FK Honda Civic 1.8 i-vtec - anything else comparable?
Discussion
I'm looking for something as a bit of a family hack, so 4 doors, will do a fair few short runs but need to be able to do battle on the motorways... Must be a petrol, as the short journeys will kill a dpf, and with kids I'd not have a diesel without one.
Looking around, the triangular honda civic 1.8 i-vtec seems to be a good bang for buck, 140bhp,decent economy, 8 secs 0-60. I currently have a 330d, so having something that needs to be revved is "a good thing"!
All the rivals are either slower or more juicy, or cost more money. I've read that they have some shocking build quality on the interior, but with two kids they'll rip it all apart anyway, or anything that rattles will end up glued in place with food, vomit or poo... Or all three.
Anything else I should consider?
Looking around, the triangular honda civic 1.8 i-vtec seems to be a good bang for buck, 140bhp,decent economy, 8 secs 0-60. I currently have a 330d, so having something that needs to be revved is "a good thing"!
All the rivals are either slower or more juicy, or cost more money. I've read that they have some shocking build quality on the interior, but with two kids they'll rip it all apart anyway, or anything that rattles will end up glued in place with food, vomit or poo... Or all three.
Anything else I should consider?
I had one for a grand total of a month. Was actually a nice car apart from the f
king squeaky clutch which was the reason i got rid of it!
https://www.google.co.uk/#q=fk+civic+squeaky+clutc...
king squeaky clutch which was the reason i got rid of it! https://www.google.co.uk/#q=fk+civic+squeaky+clutc...
RemarkLima said:
And the squeaky clutch wasn't fixable? Sounds like it'd get right on your goat, but must be a fix somewhere??
It is a very common problem and i couldn't find a definite fix and got fed up with it. It was the most expensive car i had ever bought and i just traded it in as i couldn't be arsed trying to fix it.For what it's worth, I have a MY2011 Type S GT with the 1.8.
Can't fault build quality, running costs and reliability. Seems very well screwed together, an almost silent drive on most surfaces.
However, if I'm being completely honest, the suspension is borderline ridiculous. Very very stiff, you'll certainly feel every bump. This can be a good thing (when pushing) and a bad thing (when you can't be arsed and just want to pootle). After 10k miles, I'm currently swaying towards the negative on this if we're talking about an everyday hatchback.
One of the pluses is the engine note. For a mundane 4 pot hatchback, it makes a lovely noise when pushing it.
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...
The early Sport spec cars had HIDs as standard as well.
The early Sport spec cars had HIDs as standard as well.
Regarding the suspension,we've got a e91 m sport, with run flat tyres, so pretty used to a shockingly bad ride ;-)
Ali_T said:
Mazda 3? Comparable reliability, usually a little cheaper so you can get a better spec, more practical and don't look like ass.
I like mazda, had an RX7, but the 3, even in 2 litre sport guise is down on power, economy and with higher emissions more to tax... Plus I rather like the honda for being a bit different! Oceans said:
For what it's worth, I have a MY2011 Type S GT with the 1.8.
Can't fault build quality, running costs and reliability. Seems very well screwed together, an almost silent drive on most surfaces.
However, if I'm being completely honest, the suspension is borderline ridiculous. Very very stiff, you'll certainly feel every bump. This can be a good thing (when pushing) and a bad thing (when you can't be arsed and just want to pootle). After 10k miles, I'm currently swaying towards the negative on this if we're talking about an everyday hatchback.
One of the pluses is the engine note. For a mundane 4 pot hatchback, it makes a lovely noise when pushing it.
I have a Type S GT with the 1.8 also, I would expect as the OP wants a 5d car then it won't be a type S which should mean softer suspension. I don't mind the firmer ride myself but I know a lot of passengers have moaned about it. Can't fault build quality, running costs and reliability. Seems very well screwed together, an almost silent drive on most surfaces.
However, if I'm being completely honest, the suspension is borderline ridiculous. Very very stiff, you'll certainly feel every bump. This can be a good thing (when pushing) and a bad thing (when you can't be arsed and just want to pootle). After 10k miles, I'm currently swaying towards the negative on this if we're talking about an everyday hatchback.
One of the pluses is the engine note. For a mundane 4 pot hatchback, it makes a lovely noise when pushing it.
The GT spec gives you fog lights, panoramic roof, dual zone climate control and cruise control. Boot space is incredible as is the lay flat folding rear seats. The clutch does appear to be the weak point of the car but otherwise I can't really fault it and I still get people at work commenting on its looks they're also shocked when I direct them to the 57 plate as it just has a modern feel to it.
Would I buy another, no chance the turning circle is better on a super tanker, visibility is non existent at the front, rear and sides and to me the engine is good but slightly dull (agreed it does sound nice when it's getting pushed)
However I've had 5 years of trouble free motoring in an enjoyable car (bar servicing items and a fox through the front bumper) it just lacks character. I've now got it in my head I want an R26.R....
Deerfoot said:
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...
The early Sport spec cars had HIDs as standard as well.
The early Sport spec cars had HIDs as standard as well.
That's the spec I had. Yes, it had a squeaky clutch pedal - can't remember if it stopped, or I just stopped noticing it!
The Sport spec also had 17" wheels which I would avoid as the ride is the worst feature of the car IMHO. (I think smaller wheels would help.) Funnily enough, when I bought mine, I also looked at the Mazda 3 - in 2.0 Sport form. Yes, it's comparable, but it's slower and thirstier, so I went for the Honda.
Kept it for 8 years - it was a bit boring, but it was pretty reliable. It did suffer from a bent rear damper and sone steering bush wear - replaced FOC by Honda even though the car was (just) out of warranty - and the battery died around year 7, otherwise only items replaced were consumables.
Thanks all, pretty much as I'd thought... Ride is a bit firm, but engine and economy is pretty good and accurate. There's not too much that quite matches it for knocking around in.
I'm working towards a lotus elan +2 for the fun car, ideally with a tuned zetec and spyder chassis... But time will tell with that one ;-)
I'm working towards a lotus elan +2 for the fun car, ideally with a tuned zetec and spyder chassis... But time will tell with that one ;-)
RemarkLima said:
Thanks all, pretty much as I'd thought... Ride is a bit firm, but engine and economy is pretty good and accurate. There's not too much that quite matches it for knocking around in.
I'm working towards a lotus elan +2 for the fun car, ideally with a tuned zetec and spyder chassis... But time will tell with that one ;-)
Forgot to add my commute from Southampton to Sheffield via A roads and motorways with a heavy right foot around the A43 silverstone roundabouts and I return around 41-43mpg which is good going. Best I've had is around 51mpg but that was the most boring drive of my life but I wanted to see how well it did. I'm working towards a lotus elan +2 for the fun car, ideally with a tuned zetec and spyder chassis... But time will tell with that one ;-)
Frankthered said:
That's the spec I had. Yes, it had a squeaky clutch pedal - can't remember if it stopped, or I just stopped noticing it!
Kept it for 8 years - it was a bit boring, but it was pretty reliable. It did suffer from a bent rear damper and sone steering bush wear - replaced FOC by Honda even though the car was (just) out of warranty - and the battery died around year 7, otherwise only items replaced were consumables.
It does very well on fuel, I normally get low 40's from predominantly motorway journeys but have got over 50 before (Oxford to Sheffield on clear roads with speed varying between 50-75 due to roadworks).
The most surprising thing is boot space- with the fold flat rear seats I have recently got 6 dining room chairs in a single trip. The next weekend was an idea trip and managed a double bed, matress, large rug and a chest of drawers (all flat packed but still not exactly small).
Have it in mind, that you will have to rev the 1.8 vtec like mad to make it move. I used to regularly drive my dads 2007 Civic with that engine and although it might claim to do 0-60 in 8.6, hell of an effort to!
Although its a lovely smooth engine and very economical, I found it particularly flat on the motorway. Any gradient and quite often needed to change down. Any A-road overtake would require a drop to 3rd and red line it to pass anything safely.
The daft rear visability with that stupid glass spoiler was a pain as well!
Although its a lovely smooth engine and very economical, I found it particularly flat on the motorway. Any gradient and quite often needed to change down. Any A-road overtake would require a drop to 3rd and red line it to pass anything safely.
The daft rear visability with that stupid glass spoiler was a pain as well!
I have one of these, a 1.8 SI on a '10 plate.
40.1 mpg on the computer mixed driving, I think it is great, when it's being hustled it is quite surprising and makes a great noise when higher up the Rev range.
If you change up at the perfect point with the shift lights illuminated it's quite rewarding.
I'll echo what others have said about the ride, it's hard, on new or smooth roads it's lovely, bumpy roads are, well, bumpy! I don't mind the hard ride it feels quite compliant, the kids like the bumps.
Storage space is brilliant, the boot has an extra lower level to it and there's spaces elsewhere you wouldn't expect. Under the rear seats, the glovebox is massive and refrigerated by the aircon.
40.1 mpg on the computer mixed driving, I think it is great, when it's being hustled it is quite surprising and makes a great noise when higher up the Rev range.
If you change up at the perfect point with the shift lights illuminated it's quite rewarding.
I'll echo what others have said about the ride, it's hard, on new or smooth roads it's lovely, bumpy roads are, well, bumpy! I don't mind the hard ride it feels quite compliant, the kids like the bumps.
Storage space is brilliant, the boot has an extra lower level to it and there's spaces elsewhere you wouldn't expect. Under the rear seats, the glovebox is massive and refrigerated by the aircon.
I can only echo the comments made by others about both the ride quality and the need to rev the engine to get anywhere.
I spent quite a bit of time with these as they were fleet hire cars at one point for a company I used to work for. Most of my time spent driving them was on the motorway and on Cumbrian A/B roads and personally I didn‘t get on with them.
Plus points:
Solid and well-built. Comfortable on the motorway. Big boot and lots of front and rear leg space. Loved the fast, precise steering even if it was electrically assisted. Economical for a car of its size I suppose.
Negative points:
Overly firm ride - also made the car very skittish when trying to make progress on uneven roads. Thrashy engine coupled with gearing that was far too long. Seemed to take forever to reach the red line. Overtaking was hard work, often needing to drop two gears to get anywhere. Definitely didn‘t feel as fast as the manufacturers claimed! Rear visibility hindered by the spoiler. For a man of my height, in my most comfortable driving position, the steering wheel rim obscured the speedo - obviously not ideal.
The hire company replaced them with Kia C‘eeds of the 1.6 variety. Although not as comfortable, or as well- built, or as ‘fast‘, they were far more fun to drive on country roads. Eager engine, light-footed, predictable handling. I enjoyed these a lot more, although in all honesty, of the two the Civic would be the one I would most likely own.
I spent quite a bit of time with these as they were fleet hire cars at one point for a company I used to work for. Most of my time spent driving them was on the motorway and on Cumbrian A/B roads and personally I didn‘t get on with them.
Plus points:
Solid and well-built. Comfortable on the motorway. Big boot and lots of front and rear leg space. Loved the fast, precise steering even if it was electrically assisted. Economical for a car of its size I suppose.
Negative points:
Overly firm ride - also made the car very skittish when trying to make progress on uneven roads. Thrashy engine coupled with gearing that was far too long. Seemed to take forever to reach the red line. Overtaking was hard work, often needing to drop two gears to get anywhere. Definitely didn‘t feel as fast as the manufacturers claimed! Rear visibility hindered by the spoiler. For a man of my height, in my most comfortable driving position, the steering wheel rim obscured the speedo - obviously not ideal.
The hire company replaced them with Kia C‘eeds of the 1.6 variety. Although not as comfortable, or as well- built, or as ‘fast‘, they were far more fun to drive on country roads. Eager engine, light-footed, predictable handling. I enjoyed these a lot more, although in all honesty, of the two the Civic would be the one I would most likely own.
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff