I don't care that it has 4 doors. I care that it's hideous looking. Just like I don't care that the Civic Type R is the best performing hot hatch. It's hideous looking and I don't want to own one.
I don't care that it has 4 doors. I care that it's hideous looking. Just like I don't care that the Civic Type R is the best performing hot hatch. It's hideous looking and I don't want to own one.
bobzilla said:In reply to volvoclearinghouse :
Both our rio's made 138hp with 1.6L, the 2.0L GDI in the Forte was 171hp. Both would easily get 35+mpg and made good power in a usable range.
Yeah, but the 1.6T gets the same mileage with a ton more power on tap across the board.
nocones said:In reply to bobzilla / volvoclearinhouse:
I do love the way the 1.6T in my Elantra drives though. LOW end torque and doesn't completely fall on it's face at the high end. A little tiny bit of delay on throttle application but overall I am pleased with the fuel economy improvements over a similar power curve V6 would offer. I get 30-32 with upwards of 35 on highway trips on 87 octane. Apparently I'm learning 91 would bump driveability and power up some so I will try that next tank.
I did drive a Civic and it was not as good as the Hyundai.
But yes if you are a fan of the traditional 4cyl NA powerband the new Turbo motors are something different and would be undesireable.
That was pretty much the reason I bought the Mazda, it was the only option available with a decently punchy N/A and a stick, that got pretty good fuel economy. Mine's the 2.0 Skyactive, about 155 HP, and over the last 40,000 miles I've averaged a tick under 37 mpg. The 2.5 liter engine, 180+ HP, was an option, but at the time I didn't feel like paying for the extra power. But I hear they still get 34-35 mpg with the stick, pretty respectable.
Honda knows how to make a spectacular N/A 4 cylinder (*cough* S2000 *cough*) but I feel like we're re-living the 1980's now where everyone's got to have TUBRO POWAH!! in everything. I don't mind having turbos as an option, but they've taken away the option of _not_ having a turbo, along with the attendant increased weight, maintenance, complexity, and cost.
To some degree this fixes the odd front fascia of the Civic. Otherwise it's the same car, right?
Either Civic hatch with the non-turbo motor and a manual trans, or find the money for a Golf GTI. I think it's obvious that Honda knows this isn't that attractive or they wouldn't have put that Pep Boys decal across the doors.
Am I missing something about the original Integra? Wasn't it basically just a slightly nicer Civic? I don't quite understand why it's on such a pedestal.
As far as the "every car looks the same" argument... Yeah, cars from similar times look similar. There are only so many ways to make the most aerodynamic, safest, cheapest car possible with current manufacturing technologies, laws, and consumer demands.
2001 Integra:
2001 Ford:
2001 Kia:
2001 Hyundai:
Tom, I don't think those images are supporting your position.
In reply to ProDarwin :
Agreed. The Integra was special because it got new engines and transmissions than the lowly civic. Suspension tuning, Styling, engines, transmissions were all new. 4 wheel disc brakes were standard (and not even available for many years of the civic). They may have started at the same place,but they went completely different directions.
Real Time raced the Integra for years, even after the RSX was released (turd chassis, great motor). They didn't race a civic.
In reply to nocones :
In regards to the fuel, I've learned the NA 1.6 Gamma likes 91/93 much much much better. Yes, it runs ok on 87. It will still get 37mpg mixed driving. But throw in 93.... its quicker, smoother and happier and close to knocking on the 40's for my mixed driving.
It will be interesting to find out how many body panels are shared between this new Integra and the new Civic. I don't think any bodywork was shared between the 90's Integra and Civics. This looks like a grill and lights change for the most part.
I think what's driving the general 'meh' towards this is that the Civic this car is based on is a really good appliance coupled with the lack of changes to make an Integra out of that car. The Integra's of old weren't nearly so badge engineered as this car looks to be.
My thoughts on the new Integra:
-It's better than the outgoing ILX, I think.
-It doesn't look as good as the old Integra or RSX IMHO. Actually, I think the Civic looks better. Yellow is not it's color.
-Shared drivetrain with the Si is ok for a base model, but I was hoping for at least AWD as an option to set it apart.
-I'm happy a manual trans is part of the equation.
It will be a good car, but it's not setting my heart on fire. A solid "MEH" from me.
pres589 (djronnebaum) said:It will be interesting to find out how many body panels are shared between this new Integra and the new Civic. I don't think any bodywork was shared between the 90's Integra and Civics. This looks like a grill and lights change for the most part.
I think what's driving the general 'meh' towards this is that the Civic this car is based on is a really good appliance coupled with the lack of changes to make an Integra out of that car. The Integra's of old weren't nearly so badge engineered as this car looks to be.
all of this. The Integra should be special. Not just a nicer ILX/Civic.
The biggest problem with it, IMO, is that for $30k the Elantra N exists.
Meh
Tom Suddard said:Am I missing something about the original Integra? Wasn't it basically just a slightly nicer Civic? I don't quite understand why it's on such a pedestal.
Because "Integra" now only means the Type R in the minds of everyone.
Tom Suddard said:Am I missing something about the original Integra? Wasn't it basically just a slightly nicer Civic? I don't quite understand why it's on such a pedestal.
As far as the "every car looks the same" argument... Yeah, cars from similar times look similar. There are only so many ways to make the most aerodynamic, safest, cheapest car possible with current manufacturing technologies, laws, and consumer demands.
2001 Integra:
2001 Ford:
2001 Kia:
2001 Hyundai:
The difference in my opinion is that back then Honda actually tried con the styling making an attractive car that looks different from the civic. The current integra looks like they just grafted the corporate Acura front on the civic 5 door and called it a day.
Yes tom, You are missing something.
The original Integra and prelude were the only 2 models to really get the better NA motors from Honda. As an owner of both the DA and the DC chassis GSR over the years, it was a decent step up from the Civic SI of the time. When I bought my DA chassis GSR, I also looked at the EF civic si. As a street car, it was better in every way. more HP, Higher revving, and just more fun on the streets. It wasn't till the 99-00 Civic SI where the Integra and Civic were really even close again. I still love taking my 01 GSR to 8K on a regular basis. It still sings all the way up there even with over 200K miles on it.
This is basically a luxury civic SI which overall isn't a horrible thing but there is just nothing special about it. It feels a lot like a brand engineering exercise where the prior generations were unique to their civic brothers.
All I really wanted was for honda to bring back the 2 door civic SI from a few years ago and call it the integra.
Maybe this car will look better in other colors but I'm not a big fan of how the civic 5 door looks but I think it fits this body look wise better then the integra. That being said I think the civic sedan is the best looker of the 3.
I just got to this thread (sorry, almost no internet-ing yesterday that wasnt strictly MR2 intercooler related!), and I got to say that when I saw the first picture it was a, "Ive seen this before" moment.
It just feels like other cars from H/A, nothing stands out about it, it doesnt look very sporty, it doesnt appeal to me. I will do a poll in my class shortly (they're currently in a test for Voting and Elections) and see what the YOUTH think about it. Sample size of only 22, apologies. But it doesnt give me the same excitement of seeing the integras of the late 90s and early/mid 2000s, nothing sporty.
bmw88rider said:Yes tom, You are missing something.
The original Integra and prelude were the only 2 models to really get the better NA motors from Honda. As an owner of both the DA and the DC chassis GSR over the years, it was a decent step up from the Civic SI of the time. When I bought my DA chassis GSR, I also looked at the EF civic si. As a street car, it was better in every way. more HP, Higher revving, and just more fun on the streets. It wasn't till the 99-00 Civic SI where the Integra and Civic were really even close again. I still love taking my 01 GSR to 8K on a regular basis. It still sings all the way up there even with over 200K miles on it.
This is basically a luxury civic SI which overall isn't a horrible thing but there is just nothing special about it. It feels a lot like a brand engineering exercise where the prior generations were unique to their civic brothers.
I was about to write something similar but bmw88rider said it better. The prototype is clearly a Civic Si with different front/rear fascias. I'm not sure I see the point beyond saying the Integra is back with the cheapest possible R&D.
Tony Sestito said:My thoughts on the new Integra:
-It's better than the outgoing ILX, I think.
-It doesn't look as good as the old Integra or RSX IMHO. Actually, I think the Civic looks better. Yellow is not it's color.
-Shared drivetrain with the Si is ok for a base model, but I was hoping for at least AWD as an option to set it apart.
-I'm happy a manual trans is part of the equation.
It will be a good car, but it's not setting my heart on fire. A solid "MEH" from me.
Keep in mind we haven't heard anything about trims and options yet. We haven't even seen the interior!
I would not be surprised at all if there is an Integra Type S with a 2.0T and AWD available in the future. Honda has parts in the bin to make it.
Of course, I look at this through my personal lens, which is that I drive a Fiesta ST but am 50+ so maybe something more grown-up would be good.
The issue is that 1) if the Civic Si came in a 4-door hatch, I would much prefer that and 2) if the Kia K5 GT had an LSD, i'd prefer that even more.
I thought you had to get a GSR or a Type R to get the "good" engine 20 years ago? Did Honda announce additional trims on the new Integra with the same engine, or just the base model?
j_tso said:Tom Suddard said:Am I missing something about the original Integra? Wasn't it basically just a slightly nicer Civic? I don't quite understand why it's on such a pedestal.
Because "Integra" now only means the Type R in the minds of everyone.
Well the 3rd gen integra came standard with 140 hp which was a lot of power for any car in that class in that area. When it was launched a civic si only had 125hp.
I'm miffed because I look at the new integra and see the Civic Si hatch everyone wanted.. but now it's $30k
The Integra may have been sold in a sedan, but it's remembered and revered for the 2dr hatchback..
We know Honda can do better... which is why we're disappointed that they didn't...
You'll need to log in to post.
