• almprin06 Posted: 4/20/2011 7:34am PDT

    The new Civic's dashboard is blocky, bargain-esque, & asymmetrical - all too reminiscent of a 1985 Nissan Stanza's.
    Also, the new Civic is still too low to provide easy ingress\egress for those who are not vertically-challenged. Honda missed the opportunity to add a few inches of roof height to accommodate grown adults seeking an economical sedan.
    Regardless, enough shoppers will be pleased with the fuel-economy improvements and Honda's longstanding bullet-proof reliability.

  • Jennifer Posted: 4/20/2011 8:36am PDT

    I loved my Honda Civic (1986). It was stylish, affordable, reliable, fuel efficient — just like now! Thanks for the update, John!

  • fb_82100996 avatar Richard Posted: 4/20/2011 9:54am PDT

    Cheap, basic and dull looking. I've always liked Civics but not this one. SNORE. Those taillights are straight off of the Camry from 2 generations ago!

  • Jon Posted: 4/20/2011 10:13am PDT

    I actually thought the rear end looked a bit like an old Mitsu. Mirage... :(

  • SStachowiak Posted: 4/20/2011 10:18am PDT

    I just checked Honda's website, to see which Civic models will have a manual transmission. You can no longer get an EX with a 5-speed manual. That means Honda thinks that just because you want to shift your own gears, you don't want a sunroof, alloy wheels, upgraded audio, or navigation. What a shame.

  • dagr382 Posted: 4/20/2011 10:27am PDT

    A cheap Japanese car as an American institution - no wonder the country's in such a hell of a mess!

  • greg Posted: 4/20/2011 11:27am PDT

    In just one year, Honda and Hyundai have switched places? Honda the cheaper, more laughable. Hyundai, the leader? Am I mistaken?

  • Matt Posted: 4/20/2011 12:52pm PDT

    Does it have an option to get it without out all these spiders that have been plaguing these cars :-)

  • Mark Behr Posted: 4/20/2011 6:11pm PDT

    I have to agree. The Koreans have taken the design high ground while Honda has taken a turn to blandsville.

  • fb_1306861507 avatar Jim Posted: 4/21/2011 2:27am PDT

    It may not look thrilling to you gentleman but it just simply drives so much better than the competition with an agility and fluidity they lack. The Elantra has a great interior, interesting style but drive them back to back and you will notice a difference. One that could get really, really old after a few years.

  • Jethro Posted: 4/23/2011 10:57am PDT

    it looks OK, ive owned two accords and one civic all great vehicles. However, the tail lights look like the ones on my old 95 accord, like they had a bunch left over and decided to use them on the new civic, lol

  • asdf Posted: 4/23/2011 10:01pm PDT

    Honda making ugly cars these days... I've ALWAYS been a Honda fan, but someone needs to smack the engineers up side the head

  • carguy Posted: 4/26/2011 12:24am PDT

    I have driven the new Elantra and the Civic and really there is not that much difference in the way both cars drive (I suspect the Civic will handle a tad better if driven hard). For your average consumer, I doubt if they would notice any signifigant difference in the way these two cars drive. The Elantra looks much better than the Civic sedan, gets 40 mpg (vs. 39 for theCivic). Has a back up camera option and a six speed auto (all of which is not available on the Civic). And contrary to the uninformed, Honda's are not as reliable as before (for example, I have replaced the transmission 2x already on my 2001 Odyssey and my Accord has experience pre mature brake wear (Honda's have always had poor performaing brakes in general).

  • Scuromondo Posted: 4/29/2011 11:48am PDT

    Upon hearing that the new Civic Si offered a 2.4L, 170 lb-ft engine (rather than last year's 2.0L, 139 lb-ft engine) my first reaction was that the new Si would be a real screamer compared to the outgoing model!
    But then I compared the hp/torque curves of the two engines: From idle to 6000 rpm, the 2.4L is clearly the winner with gobs more torque and hp. But from 6000 to 7000 rpm, the 2.4L's torque & hp drop so sharply that the performance of both engines looks almost identical. Then from 7000 to 8000 rpm, the old 2.0L's hp continues to peak while the 2.4L is already in the next gear. ...Now I'm not so sure which will be the faster car!