be going back for another look and ill keep an eye on things like the carpets to see if theres anything like that going on. There's a 3.9% apr deal ending friday so im seriously tempted to jump on this.

Zurbaran · 26-04-2017 11:00pm

Gru wrote: »

I was very impressed with the drive. Felt nice and energetic and seemed to handle well. Things like the lane assist are pretty nice too. Ill be going back for another look and ill keep an eye on things like the carpets to see if theres anything like that going on. There's a 3.9% apr deal ending friday so im seriously tempted to jump on this.

I'd be surprised if they didn't have some sort of deal for 172 so don't feel like your hand is being forced.

Atlantic Dawn · 26-04-2017 11:07pm

Out of interest the light/reflector between the front wing and where it meets the front bumber what does this do? Is it a DRL or a reflector or what?

grogi · 26-04-2017 11:11pm

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Out of interest the light/reflector between the front wing and where it meets the front bumber what does this do? Is it a DRL or a reflector or what?

Looks like turn indicator... Completely useless in Ireland.

who_ru · 27-04-2017 10:25pm

Gru wrote: »

I was very impressed with the drive. Felt nice and energetic and seemed to handle well. Things like the lane assist are pretty nice too. Ill be going back for another look and ill keep an eye on things like the carpets to see if theres anything like that going on. There's a 3.9% apr deal ending friday so im seriously tempted to jump on this.

Was it the 1.0 litre or 1.5 litre you drove? Honda seem to imply the 1.0 will be the big seller, just wondering if the extra poke from the 1.5 is worth the outlay.

Gru · 27-04-2017 11:04pm

who_ru wrote: »

Was it the 1.0 litre or 1.5 litre you drove? Honda seem to imply the 1.0 will be the big seller, just wondering if the extra poke from the 1.5 is worth the outlay.

I drove the 1.0 litre and felt plenty powerful with good response when you put your foot down. Im coming from a 1.4 petrol so it felt a lot better than that.

I imagine the 1.0 litre will be popular as it seems to have plenty of oomph and probably more than enough for most people. The dealer i was speaking likened it to a 2.0 litre petrol (pinch of salt time of course, but he seemed very excited about the car).

28-04-2017 10:05am

They certainly seem to be pushing the 1.0, the dealer was trying to convert my sister to it from the 1.5, recently told there's a delay on getting the 1.5 in stock and he was trying to push the 1.0 on her again which wasn't happening. Maby the 1.0 is all they have been allocated as the 1.5s are a bit thin on the ground hence the push on them.

JohnBoy26 · 28-04-2017 9:42pm

who_ru wrote: »

Was it the 1.0 litre or 1.5 litre you drove? Honda seem to imply the 1.0 will be the big seller, just wondering if the extra poke from the 1.5 is worth the outlay.

That depends on what the buyer wants. For me id definitely go for the 1.5 as it's a four cylinder and I just much prefer them to 3 cylinder units.

noelf · 28-04-2017 9:58pm

This weeks Autoexpress ..

colm_mcm · 28-04-2017 10:14pm

Pity the couldn't have got a manual to compare to.

Auto Express often enthuse about new models, then once they're not new any more start picking faults and revert back to the Golf

grogi · 28-04-2017 11:27pm

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

That depends on what the buyer wants. For me id definitely go for the 1.5 as it's a four cylinder and I just much prefer them to 3 cylinder units.

3 cylinder sounds much more interesting IMHO.

JohnBoy26 · 29-04-2017 1:01am

grogi wrote: »

3 cylinder sounds much more interesting IMHO.

It certainly has different characteristics and it's definitely a good unit but I just prefer the refinement and sound of the 4 cylinder and I also prefer the way they rev. Each to their own I guess

who_ru · 29-04-2017 2:35pm

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

That depends on what the buyer wants. For me id definitely go for the 1.5 as it's a four cylinder and I just much prefer them to 3 cylinder units.

A dealer told me the 1.0litre might be a bit noisy at low revs. I sat in the top spec 1.0, full leather with sun roof, nice interior but not amazing. The HRV 1.5 might interest me, it still has magic seats which would be handy for the bike.

Wouldn't fancy the auto box on the HRV though.

Poulgorm · 30-04-2017 4:01pm

Is anybody concerned that these new Honda engines may not be as trouble free as their conventional engines? Direct injected petrol engines introduce diesel-like complexity to petrol engines. Not to mention the inlet valves getting fouled up after 30k miles.

And then, squeezing 120BHP out of a 1 litre, 3 cylinder engine - can the whole package be durable?

I say this as a person who has had 4 Hondas (2 accords and 2 civics, all petrol) over the years and never had the slightest problem with them, ever.

I love this new Civic - but I have this niggling doubt...

colm_mcm · 30-04-2017 4:03pm

To be fair, this isn't their first turbocharged small engine. They've been at that in Japan for years.

30-04-2017 6:04pm

Poulgorm wrote: »

........... Direct injected petrol engines introduce diesel-like complexity to petrol engines. Not to mention the inlet valves getting fouled up after 30k miles............

The complexity is one thing and less of a concern IMO

The inlet valve issue is again like diesel woes in so far as it's probably spoken about more than it should.

Since the VAG 2.0 turbo and some of the V6 Audi units experienced media coverage (in car land more than the actual media I suupose) of the issue about a decade ago whenever we hear DI for petrols now we almost automatically think oh oh problems.

The car manufacturers are all no doubt more aware of the issue too and you'd read in the ole engine tech speels how the engineers have fine tuned the map/software whatever to ensure as close to complete combustion as possible to absolutely minimise the chance of problematic deposits.

Probably usage dependent too, ultra low mileage engines you'd imagine would be higher risk due to lots of cold engine use relative to engines that would do less miles when cold relative to total mileage.

I'm not gone on the 3 cylinder stuff myself. Was thinking the 1.5 Civic would really appeal to me in a few years as a second hand option.

JohnBoy26 · 30-04-2017 6:15pm

Poulgorm wrote: »

Is anybody concerned that these new Honda engines may not be as trouble free as their conventional engines? Direct injected petrol engines introduce diesel-like complexity to petrol engines. Not to mention the inlet valves getting fouled up after 30k miles.

And then, squeezing 120BHP out of a 1 litre, 3 cylinder engine - can the whole package be durable?

I say this as a person who has had 4 Hondas (2 accords and 2 civics, all petrol) over the years and never had the slightest problem with them, ever.

I love this new Civic - but I have this niggling doubt...

Well they are more complex than a conventional unit so there is more potential for things to go wrong. However if you look at hondas diesel engines(apart from the early accords) they have been very reliable and very good units despite having modern diesel complexity.

Id certainly bet that these will be equally good reliable units and certainly better than efforts from some other manufacturers.

Poulgorm · 03-05-2017 11:00am

colm_mcm wrote: »

To be fair, this isn't their first turbocharged small engine. They've been at that in Japan for years.

It's not really the turbo charger I would be concerned about - it's the direct injection.

As far as I know, this is Honda's first direct injected petrol engine.

colm_mcm · 03-05-2017 12:20pm

Nah they've been using direct injection in the states for 5-6 years AFAIK.

Pacifico · 09-05-2017 4:54pm

Anyone drive or pick up a 1.5L version yet?! Any good?

colm_mcm · 09-05-2017 6:42pm

There are 7 registered to the end of April.
1 in March and the rest last month.

120 1.0 petrols

Del007 · 11-05-2017 10:39am

I'm hoping that they offer a scrappage deal soon.

Do Honda do them on a regular basis?

micks_address · 11-05-2017 10:43am

Del007 wrote: »

I'm hoping that they offer a scrappage deal soon.

Do Honda do them on a regular basis?

Here we get hard done by when it comes to Honda offers... In the UK where they sell lots more they regularly get attractive apr rates etc ... Honda re so small here they dont bother... i dont think ive seen a scrappage deal ever from them... been driving honda since 2002...

bazz26 · 18-05-2017 5:19pm

I know it's a sales video but it gives a better good comparison between the 1.0 litre and 1.5 litre, just a pity they didn't do a road test. I guess they don't want to put people off the 1.0 litre who have no intention of buying the 1.5 litre.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBsgYiZbEUk

Del007 · 18-05-2017 10:01pm

Apparently the new 1 litre petrol is very heavy on juice. My buddy was talking to a Honda salesman recently

eagerv · 20-05-2017 4:31pm

Pacifico wrote: »

Anyone drive or pick up a 1.5L version yet?! Any good?

Yes drove the 1.5. Very smooth with nice torque from fairly low revs. Nice bit of power when you put your foot down, feels faster than 8.2 seconds to 62.

Very quiet when cruising, but nice sound with revs.

Lovely driving position, lower than before. Headroom grand for me, but over 6' in back may need to slouch a bit. Steering very quick and precise. Suspension smooth with adaptive dampers on higher models. Independent multilink rear a big improvement.

Seems well priced if you take into account the standard spec. The S Design with GT Pack seems to be the best value. Includes Adaptive suspension, Smart entry and start, 11 speaker 450 watt Audio, Glass opening roof, Wireless charging, heated seats, LED headlights etc. Approx €31,000.

I like the looks, many don't! It looks good with strong colours such as Blue or Red. Not mad on White or Black but everyones tastes are different.

Many owners are reporting 50 MPG easily enough already in UK, but would have to see it myself to believe. Driven normally both engines appear to be fairly frugal. One tester I read got 42 MPG out of both engines not driving too easily.

Hope above helps, actually I enjoyed the car so much I placed an order for the above spec metallic blue!

bazz26 · 27-05-2017 9:47pm

Interesting review here of the new Civic and previous generations:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_ie9mRq8aw

28-05-2017 10:35am

Here's a 1.5 S design Gt we picked up. Nippy little motor, love the driving position which feels quite low, gear changes are nice and mechanical feeling so to speak. Suspension doesn't feel firm, even with the adaptive setting to stiffen it up (bear in mind I'm comparing to my type r) so may seem stiff to others, but it feels nicely planted on the road and we'll setup. It feels like it's a smaller car to drive compared to it's exterior size.

My only gripes are with some of the interior bits I feel they cheaped out on, rear parcel shelf or lack of, sunroof shade, buttons on the steering wheel, don't have a premium feel as such to them that you might expect, the 9th gen if I'm honest had a better interior feel to it as opposed to the 10th.

All in all I think it's a good all rounder, and wouldn't recommend judging it on looks alone, get in one and give it a good drive and see what you think then

eagerv · 28-05-2017 11:23am

bazz26 wrote: »

Interesting review here of the new Civic and previous generations:

Interesting review, loved all the old Civics, I even owned one of the earlier ones; a 1993 Model. It was a great machine at the time, 125 HP VTEC IIRC.

Looking forward to my 1.5 Mark 10.

eagerv · 28-05-2017 11:30am

5500 wrote: »

Here's a 1.5 S design Gt we picked up. Nippy little motor, love the driving position which feels quite low, gear changes are nice and mechanical feeling so to speak. Suspension doesn't feel firm, even with the adaptive setting to stiffen it up (bear in mind I'm comparing to my type r) so may seem stiff to others, but it feels nicely planted on the road and we'll setup. It feels like it's a smaller car to drive compared to it's exterior size.

My only gripes are with some of the interior bits I feel they cheaped out on, rear parcel shelf or lack of, sunroof shade, buttons on the steering wheel, don't have a premium feel as such to them that you might expect, the 9th gen if I'm honest had a better interior feel to it as opposed to the 10th.

All in all I think it's a good all rounder, and wouldn't recommend judging it on looks alone, get in one and give it a good drive and see what you think then

Nice car.

Good review, I like the shape. Some of the pics taken aren't very flattering but looks far better in the metal. Love the shape of the bonnet when driving it.

New Civic

Comments