My Honda Civic Company Car Opt Out

[CatherineJ]

Yes I guess it is lacking in the torque dept somewhat, although on the level it chugs along in 6th at 35/40, which is a new one to me.

[AB]

I had no idea that the Type S came in 1.4 guise. I always assumed that the Type S was the 2.0 litre that sat beneath the Type R - well they say that assume makes an ass out of u and me - or not in this case.

[CatherineJ]

The Type S up until spring came as a 1.8 Vtec and a 2.2 Diesel. You had the choice of a Type S or a Type S GT model.

As part of the 2009 facelift they also launched a new 1.4 Vtec engine and added it to the Type S. I "think" but I could be wrong it's the most powerful 1.4 non turbo engine you can currently get, most on the market are around the 80/85 bhp mark.

Edited by CatherineJ on Tuesday 15th September 17:41

[Waugh-terfall]

I always thought the same as AB, until one nearby started up and sounded like a diesel

CatherineJ said:

The Type S up until spring came as a 1.8 Vtec and a 2.2 Diesel. You had the choice of a Type S or a Type S GT model.

As part of the 2009 facelift they also launched a new 1.4 Vtec engine and added it to the Type S. I "think" but I could be wrong it's the most powerful 1.4 engine you can currently get, most on the market are around the 80/85 bhp mark.

Mine's from 2003 and has 100bhp

[CatherineJ]

Ok let me rephrase, in current production.

[va1o]

CatherineJ said:

Ok let me rephrase, in current production.

Its one of the best but not quite 'the best'. The Toyota 1.33 matches it for bhp and has marginally more torque.

[CatherineJ]

That's pretty good from a 1.3 engine.

I did think about a 1.6 Auris TR, but after driving a 180 bhp diesel earlier in the year. There was just something about it that I really didn't like. I'm not sure if it was the orange/yellow instruments making the cabin a bit garish.

Edited by CatherineJ on Tuesday 15th September 18:45

[Waugh-terfall]

va1o said:

CatherineJ said:

Ok let me rephrase, in current production.

Its one of the best but not quite 'the best'. The Toyota 1.33 matches it for bhp and has marginally more torque.

Don't Renault do a 1.1 Turbo with 100bhp, marketed as the 1.2TCE or something?

Edited by Waugh-terfall on Tuesday 15th September 19:11

[CatherineJ]

Yes although I was talking about non turbo cars. The 1.2 TCE engine is in the Clio and possibly in the Twingo. In the Megane the smallest engine is a 1.6 with 100 bhp.

VAG also have a 1.4 TSI engine with a turbo and supercharger that pumps out over 120 horses. My second choice car was a Skoda Octavia with that engine but there were no guarantees on delivery dates.

Edited by CatherineJ on Tuesday 15th September 20:21

[Waugh-terfall]

CatherineJ said:

Yes although I was talking about non turbo cars. The 1.2 TCE engine is in the Clio and possibly in the Twingo. In the Megane the smallest engine is a 1.6 with 100 bhp.

VAG also have a 1.4 TSI engine with a turbo and supercharger that pumps out over 120 horses. My second choice car was a Skoda Octavia with that engine but there were no guarantees on delivery dates.

Edited by CatherineJ on Tuesday 15th September 20:21

The new Meganes 1.6 is only 100bhp? That's a bit stingy of them...
Skoda never got the Twin-Charged 1.4, that was only available in 140bhp or 170bhp guise in the VW Golf, the 1.4TFSI unit in the Skoda is just Turbocharged.
Do you think you made the right choice? Or are there one or two lingering doubts Civic vs Octy?

[va1o]

Waugh-terfall said:

Skoda never got the Twin-Charged 1.4, that was only available in 140bhp or 170bhp guise in the VW Golf, the 1.4TFSI unit in the Skoda is just Turbocharged.

VW, Seat and Skoda all brand the 1.4 as the TSI, the lower powered 122 versions have just a turbocharger and the higher powered 150/160/170/180 versions are twincharged. VW and Seat are the only brands currently offering the twincharged version, Skoda just do the 122 turbo.

Waugh-terfall said:

The new Meganes 1.6 is only 100bhp? That's a bit stingy of them...

I think they now offer the 1.6 in two states of output (100 and 110?) rather than having sepearate 1.4 and 1.6 engines like before.

Edited by va1o on Tuesday 15th September 21:09

[CatherineJ]

No i'm glad I didn't go for the Octavia. The dealers were trying to push the diesel car rather than the petrol. They couldn't give a delivery date on the car. There were also quite a few spec bits on the Civc that I decided were more important so in the end it was a no brainer for me. Oh and the fact that the lovely dealers tell you it's a twin charged engine isn't that great really, is it. I must admit I didn't study the brochure that much.

Edited by CatherineJ on Tuesday 15th September 22:26

[CatherineJ]

va1o said:

Waugh-terfall said:

Skoda never got the Twin-Charged 1.4, that was only available in 140bhp or 170bhp guise in the VW Golf, the 1.4TFSI unit in the Skoda is just Turbocharged.

VW, Seat and Skoda all brand the 1.4 as the TSI, the lower powered 122 versions have just a turbocharger and the higher powered 150/160/170/180 versions are twincharged. VW and Seat are the only brands currently offering the twincharged version, Skoda just do the 122 turbo.

Waugh-terfall said:

The new Meganes 1.6 is only 100bhp? That's a bit stingy of them...

I think they now offer the 1.6 in two states of output (100 and 110?) rather than having sepearate 1.4 and 1.6 engines like before.

Edited by va1o on Tuesday 15th September 21:09

Yes I think that's what it is. Ford do something similar with the 1.6, I noticed they have one producing 100 and others producing more. My 2003 Focus had 115 from memory and at the time that was all you could get.

Edited by CatherineJ on Tuesday 15th September 22:24

[Waugh-terfall]

CatherineJ said:

No i'm glad I didn't go for the Octavia. The dealers were trying to push the diesel car rather than the petrol. They couldn't give a delivery date on the car. There were also quite a few spec bits on the Civc that I decided were more important so in the end it was a no brainer for me. Oh and the fact that the lovely dealers tell you it's a twin charged engine isn't that great really, is it. I must admit I didn't study the brochure that much.

Edited by CatherineJ on Tuesday 15th September 22:26

Whilst the Octavia is definately good value for money and offers up the more grunty engine the Civic, The quirky Jap just looks so much cooler and for slightly less money no? I'd guess that the Octavias you were thinking of were rep-spec style-wise where as the Civic looks properly sporty and rather special

[CatherineJ]

The Octavia would have been an SE, so sort of bottom middle of the range.

I think your right, the Civic is a little bit unique as hatchback's go.

[Waugh-terfall]

CatherineJ said:

The Octavia would have been an SE, so sort of bottom middle of the range.

I think your right, the Civic is a little bit unique as hatchback's go.

That's why I chose the Megane over a Polo Twist or a Golf SE, though I think maybe a Focus Zetec would have been better in the long run...