Tried all three engines today. - Civinfo
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 25 (permalink) Old 23rd March 2013, 22:45 Thread Starter
 
Join Date: 24th February 2013
Location: Sweden SE
Posts: 18
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
iTrader: (0)
Tried all three engines today.

So i was at the dealer for a final decision on what car to buy and i was kindly offered to drive first the 1.6 then the 1.8 and last, the 2.2. Some views from a Honda newbie below.

The 1.6 is a great engine, and as I am driving 125 miles a day 4 days a week the most sensible choice. Great torque, very low fuel consumption (reached 60 mpg doing 75 on the highway) and light and nimble. The overall sound level with this car is at about the same level as the others. The sound system noise canceling doesn't seem to add much though, maybe it had been louder then the other two without it, i dont know. In general the civic is certainly not the the quietest car in the c-segment. Part of this might be because the Hondas usually are fitted with 17inch alloys as standard when test driving?

Anyway,

The 1.8 has alot going for it. First of all, Honda diesels are priced high and therefore the lower initial cost and running cost of a petrol might be hard to gain back solely on lower fuel costs from a diesel.

It is also dead silent engine wise but has a very pleasing sound when revved and is quick enough for me. It should also be extremely reliable i have read. Nimble as well.

So then the 2.2. It has a more lower frequency humming than the 1.6 but overall is louder maybe. And then when you rev it, the sound of what i believe is the whistle from the turbo together with the growling of this large engine in this small car is just charming. Im not used to sports cars and the 8.5 sec figure is not that high but man this car feels quick. At high revs it looses out to the petrol of course but its still much better than the smaller diesel. I also think i prefer this gearbox to the 1.6s.

Finally, i find the 2.2 very very expensive.

So, in summary, for me it feels like the 1.6 you choose with your brain but the 2.2 you choose with your heart. The 1.8 had been my pick if was driving mostly around town but since i do mostly high way miles the lower revs and lower fuel consumption make me go for a diesel. The 2.2 without a doubt.

So now the waiting begin, i really do not love the Honda way of production....
gustav99 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 25 (permalink) Old 24th March 2013, 04:06
Super Moderator
 
Grayfox's Avatar
 
Car: '11 Impreza R Special
Join Date: 1st February 2012
Location: NSW, Australia AU
Posts: 7,124
Thanks: 93
Thanked 1,011 Times in 891 Posts
iTrader: (0)
Eco display Eco display
Garage
4 engines mate,

1.3 petrol
1.6 diesel
1.8 petrol
2.2 diesel
Grayfox is offline  
post #3 of 25 (permalink) Old 24th March 2013, 10:51
LOUD NOISES!!!
 
gadgetman68's Avatar
 
Car: 60 FN2 M200
Join Date: 5th February 2009
Location: Derbyshire, UK ENGLAND
Posts: 5,369
Thanks: 990
Thanked 765 Times in 624 Posts
iTrader: (6)
Nice review .... so are you going for the 2.2?
gadgetman68 is offline  
 
post #4 of 25 (permalink) Old 24th March 2013, 18:57
 
conlano's Avatar
 
Car: 2012 2.2 i-DTEC EX, Silver
Join Date: 25th September 2012
Location: Dublin, IRELAND IE
Posts: 3
Thanks: 4
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
iTrader: (0)
I enjoy the 2.2 diesel and hope you do too. It's very responsive across the range and believe it or not in my experience it's also economical. Enjoy.
conlano is offline  
post #5 of 25 (permalink) Old 26th March 2013, 20:34
Supporter
 
Stef's Avatar
 
Car: 13 CRV / 14 Accord / 04 S2K
Join Date: 14th October 2006
Location: Belgium BE
Posts: 1,209
Thanks: 62
Thanked 127 Times in 81 Posts
iTrader: (0)
Stef is offline  
post #6 of 25 (permalink) Old 26th March 2013, 21:42 Thread Starter
** Thread starter **
 
Join Date: 24th February 2013
Location: Sweden SE
Posts: 18
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
iTrader: (0)
Yes i put an order in for an 2.2

Thanks for the comparison table. Interesting read.
gustav99 is offline  
post #7 of 25 (permalink) Old 26th March 2013, 22:48
Supporter
 
Stef's Avatar
 
Car: 13 CRV / 14 Accord / 04 S2K
Join Date: 14th October 2006
Location: Belgium BE
Posts: 1,209
Thanks: 62
Thanked 127 Times in 81 Posts
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gustav99 View Post
Yes i put an order in for an 2.2

Thanks for the comparison table. Interesting read.
Congrats! The 2.2 would also be my choice.
Stef is offline  
post #8 of 25 (permalink) Old 27th March 2013, 21:23
Supporter
 
Rustyfrog's Avatar
 
Car: 2012 EX 2.2 i-dtec, white
Join Date: 24th January 2013
Location: Leyland ENGLAND
Posts: 148
Thanks: 3
Thanked 16 Times in 15 Posts
iTrader: (0)
Fairly new to both the forum and my Civic 2.2.

I enjoy the performance offered by the 2.2 and am willing to forgive it for not being as frugal as the new 1.6 diesel.

Its worth it!
Rustyfrog is offline  
post #9 of 25 (permalink) Old 27th March 2013, 22:05
 
Car: Polished Metal 2.2 ES
Join Date: 29th May 2010
Location: Hampshire ENGLAND
Posts: 34
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
iTrader: (0)
Well i have traded in my 3 year old type s with 90000 on the clock for a 2.2 diesel have i done the right thing? Frugality isnt an issue, performance seemed good when i drove it.
gazzaa10 is offline  
post #10 of 25 (permalink) Old 28th March 2013, 09:24
Supporter
 
Alwaysblack's Avatar
 
Car: 2012 2.2 EX GT Crystal Black
Join Date: 21st September 2006
Location: S E London / Kent ENGLAND
Posts: 365
Thanks: 35
Thanked 27 Times in 22 Posts
iTrader: (0)
I had a Type R GT for nearly 5 years. Bought brand new in 2007, and have stated on here many times that it was the best value for money car I ever owned.

Early retirement and advancing years I decided on a change. Something a little more luxurious, comfortable and frugal. I didn't really want to change brand or model. I had 3 previous Civics and 13 years trouble free motoring.

I also believe that if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The 1.6 wasn't out so really it was either, the 2.2 or 1.8.

I had never owned a diesel before and was a bit reluctant at first, but it was my son who said that coming from a Type R you will forever be comparing and the petrol will just not do it!

I must admit, I was really surprised when I first drove the 2.2. Power delivery, acceleration and a satisfactory "push in the back" under firm throttle, were all welcoming, but the car was just so smooth and quiet.

Had it coming up to a year now and really pleased.

Hopefully you will be too.

Good Luck
Alwaysblack is offline  
post #11 of 25 (permalink) Old 28th March 2013, 23:36
 
Car: Polished Metal 2.2 ES
Join Date: 29th May 2010
Location: Hampshire ENGLAND
Posts: 34
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
iTrader: (0)
Thanks Alwaysblack, i am getting it Sat in polished metal.
gazzaa10 is offline  
post #12 of 25 (permalink) Old 29th March 2013, 23:58
 
gloom's Avatar
 
Car: 2012 Civic 1.8, White Pearl
Join Date: 11th February 2010
Location: Stockholm, SE SE
Posts: 619
Thanks: 11
Thanked 45 Times in 38 Posts
iTrader: (0)
Smooth and quiet.. not compared to the petrol by miles.
Its good that you like your diesel but its nowhere close to smooth as the 1.8 sorry. Had to be said.
gloom is offline  
post #13 of 25 (permalink) Old 30th March 2013, 11:59
 
Car: 2012 1.8 Sport, Silver
Join Date: 24th September 2012
Location: Turin IT
Posts: 106
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
iTrader: (0)
I admit the the 1.8 is a great engine but it lacks of torque at lower rpms. Sometimes the torque of a diesel engine it miss me or probably I have to learn again how to drive a petrol car and use gearbox more often.
darkolo is offline  
post #14 of 25 (permalink) Old 30th March 2013, 13:28
 
gloom's Avatar
 
Car: 2012 Civic 1.8, White Pearl
Join Date: 11th February 2010
Location: Stockholm, SE SE
Posts: 619
Thanks: 11
Thanked 45 Times in 38 Posts
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkolo View Post
I admit the the 1.8 is a great engine but it lacks of torque at lower rpms. Sometimes the torque of a diesel engine it miss me or probably I have to learn again how to drive a petrol car and use gearbox more often.
Yes.
Remember the petrol on paper only short of 7 or so horse power but naturally it needs to be reved higher.
gloom is offline  
post #15 of 25 (permalink) Old 30th March 2013, 16:21
Supporter
 
DreamerDave's Avatar
 
Car: Civic ES 1.6 iDTEC - Milano
Join Date: 16th December 2007
Location: East Yorkshire, UK ENGLAND
Posts: 52
Thanks: 14
Thanked 14 Times in 7 Posts
iTrader: (0)
I prefer petrol engines personally and the Honda petrols are great because they are designed to rev. But a +30mpg advantage and the fact the 1.6 does actually spin so freely like a petrol that it really impressed and the low down torque, whilst not that of a 2.2, is very welcome.

I would say that you can genuinely think of the 1.6 as a cross between the 1.8 and the 2.2 combining a 'free revving' petrol engine characteristic with frugality of a diesel. It's very Honda if you like!
DreamerDave is offline  
post #16 of 25 (permalink) Old 30th March 2013, 17:13
Cockup Specialist
 
Relic's Avatar
 
Car: 2007 2.2 Type 'S' GT, Bronze
Join Date: 31st August 2009
Location: uk ENGLAND
Posts: 12,885
Thanks: 791
Thanked 1,690 Times in 1,437 Posts
iTrader: (0)
+ no weight penalty due to the 1.6 being so light.
So handling wont suffer.



Relic is offline  
post #17 of 25 (permalink) Old 30th March 2013, 23:24
 
gloom's Avatar
 
Car: 2012 Civic 1.8, White Pearl
Join Date: 11th February 2010
Location: Stockholm, SE SE
Posts: 619
Thanks: 11
Thanked 45 Times in 38 Posts
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamerDave View Post
I prefer petrol engines personally and the Honda petrols are great because they are designed to rev. But a +30mpg advantage and the fact the 1.6 does actually spin so freely like a petrol that it really impressed and the low down torque, whilst not that of a 2.2, is very welcome.

I would say that you can genuinely think of the 1.6 as a cross between the 1.8 and the 2.2 combining a 'free revving' petrol engine characteristic with frugality of a diesel. It's very Honda if you like!
You are probably correct but I have only tried the 2.2 not the brand new 1.6.
The 1.6 is still 2000-3000 more expensive then the 1.8 and still less powerful..
I got 50mpg on my last trip mostly motorway 60-70mph (no stress eco mode). Probably not close to the 1.6 but good enough for me atleast
gloom is offline  
post #18 of 25 (permalink) Old 31st March 2013, 01:02
Supporter
 
DreamerDave's Avatar
 
Car: Civic ES 1.6 iDTEC - Milano
Join Date: 16th December 2007
Location: East Yorkshire, UK ENGLAND
Posts: 52
Thanks: 14
Thanked 14 Times in 7 Posts
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gloom View Post
I got 50mpg on my last trip mostly motorway 60-70mph (no stress eco mode). Probably not close to the 1.6 but good enough for me atleast
That's impressive from the 1.8.
I reckon that would be better than a new ecoboost unit in the Ford's in real world motoring.
When you actually look at peoples real world fuel returns the 1.8 is impressive and will beat many manufacturers newer petrol units on cubic capacity/power/mpg/emission ratios.

I admire Ford's investment in the 1.0 ecoboost but i drove both 1.0 and 1.6 units in the focus and guess what...the 1.6 was more efficient in reality...that 1.0 has to work like hell...

i suspect the 1.8 VTEC would beat them both to be perfectly honest...but then again its fun revving the honda!!

I think all 4 current civic engines are bl%^$dy good to be honest!
DreamerDave is offline  
post #19 of 25 (permalink) Old 3rd April 2013, 14:27
Supporter
 
Honciv's Avatar
 
Car: 2012 1.8 EX, Black
Join Date: 19th December 2012
Posts: 255
Thanks: 69
Thanked 21 Times in 17 Posts
iTrader: (0)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by gloom View Post
You are probably correct but I have only tried the 2.2 not the brand new 1.6.
The 1.6 is still 2000-3000 more expensive then the 1.8 and still less powerful..
I got 50mpg on my last trip mostly motorway 60-70mph (no stress eco mode). Probably not close to the 1.6 but good enough for me atleast
Yep, I drove 400 motorway miles over the weekend and averaged just over 50mpg. Similarly drove between 60-70 and kept it in Eco mode (found it very boring if i'm honest), but delighted with the efficiency.
Honciv is offline  
post #20 of 25 (permalink) Old 5th April 2013, 10:08
 
Santtu Pikkarainen's Avatar
 
Car: 13 1.6 iDTEC Milano Red
Join Date: 18th February 2009
Location: Ermelo, NL NL
Posts: 181
Thanks: 2
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
iTrader: (0)
I'm going to testdrive the 1.6 tomorrow. Almost certain this will be my next car
Santtu Pikkarainen is offline  
Reply

  Civinfo > 9th Generation Euro Honda Civic (2012 - 2016) > General Discussion (9G)

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Civinfo forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Your User Name is the name that appears by all your posts on the forum, and so should not be your email address.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Choices Difference in 2.2 i-cdti engines? fatwelshboy Engines and Transmission (8G) 4 6th December 2012 20:12
ep3 fn2 same engines? geemac Type-R 20 23rd June 2012 18:34
upgrades on engines nelson_moreira General Discussion (8G) 9 8th July 2011 12:07
Current Tdi engines rossharrison General Discussion (8G) 20 3rd February 2011 10:57

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome