2015 Si TOASTED!

15847 Views 21 Replies 18 Participants Last post by Blindeye_03, Jan 29, 2016

Civic X News

Discussion Starter · Nov 27, 2015

To say that most people have been thoroughly impressed with the 10th gen Civic would be an understatement. Not only will it return 40 miles per gallon, it will also best the 2015 Si in the quarter mile.

JeffX over at Temple of VTEC strapped a VBox to his 1.5T equipped Civic and came away with illuminating results.

0-60: 6.5 sec
1/4 mile: 14.9 @ 97mph

To put that in context the 60 time is about the same as the '15 Si, but the quarter mile time is nearly a half second quicker.

Jeff claims the 60 time would of been quicker but the car doesn't launch hard enough equipped with the CVT.

Which makes things doubly surprising, the Si comes with more power, more torque and a 6MT. The difference likely lays in the Si's 3,000 lb curb weight vs the 10th's 2,900.

It's not just the 2015 Si that falls prey to the new Turbo motor. The Focus ST is .2 seconds quicker to 60, the BMW 320i will match it to 60 and it beats the ILX with 2.4 and 8DCT by a tenth of a second. In fact the Civic embarrasses just about everything in class, the Mazda and VW are over half a second off the pace.

Looking forward to some proper Head 2 Heads.

See less See more

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

4Tires

· #2 · Nov 27, 2015

So it hit 1/4 mile in 14.9 seconds?

5TAR

· #3 · Nov 27, 2015

Making it even better he ran 87 octane

Now this leaves me wondering what more can be accomplished with a tune.

Reactions: 1

HondaGeek

· #4 · Nov 27, 2015

Better tires will show good improvements, since the OEM tires are for max fuel economy and comfort.

Smartie

· #5 · Nov 27, 2015

I also wonder about if it launched harder... but then again, it's impressive results after launch are totally due to CVT. So swapping out the CVT for something that launches better may actually end up slowing in the quarter...

Civil

· #6 · Nov 27, 2015

People upset about a manual not being available for the Si will point to this as a reason why the manual should be offered. Still, it is out performing the other cars in the segment, and you can't ask for too much more than that. How did they get the Civic to weigh so little without the price going up considerably?

Smartie

· #7 · Nov 27, 2015

Civil said:
People upset about a manual not being available for the Si will point to this as a reason why the manual should be offered. Still, it is out performing the other cars in the segment, and you can't ask for too much more than that. How did they get the Civic to weigh so little without the price going up considerably?

hmmm.... see this doesn't make sense.

Because no one is upset the Si doesn't have a manual, because in fact Honda hasn't built an Si without a manual. Honda hasn't built ANY 2016 Civic Si's yet...

Your second point about this being a point... see the CVT just smoked a manual with a car producing less torque and less HP... it's a damnation of the 6MT if anything...

Myxalplyx

· #8 · Nov 27, 2015

Smartie said:
Your second point about this being a point... see the CVT just smoked a manual with a car producing less torque and less HP... it's a damnation of the 6MT if anything...

I was going to mention this point (I'm CVT biased....just because). Thanks for bringing it up.

CivicDuty

· #9 · Nov 27, 2015

Having driven a Civic HX (CVT) since '98, I'm biased as well...I've never have another! My next Civic will have two doors and three pedals! :laugh:

Ghost_92TSi

· #10 · Dec 3, 2015

I need to drive something with CVT to make an opinion. From others I read before it was weird and they didn't like it. I love my old cars with a slop box but like to keep my daily driver fairly new with the creature comforts and implied reliability.

Reactions: 1

Nessuno

· #11 · Dec 3, 2015

Ghost_92TSi said:
I need to drive something with CVT to make an opinion. From others I read before it was weird and they didn't like it. I love my old cars with a slop box but like to keep my daily driver fairly new with the creature comforts and implied reliability.

It's an interesting feeling man. Almost like your zooming or floating. Especially once the car gets into its sweet spot. You almost don't even realise the car isn't building revs in the traditional sense.

integra15

· #12 · Dec 16, 2015

Motor Trend has it at 15.5 seconds at 92.4. I will trust the magazine more than a random post on a forum. Either way it is much improved over the 2015 Civic.

Nessuno

· #13 · Dec 16, 2015

integra15 said:
Motor Trend has it at 15.5 seconds at 92.4. I will trust the magazine more than a random post on a forum. Either way it is much improved over the 2015 Civic.

It's not a random post... Jeff X runs TOV, the man knows a thing or two about a thing or two. We also have no idea what conditions were like in the MT vs the TOV test...

Reactions: 1

Design

· #14 · Dec 17, 2015

Virtual comparisons are a bit far fetched due to the absence of several key environmental factors. Jeff X should know this; and he should have mentioned this in his post. The last 1/8 mile tends to add up to a half second delta due to wind drag and intake flow variances at higher speeds (especially on Direct Injection). I don't see this car hitting high 14s in stock form even on the best of days.

integra15

· #15 · Dec 17, 2015

Well its a great improvement anyway. Can't wait for the new SI though!

Smartie

· #16 · Dec 17, 2015

Design said:
Virtual comparisons are a bit far fetched due to the absence of several key environmental factors. Jeff X should know this; and he should have mentioned this in his post. The last 1/8 mile tends to add up to a half second delta due to wind drag and intake flow variances at higher speeds (especially on Direct Injection). I don't see this car hitting high 14s in stock form even on the best of days.

The impression I had from the post is that he actually ran the Civic on the 1/4, it's not just an extrapolation.

'13_Si

· #17 · Dec 18, 2015

Stock 9th gen Civic Si's can and have run faster 1/4 mile times than 14.9 seconds.

johnnywatts

· #18 · Jan 21, 2016

Ghost_92TSi said:
I need to drive something with CVT to make an opinion. From others I read before it was weird and they didn't like it. I love my old cars with a slop box but like to keep my daily driver fairly new with the creature comforts and implied reliability.

Different manufacturers set up their CVTs differently.

In the case of the 2016 Civic, it's alright. It tries to mimic gears in S mode. There's also just a slight lurch as you launch from a standstill, but very slight.

It's as if Honda knew what they were doing when they slapped the CVT on most of the trims.

Reactions: 1

dick w

· #19 · Jan 21, 2016

johnnywatts said:
It's as if Honda knew what they were doing when they slapped the CVT on most of the trims.

Imagine that.

Reactions: 1

RobbJK88

· #20 · Jan 21, 2016

CVTs might get a so so review at the moment. But give the tech a few more years to mature and advances to be made (since it seems to becoming the go to automatic setup) and it's not impossible the CVT becoming just as well balanced as a DCT transmission or a more complex automatic (8-10 speed autos just seem odd to me still) in terms of performance. Mostly they need to work out the initial lag in response so that they can launch harder, like a traditional automatic. DCT transmissions perform well but i'd imagine weigh more than the CVT units and have the unfortunate effect of lurching at low speeds if not equipped with a torque converter (which is what honda did on the ILX).

I'm absolutely a convert in favor of the future of the CVT. I cannot tell you how badly i HATED the CVT in the Sentra i test drove back in 08 before i got my first new civic. I was so dismayed that honda went the CVT route. But after having my 14' coupe for over a year, i can't really complain about the CVT anymore. Honda has done a great job with it and it does not leave me wishing for my old 5 speed auto back.

See less See more

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.