Honda Claims That Civic Si Performance Was Intentionally Compromised Because Buyer's Expect 200,000 Mile Durability

20 years ago, my Honda CRX Si had 195 H.P. Don't much difference to the new Si except the new one is much heavier.

Finally a turbo in a Si? Kinda late to the party don't ya think?

VW GTI has been turbocharged since 2003. So much for Honda engineering. First a R8 clone, now a GTI clone. You know what they say - monkey see, monkey do!

You apparently missed the point of this article. Honda is not going to put an engine in the market unless it will last 200,000 miles. GTI is not going to run trouble free for 200,000 miles. So it took this long for Honda to get 200,000 trouble free miles from a turbo. Sounds about right.

The mistake is that the turbo is a 1.5T when it should be a 2.0T.

so, by their reasoing, if you want a performance car... buy something else?

Precisely.

So what's the point of the Si then?

Why would anyone bother with the SI besides the fact that it is hideous it pales in comparison to the performance of the GTI or heck even the Focus ST

Because the VW - especially the higher power turbo ones - are notoriously unreliable - and the Focus is small inside and does not hold its value in the USA.

The Focus ST holds its value just fine.

Ford does that with every car, it's the only way they know how to sell them and they have conditioned the public to expect it. Playing games...

@Aspy11 I'll assume your nickname indicates that you have Asperger's Syndrome--nothing wrong with that...we're all here to give support--but the symptoms are showing.

The Focus ST has a much higher resale value than a regular Focus. Ford is NOT piling money onto the hood of the ST.

Then @fifytsix You should go buy one instantly. $18K is about $10K under a typical sticker price, so you should definitely go to a Ford dealer that will cash rape themselves that way.

I think the real reason with the 1.5 turbo is that it is already in a bunch of Civics and CRV. It might have been cheaper to certify than the turbo 2. Once the type R is out and selling Honda might do a mid line model much like the Subaru WRX and STI.Staying with the 1.5 probably does help keep the price of the SI under 25 grand

The MK7 GTI's have exceptional reliability in fact even the later MK6 models were quite good.. this idea that VW's arent reliable is a thing of the past

Nope. You're wrong. The paddle shifter is especially fragile and can grenade itself well before 75K with spirited driving.

In general DCT, PDK, DSG, and the other fake automatics grenade themselves at an alarming rate.

I like the fact that at least you can only get it with a manual transmission. I really believe there is going to be a mid line hatchback 4dr below the type R. Further I believe it will have a detuned 2.0 from the R with about 240 to 250 HP. That may be why Honda deliberately choose to put the 1.5 in the SI. The 1.5 is a small engine and putting a lot of power into it might decrease longevity. You notice from Hyundai/Kia that their 1.6 puts out 201 HP. Even Nissan with their Juke AWD has a maximum power of 215 HP in the AWD auto. he question is where in the market are you seeing significant higher horsepower engines under 2 liters. Only one that I know of. The 1.75 engine from the Alfa 4C puts out 237HP. So there must be some basic engineering knowledge about how much HP you can put into an under 2 liter turbo engine and achieve an acceptable longevity rating.

@Aspergers11 Your illogic is on parade once again. It makes NO DIFFERENCE what the Civic's hp/l figure is, the Si simply is not in the hunt for power.