2006+ Honda Civic Forum banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
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....
 

·
LOUD NOISES!!!
Joined
·
5,369 Posts
Nice review .... so are you going for the 2.2?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,208 Posts
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
148 Posts
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!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
365 Posts
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
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
616 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
616 Posts
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
52 Posts
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!
 

·
Cockup Specialist
Joined
·
12,885 Posts
+ no weight penalty due to the 1.6 being so light.
So handling wont suffer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
616 Posts
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 :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
52 Posts
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!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
255 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
I'm going to testdrive the 1.6 tomorrow. Almost certain this will be my next car
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top