Kreb wrote:
RANT ON: If all you can say about a car is that it's ugly (or beautiful), perhaps you should keep it to yourself. There are words that you can use, comparisons that you can make, examples that you can give, or other ways of illustrating your point. All these things create a meaningful argument. Here are examples of observations with some context, that can be the basis for a healthy debate:"The excessive front overhang gives it awkward proportions", "I prefer the clean body styles of the 1990s such as the CRX or FD RX7", "The overwrought tailights are a worn out design trend", "It's girth is out of keeping with the tradition of that model". By comparison, there are such mouth-breathing phrases as "That sure is ugly" or that classic "I need to be by myself for a minute" which is kind of disgusting, if it means what I think it does.
So now that I've exhibited my design-snobbery, my take on this car is that it is handsomely proportioned, although a bit large for what I expect from a Civic. The detailing is overwrought, but I don't mind that. In a sense it's like the 1950s-to-early 60s attraction to extraneous filigree, but in a more integrated way. All those baroque design elements give me something to consider as I sit next to one in traffic. I don't want one, but if my wife did I'd try to talk her into a Mazda3, and relent if she insisted.
If I say "the front overhang is too large and the proportions are all wrong," you can't argue those points any more than if I said "it looks stupid." There is no discussion or "meaningful argument" when it comes to cosmetic features or appearance of a car. You can't say "no, the front overhang is perfect and the proportions are great" and have me magically change my mind.
I simply think that the back end of the car looks ugly. There is nothing to compare it to (except the Civic sedan, which looks equally ugly). I don't know what "design language" is being used here. Would it make you feel better if I make the comparison to "something that someone at Pep Boys accessories department" designed? The rear end is just unattractive in its entirety. I don't see any consistent design language there other than "let's slap on a bunch of panels an mesh things because that would look rad!" in my opinion.
I think these actually look worse in person, which is sorta hard to imagine. Busy doesn't even begin to describe the back.
But the worst part IMHO is that, while it is a hatch, the difference between the hatch and the sedan is pretty small. It really just looks like they changed where the trunk is hinged, and that's about it.
Kreb wrote:
"...or that classic "I need to be by myself for a minute" which is kind of disgusting, if it means what I think it does."
That one always kind of bothered me too. So gross.
Yes, our test car had a real six-speed manual gearbox. It felt good.
The parking brake is electronic, but that's becoming standard with everyone. You get used to it after a few uses. It's not a deal-breaker.
Can I get one with two less doors?
Wow that's ugly. I hope it's cheap. Or else just buy a GTI and be an adult.
The robotron styling needs to be killed with fire.
It must really be aimed at the 20 somthing crowd.
In my new attempts to be positive, I'll say the blacking out of that hideous grill that is canted the wrong direction helps. 6-speed available from the factory is good. Turbo'd engine is good. So, this is a second tier to a type-R? That's good. I saw a base model in puke green up close recently. It was an assault on the senses-in a good way.
I like it a lot. Ya it's weird looking but it's got the right stuff. Maybe Honda is making a come back? Years ago I was a Honda guy and I could see using that as a DD with no problem. The last thing I want to be in is another generic blob.
Brian
MegaDork
2/3/17 7:07 a.m.
I would go for the coupe or a 3 door if they made it. As much as I enjoy standard, I would like to see how well the turbo and CVT play together, being an outlier who doesn't hate CVT with a passion.
I do like how Honda continues to offer a mid level sport trim short of the Si and upcoming Type R. My '09(8.5 gen) is an LX-Sport. It has a lip spoiler, alloys, a special interior(microfiber/mesh/leather wrapped wheel) and I believe an improved rear suspension(original aggressive camber and a rear bar) over a regular LX.
Over all I'm liking the styling of this generation of civic, but I would like to the "aggressive" styling features turned down from 11 back to 7 or 8.
Not that really matters what I think, because I won't be buying one, at least not new from the dealer.
From what I have read so far, the turbo motor responds very well to some basic mods. Chip, intake and exhaust will get you close to 190hp/180tq at the wheels. That aint too shabby.
I really like the looks of the car, but I like most any hatchback or wagon, so there's that.
I love Hondas, but I sure wish they'd build something that has low end torque. Most turbo 4s make gobs of torque at low rpms, and from the numbers it looks like this one is still a screamer.
dean1484 wrote:
The robotron styling needs to be killed with fire.
It must really be aimed at the 20 somthing crowd.
That's my guess as to why they have gone nuts with the Civic styling, but kept the Accord rather toned down.
pinchvalve wrote:
From what I have read so far, the turbo motor responds very well to some basic mods. Chip, intake and exhaust will get you close to 190hp/180tq at the wheels. That aint too shabby.
Wait, that massive, over-angular monster isn't making that to start with? The Korean twins make 240/220 with a tune only to the front wheels, are much less ugly and not as heavy.
AMC designs of the 70s and 80s are starting to look understated and elegant.
I would prefer the front end didn't look so much like the Accord Crosstour. Surprisingly I don't hate the rear (I don't love it either though).
I'll probably test drive one of these in 4-8 years when I'm looking for a new car again.
Coldsnap wrote:
Nick (Bo) Comstock wrote:
Can I get one with two less doors?
Yes, veloster :P
That only has ONE less door
pointofdeparture wrote:
Coldsnap wrote:
Nick (Bo) Comstock wrote:
Can I get one with two less doors?
Yes, veloster :P
That only has ONE less door
Depends which side of the car you stand on.
NickD
SuperDork
2/5/17 7:26 a.m.
MadScientistMatt wrote:
dean1484 wrote:
The robotron styling needs to be killed with fire.
It must really be aimed at the 20 somthing crowd.
That's my guess as to why they have gone nuts with the Civic styling, but kept the Accord rather toned down.
Hey, I'm in my 20s and I hate the styling on this thing. I'd much rather have the 8th-gen sedan. That was smooth futuristic styling without being overwrought (Except maybe the Cylon dashboard)
NorseDave wrote:
I think these actually look worse in person, which is sorta hard to imagine. Busy doesn't even begin to describe the back.
But the worst part IMHO is that, while it is a hatch, the difference between the hatch and the sedan is pretty small. It really just looks like they changed where the trunk is hinged, and that's about it.
That's where I'm at too. It's a hatch but you can't really fit anything big or bulky in there. Even with the other hatches like the focus, cruze... the back is too sloped and opening too small to really be worthwhile. I fit a full size washing machine in my 03 zx3. The fit I'd really the only hatchback worth it for the the space and not just looks in my opinion. And like previously said the current one is pretty weird looking
In reply to nepa03focus:
I really wish Honda would just make a goddamn Fit Si already. That platform would be incredible even with the base Civic's 2.0 to replace the 1.5. That would be a true successor to the Si cars of yore...
SilverFleet wrote:
I'm sorta interested in these. The styling is weird, but Japanese cars are supposed to be weird. I'm waiting on the next Civic Si though.
I'm using a Fit as a carry-all car. But I'm really waiting for another CRX Si! When my '85 was totaled, not my fault, it was a truly sad day.
