Do we hate the new civic?

First I've read about the car, but on paper Honda seems to be doing a number of things right (or better anyway). http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/2016_honda_civic_first_look_review/

Good:

• 1 inch lower than the current four-door Civic
• ex gets turbocharged, direct-injected, 1.5-liter I-4 "most powerful non-Si Civic engine ever offered"
• base model gets 2.0-liter i-VTEC I-4 "most powerful ever offered in a base Civic"
• new sedan sheds 68 pounds off the weight of its unibody
• seating position has been dropped 1 inch from the current car

The bad. Really bad:

• 6 speed only with LX trim, turbo models only come with CVT

I really liked what I was reading until I hit your final point. That is really bad. Deal breaker bad, for me.

classicJackets wrote: I really liked what I was reading until I hit your final point. That is really bad. Deal breaker bad, for me.

This. CVT = complete dealbreaker for me. Sure, the technology is interesting, it can do nice things, i just don't want anything to do with it. ever.

ProDarwin wrote: Do we hate the new civic?

5 door hatch, new Si, TYPE R? No, we don't hate it. People will gripe about the CVT-only turbo though.

MCarp22 wrote:

ProDarwin wrote: Do we hate the new civic?

People will gripe about the CVT-only turbo though.

Kinda what I figured. But a lighter, lower, 2.0 NA 6 speed car doesn't really sound that bad for a base model. I could easily see that being 170hp.

Add this to cons: the trunk opening is oddly shaped and small, and the sedan really should have been a liftback.

I'm not really feeling the looks, It actually reminds me of a new Impala thats been bedazzled with some extra chrome and fog lights.

I do like the new powerplants and could easily see in 6 years that engine or trans swaps from the T to the NA six speed being common place.

Also can you say replacement motor for the B and K series swaps?

It looks like a mini Crosstour

Slippery wrote: It looks like a mini Crosstour

Ya and a little too much chrome and glitz. Not a stellar look.

Slippery wrote: It looks like a mini Crosstour

But I like the Crosstour.....I'm the only one, aren't I?

mazdeuce wrote:

Slippery wrote: It looks like a mini Crosstour

But I like the Crosstour.....I'm the only one, aren't I?

No, I'm in the same pool.

Feedyurhed wrote:

Slippery wrote: It looks like a mini Crosstour

Ya and a little too much chrome and glitz. Not a stellar look.

Yeah just the looks is a serious turn-off for me....that plus the recent downturn in Honda quality means I'll stay away from this one for a while.

Not like I buy new cars anyways

Wow, two Crosstour fans. That is confusing.

I think the interior looks pretty good, but there is nothing about the exterior that makes me interested in that car. The front is too chromey and generic (even has a vestigial Acura beak) and the rear end is too high. Basically, looks like just another blahmobile to me. I like that they made it lower and lighter than its predecessor - that is encouraging. I don't hate it, but I don't like it eather. It is just irrelevant to me.

Needs more beige. That's a seriously vanilla looking car. Civics always looked good to me. Not this one.

It's sad. It's gotten too large. Is there even a small, reliable, two door hatch left in this market? VW Golf, Fiat 500 come in mind but neither are as reliable as Honda.

mazdeuce wrote:

Slippery wrote: It looks like a mini Crosstour

But I like the Crosstour.....I'm the only one, aren't I?

I like it from most angles, but I think they put the wrong front end treatment on it. They'd have nailed it if they went with a scaled up CR-Z front end.

Or maybe that's just me.

And the new Civic has the right profile but not the Crosstour's clunky front end.

"Hate" is such a strong word.

In reply to Coldsnap:

I think thats where the CR-z is supposed to fall...

T.J. wrote: The front is too chromey and generic (even has a vestigial Acura beak)

What if it were piano black instead of chrome like a Fit?

I don't hate it. I am not excited by it. I will reserve judgment until I see one live in person.

In reply to MCarp22:

I like the look of the Fit front much better. The civic just has too much going on. It looks like they are trying to make s Mercedes front view.

I don't dislike it yet. As far as the cvt issue, Honda makes a good one that, to me, is miles ahead of a conventional auto. Not that I would put my money on it, but I wouldn't dread having to use it. Besides, if you want high end with a stick, there is the Si.

I don't hate it. I honestly don't care about a CVT for a commuter car, which is what this is. My main complaint with the old one was the 2-tier dash, and it looks like they changed that.

slowride wrote: I don't hate it. I honestly don't care about a CVT for a commuter car, which is what this is. My main complaint with the old one was the 2-tier dash, and it looks like they changed that.

The 2 tier dash is the best part of my 8th gen. It's almost a HUD.

The two tier dash makes me laugh every time I pass a Civic on the road and can read their speed easier than I can read my speed on my own dashboard. It is a strange feature that rules those cars out for me.