Honda CRX Forum banner
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
778 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Anybody have a 2007 Civic Si? I'm looking at getting a 4dr Si. The daily driver CRX DX isn't cutting it anymore. It's fun but on longer drives it's too harsh. It does get good MPG though. I still have the Si for weekend fun.

Also looking at a year or two old TSX. Or a 2008 Accord coupe. Not sure yet. Any suggestions?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,746 Posts
This is my driveway at home:


The TSX (05) is my mother's, and the Si (06) belongs to my stepdad. I know the Si is faster, and it's really fun to drive, but I like the TSX more. Considering you also already have the CRX for fun, the TSX may be more practical, especially since you're considering the sedan Si, I assume for more seating. They get similar MPG from what I've seen driving both.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
778 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
jfrolang said:
Is that a 6MT TSX Tom?

I'm in almost the same position Dren. I'm attracted to every car you are, but I really want a 5-door vehicle. The market for them is unimpressive though. Actually, if Honda sold the Stream here I'd buy it instantly, but for now I'm leaning towards a Fit.
I was leaning that way too for a while but I heard they aren't the best for longer trips, even though I like the utility.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
16,562 Posts
Dren said:
jfrolang said:
I'm in almost the same position Dren. I'm attracted to every car you are, but I really want a 5-door vehicle. The market for them is unimpressive though. Actually, if Honda sold the Stream here I'd buy it instantly, but for now I'm leaning towards a Fit.
I was leaning that way too for a while but I heard they aren't the best for longer trips, even though I like the utility.
I've heard that as well, but I frankly don't believe it. People today are spoiled with SUVs, anything remotely connected to the road is instantly deemed rough. I'm no stranger to crosswinds either. Besides, moving from a lowered CRX it's bound to be an improvement, and my CRX has suited me fine on road trips exceeding 1500 miles each way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
734 Posts
jfrolang said:
I've heard that as well, but I frankly don't believe it. People today are spoiled with SUVs, anything remotely connected to the road is instantly deemed rough. I'm no stranger to crosswinds either. Besides, moving from a lowered CRX it's bound to be an improvement, and my CRX has suited me fine on road trips exceeding 1500 miles each way.
For real...imagine your average middle-of-the-road auto columnist taking one of our cars for a spin:

Let's see, there are no power windows, no power steering, no power locks (much less keyless entry, automatic hatch opener, or security system), no auto-dimming headlights or auto-adjusting rear-view mirror, the clutch is hard to push in, there's no antilock brakes, traction control, stability control -- or any other automatic driving aids, for that matter -- and the headlights only turn on if you flip the switch (and only turn off if you remember to flip it back).

There's no cruise control, no side-impact or passenger-side or even driver's side airbags, and the seats, which aren't heated, only slide back and forth, not up and down and tilting back and forth and 7 other directions -- oh, and you have to adjust them using a lever and some leg-power, and there's no "memory" system to recall seating positions for multiple drivers.

The mirrors aren't heated, and they aren't powered, although you can adjust them using a little arm inside the car rather than sticking your arm out the window at 80mph. The steering wheel only tilts up and down -- it doesn't telescope closer to you, and the pedals are where they are, like it or not.

There's only one cigarette lighter, so you can only plug in one cell phone/radar detector/navigation system. There's no "dual-zone automatic climate control", no HEPA-filtered cabin air filtration system -- there's a heater, and if you're lucky, A/C. There is no rear-facing camera, no thing that beeps when you come close to backing into something, and no automated parking system that parallel parks the car automatically.

There's no On*Star system, no map lights, no built-in garage-door opener, no automatic antenna. There's no built-in satellite radio/CD/MP3/navigation system with Bluetooth connectivity for hands-free cell-phone use and voice-recognition dialing, no steering-wheel mounted controls for anything. There's no automatic tire-pressure monitoring system, no run-flat tires, no foglights. It's loud, its ride is harsh over potholes and speedbumps and rough roads...it's a far cry from a modern luxury car.

Hell, there's not even a cupholder. Or an armrest.

If the buzz about a new car says that it's not the best for longer trips, remember what the people writing those reviews are used to, and what WE'RE used to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
778 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
My Si had an armrest :)

Yeah, I am more worried about noise on long trips than how harsh the drive is. I don't mind if it's a little stiff like I'm sure the Si will be. I also want comfortable seats. The Si has nice seats, the Fit I have heard isn't so comfy on long trips. I sat in one at the auto show and it seemed fine. I'll drive one first before I completely scratch it off the list. And at 15,000 for a sport, it's around 7 grand cheaper than the Si that I want.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,297 Posts
IF they'd release a new 2 door Si that had a hatch glass similar to the CRX or Ford Probe (and hundreds of thero hatch back'd coupes) I would be all over that thing.

I really dont like coupes or sedans; hatchback all the way. For that feature alone, the Fit gets my vote over the Si. Then as you mentioned, the huge price difference. Add the compounded interest over 5-7 years of financing and you've got a LOT of fututre performance parts (if desired) for the Fit(or the CRX, *grin* ) and you'll be out performing a stock Si.

I'm not sure if dealerships near you do what some of them here do, but they've got a vehicle you can take for a few nights to see how it performs in your daily life. I'm not sure what kinds of deposit or fees are applied, I never have done it. But if I was making a big dollar purchase, I'd take full advantage of something like that before I bought one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
778 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
I'll get some pics later today or tomorrow when I get the time. Got a beer 'tasting' tonight to attend. All belgian beers...oh sooo yummy mmm.

Anyway, I don't plan on modding the car at all. I want to keep it bone stock. I may buy a second set of wheels so I can run some summer tires. I didn't get the summer tire option because I wasn't sure I wanted to spend another $1000 on wheels.

Any recommendations? I think I would like to stay with 17" wheels just cause of price and weight.

As for the Hondata reflash, I've heard it gives you more area under the curve by eliminating that torque jump Honda puts in there so you can feel the VTEC kick in. I sort of like the feel. I think the Hondata reflash will make the car slightly quicker but it won't feel quicker. So I'm not sure if it will be worth the $500. I also seem to like the slight rev hang so far.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
779 Posts
ryan_long_01 said:
jfrolang said:
I've heard that as well, but I frankly don't believe it. People today are spoiled with SUVs, anything remotely connected to the road is instantly deemed rough. I'm no stranger to crosswinds either. Besides, moving from a lowered CRX it's bound to be an improvement, and my CRX has suited me fine on road trips exceeding 1500 miles each way.
For real...imagine your average middle-of-the-road auto columnist taking one of our cars for a spin:

Let's see, there are no power windows, no power steering, no power locks (much less keyless entry, automatic hatch opener, or security system), no auto-dimming headlights or auto-adjusting rear-view mirror, the clutch is hard to push in, there's no antilock brakes, traction control, stability control -- or any other automatic driving aids, for that matter -- and the headlights only turn on if you flip the switch (and only turn off if you remember to flip it back).

There's no cruise control, no side-impact or passenger-side or even driver's side airbags, and the seats, which aren't heated, only slide back and forth, not up and down and tilting back and forth and 7 other directions -- oh, and you have to adjust them using a lever and some leg-power, and there's no "memory" system to recall seating positions for multiple drivers.

The mirrors aren't heated, and they aren't powered, although you can adjust them using a little arm inside the car rather than sticking your arm out the window at 80mph. The steering wheel only tilts up and down -- it doesn't telescope closer to you, and the pedals are where they are, like it or not.

There's only one cigarette lighter, so you can only plug in one cell phone/radar detector/navigation system. There's no "dual-zone automatic climate control", no HEPA-filtered cabin air filtration system -- there's a heater, and if you're lucky, A/C. There is no rear-facing camera, no thing that beeps when you come close to backing into something, and no automated parking system that parallel parks the car automatically.

There's no On*Star system, no map lights, no built-in garage-door opener, no automatic antenna. There's no built-in satellite radio/CD/MP3/navigation system with Bluetooth connectivity for hands-free cell-phone use and voice-recognition dialing, no steering-wheel mounted controls for anything. There's no automatic tire-pressure monitoring system, no run-flat tires, no foglights. It's loud, its ride is harsh over potholes and speedbumps and rough roads...it's a far cry from a modern luxury car.

Hell, there's not even a cupholder. Or an armrest.

If the buzz about a new car says that it's not the best for longer trips, remember what the people writing those reviews are used to, and what WE'RE used to.
Wow, who would of thought a 17 year old car which was a lower model which was designed around a minimalist attitude (lightweight, great on gas) would have zero features?

Comparing older cars to newer ones is comparing an apple to a calculator. I don't need ANY feature you said to be happy when I'm driving. THe only feature I wish my car had would be more speeds on the wipers, that's all.

MY dad has an 06 4dr civic EX. It's a REALLY nice car but is a PIG. Gets the same mileage to a tank then my civic, only his takes 15 more liters then mine. Maybe it's just me. I'm capable of living in the basics. I find having too many options gets annoying after a while. Plus when the car ages all the neat little features die and then they are just annoying little hazards (my mom's old GM comes to mind, seperate climates my ass).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
778 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
MeloYelo said:
I like the fact that the CRX does not have any of the power features of newer cars. Simple. Less things to go wrong and, lets not forget the big one, it weighs less. Just my two cents.
Actually I've read that the power windows weigh less. Not sure if that is true but I've read that it is
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
686 Posts
baker423 said:
Most likely not, Acura products usually have higher resale value than Hondas.
Just as Lexus cars have higher resale value than Toyota's
But the base price new needs to be factored in also. I bought an IS300 from dealership in Houston last year for $11,500 out the door. It was a 2001 in decent condition, average miles for the year. I figure the rate at which a camry would depreciate would be less than a lexus, overall after base price and resale are figured, but I could be wrong. Potential buyer market is also needed to resell.
Sorry to thread jack Dren, glad you are happy with your purchase. Some 17's would look great I think :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
778 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
signalpuke said:
baker423 said:
Most likely not, Acura products usually have higher resale value than Hondas.
Just as Lexus cars have higher resale value than Toyota's
But the base price new needs to be factored in also. I bought an IS300 from dealership in Houston last year for $11,500 out the door. It was a 2001 in decent condition, average miles for the year. I figure the rate at which a camry would depreciate would be less than a lexus, overall after base price and resale are figured, but I could be wrong. Potential buyer market is also needed to resell.
Sorry to thread jack Dren, glad you are happy with your purchase. Some 17's would look great I think :wink:
lol no worries man. how do you like that lexus? i thought about looking at the IS300
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top