2016 Civic EX-T

I've heard of people hate the tail lights on the coupe, but I think it's great. If their intent was to make an homage to the NSX, I like it. I wish the sedan had it.

>faster than the notoriously slowest sports car in the 30k margin
well i mean alright i guess

manualfags btfo

Im actually getting it but sometime next year.

gonna find a used one where some kid couldnt make his monthly payments

There is STILL no reason to buy an econobox that isn't a Mazda 3. It's simply better in every measure.

Besides, they need your money more than fucking Honda or Toyota does.

My 1999 V6 accord is 200hp/195tq and 3000lbs.

1.5L is too small, the car is going to feel slow. You can turn up boost and have your engine shit out at 100k mi... Sure whatever floats your boat.

I've been hunting for used Mazda 3s but I love Mazda so much that I feel bad that they won't get any of the money.

Car and Driver praised a recent test of the 2.0-liter one. The chassis is finally good again.

The civic ext coupe is a far better car than the Mazda 3.

>superior handling
>turbo
>looks
>mpgs
>features (heated front and back seats, Honda sense, reverse camera standard, right lane camera standard, etc)
>faster
>better build quality
>reliability

The 10th gen civic is in a league of its own in the sub compact category. There is no arguing it, check any review. Everyone says it's best in class power, handling, looks, mpgs.

I'm not sure about heated back seats in the Mazda, but you have the option of getting their iactivsense package that more or less is the same as the honda sensing. Right lane camera is nice but not necessary. Faster? As far as I remember, the Mazda is 184hp/184tq when the honda is 174hp/158tq.

>Mazda
lol no

>superior handling
Equal at best. The main thing that stands out on the MZ3 to reviewers is how they aren't boring to drive
>turbo
The cancer that is killing engine noise and throttle response everywhere
>looks
Shit taste
>features
You can get any of this shit if you equip it
>faster
No econobox is fast, you aren't going to buy any of them for speed
>better build quality
Honda and Mazda are about equal
>reliability
Hasn't been out long enough to determine that

well if mazda needs my money maybe they should lower their prices then

lol

The 1.5T with a manual transmission is going to be devastating for BRZ/FR-S owners.

Every publication has tested the BRZ to get under 6.5 seconds. The new one also has better gear ratios and more torque, so Civics won't be passing them any time soon.

The Mazda 3 is a 3400lbs boat of a car.

It's not just Mazda, everyone will have to raise their game. Honda has set the bar far above and beyond with this new civic.

Lol wut

mazda puts value add (cost increase) features in the base model

and they are selling sticker price right now

normies love them so don't expect any changes soon

Are you sure you are not referring to the MAzda 6 weight? From what I remember, the M3 hatch is about 3000-3100lbs while the sedan is maybe 2900.

Regardless, I'm impressed on how well Honda is coming back after that shitshow of a 2012 model.

>inb4 retards exclaim "that's the auto!" When we're talking about the auto civic turbo

That's the auto.

Subaru/Toyota knows that anyone who buys an automatic 86 just wants to look sporty and doesn't give a fuck about driving. They'll never go past 3000 RPM, so might as well give it stupid long gear ratios to get those fuel economy goodboy points.

Manuals test anywhere between 6.0 and 6.5.

It already did a year before it was released.

>9.5 seconds

that's slower than our v6 work truck

alsoT

cvts are shit user

>2900lbs

>sub compact

my 2000lb '91 civic is a sub compact

the new one is a compact car

>looks amazing
>2900 lbs

Almost a fucking midsize at this point.

It's like a copy of the turbo Kia Forte koup.

Still slower than everything on the road. A good way of spending 20k just to get something slower than everything.

>huge
>50-100lbs lighter than the previous gen

The 9th gen was horrible, it's why it got replaced in 2 years.

4 years, and the 9th gen was slightly lighter than the 8th.

Why can't they just make the hatch a true subcompact and make it compete with the FiST

So basically, you want a Fit Si?

>So basically, you want a Fit Si?
Yes please

We are comparing the auto frs with the auto civic turbo retard.

The auto civic is as fast as the frs manual, the manual civic will destroy the frs by atleast a full second (there's over a second difference between auto frs and manual).

Are you stupid or something?

"Hurr that's the auto"

No shit.

Well fuck if they made the Fit SI then take my fucking money honda

There are MANY cars slower to 60 than 6.5.

Most around 9s +

>>paid even more to make his slow car slightly faster while voiding warranty, decreasing lifespan and fuel economy
Isn't that literally every single fucking horsepower increase mod to any fucking car in existence of humanity?

Yeah. Like the frs. Everything else is shittier because it's an actual econobox. You're forgetting a $3000 maxima will do 0-60 in like 5.5s.

You're still not getting it, read slower pls.

The auto turbo civic is 6.5 second to 60...following me? Read it over again.

The auto FRS and BRZ are 7.9 to 60.

Ok, and the manual frs and brz are 6.5.

So the manual turbo civic would theoretically be around 5.0 - 5.5 seconds.

Read that 3 more times.

And once more.

There ya go little guy.

>on a side note imaging that little 1.5L beast in a CRZ that would be amazing

The thing is most auto cars do 60 in around 9-12 seconds on average, this civic is pretty quick. Add in the utility of a civic in day to day usage and it's an extremely impressive car.

I don't even care, the coupe looks like sex and I want it.

>So the manual turbo civic would theoretically be around 5.0 - 5.5 seconds.

Thats not how it works kiddo.

>The auto turbo civic is 6.5 second to 60...following me? Read it over again.
>The auto FRS and BRZ are 7.9 to 60.
>Ok, and the manual frs and brz are 6.5.
>So the manual turbo civic would theoretically be around 5.0 - 5.5 seconds.
That's not how it works, retard. It depends on the gear ratios of the transmissions in question.

BMW got 1500hp out of a 1.5L engine in the 80s

Yep, that's why I said theoretically.

Read slower pls.

We don't know yet which is true, though it's guaranteed tone faster than the cvt, and it'll be faster than the manual frs and brz.

It's also like $10k cheaper, has way more features, gets better mpgs, and is already turbo for easy of mod. Pretty fucking nice!

I'm getting one next month ^_^

wtf is with honda's shit tier wheels.

There's no way it's getting anywhere near 5.0s 0-60. It probably won't break 6.0s even with a manual.

Gives you more reason to replace them. I have a fetish for the 2007 TL-S wheels on any white Honda.

The deal breaker for me is the fact that the back doesnt open up as a liftback/hatchback

2016 civic coupe type r

>unironically benchracing econoappliances

Fuck you guys

>less power than an 8thgen
>heavier than an 8th gen
>more expensive than an 8th gen
>unknown reliabilty postmawdz
>no high redline fun

What is the best Civic and why is it the EK9?

Shingo pls go and stay go

>2900 pounds is a lot for a civic
Not anymore
That's actually really light compared to modern civics

Shingo drives an EG6

Am I the only one that misses the soft/round edges and design from the early 2000s?

Yes user you are the only one in the world who likes that design. This post looks like you copy pasted it straight out of the YouTube comments section

First post, check out my channel thumbs up and like the vids

I like the EK9 but it's kinda old now. I was gonna get one but I went with this

I'll stick with my hyundai thanks.

I don't like paying extra money for a nameplate.

I'm not hating on your car but wasn't that si deemed the worst? I don't know much about hondas

Can the Cvt take any mods is a question to be asked though. CVT's and hp don't mix

Actually wanting to go fast

I think the FN2 was considered the worst model

youtu.be/XeGAmcLYGQ8

I briefly browsed the civic forum. No one has the balls to void their warranty now, but I don't think a 25-30hp increase will fuck the CVT that much

REAL TALK

I just want a DD that looks kinda good with up to date features and reliable so thats why I want a civic coupe

lbs

geez, this is considered lightweight now?

sad times

I would go one step further and say save yourself the insurance money and get a sedan.

>CVT transmission only
get cucked fuckboy.

Theyve already announced itl be manual next year

Get fucked

>next year
>thread is about 2016 version
stay cucked.

JUST

>only available in shit transmission, no exceptions! lmao
Good version coming very soon
>ya but its not right now!!

Be patient you fuckin chrysler cuck. Honda takes the time needed to do shit right the first time. Which is why they waited 20 yrs to add turbos whereas your trash manufacturer put em out in 2005 and likely recalled them a yr later

The family has a Corolla 13 and Maz3 13 and i prefer the Maz3 a lot more than the corolla

>looks like a hatch/sportback
>sedan
why?

Because sedan is """""""""safety""""""""""

>fwd

>the manual civic will destroy the frs by at least a full second

Sorry for not simply believing that a 174hp fwd honda can get to 60 in 5 seconds because you said so, but could you provide any evidence to back that up?

>falseflagging this hard
I'm not the chryslercuck, I actually drive a mid-90's Honda.
>thread title obviously says "2016 EX-T"
>2016 EX-T is CVT only
>backpedaling this hard
Get fucked, if you want a CVT get a CVT, just don't expect a fucking compliment for gimping yourself considering you want to fucking mod the thing.

>honda takes the time needed
Yeesh you are fucking cancer. Show me on the doll where the SRT-4 which gear the SRT-4 raped you in.

he's just damage controlling, the thread has been him claiming one thing, getting btfo, and backpedaling til he gets a better foundation.

>He actually thinks a Honda motor will shit out after turning up boost

The only thing that would shit out would be the CVT trans, which driving what you do you should know all about

>theoretically

Theories require evidence, not some half-assed attempt to make causation from mere correlation.

Because it's probably a k04 or smaller turbo and 25 lbs is wayyyy outside of its efficiency range.

So you will just blown shit ton of hot as fuck air until the seals blow 5000 miles later.

Yeah gl op.

99 times out of 100 you need at least 200hp/200tq to get sub 5.5 0-60 times.

>1.5 making 174hp

>mod potential

Choose one.

This comes from a eurofag that drives a 1.6

I know about tight shit, be thankful if that shit turns out as reliable as previous models with bigger blocks.

>looks amazing

Nice joke.
Honda needs to revamp literally all of their line ups on the rear end. They all look like fuckiing edgy ufomobiles.
The accord is fucking sexy on the other hand. They could just copy paste it into their other cars if theyre too lazy to design something that doesnt belong into the trashcan.

This also literally shows me how much of a faggot you are OP

More like 250/250 with those figures, probably more.
Bear in mind the new Type-R does 0-60 in 5.7 and that has 310hp, and this will definitely not outperform that.

>faster than a 9th gen Si
Stock they have the same straight line speed.
However the 9th gen Si's 2.4L will always be better for modding.
Base supercharger kits running 7 psi with intake, exhaust, downpipe, and aftercooler are making 300whp with tons of room to grow.
PRL kits can make well over 400whp...

>i drive a mid 90s honda

Ohhhhh ok i see why youre so asspained now. Seein all these nice new Hondas drive by reminds you of how beat to hell your shitbox is, and youve got sour grapes up your ass

>still pretending you knew the coupe would be released in manual, and pretending you were talking about the 2016 model specifically and not the new civic coupe as a whole (current year being 2016, yes)
>ass bleeding cause i proved you wrong immediately
>calling me the backpeddler

What a fag