Thought i would write up a small review for both cars, maybe help someone out in the future in purchasing one or the other.

I bought a 2008 Civic Si probably 7 months ago and unfortunately it was stolen maybe a month ago, the car is probably over seas or the engine is in someone elses engine bay. Needless to say sucks *******, but life goes on and it brings a new car to me.

Performance:
SI: This was really fun to drive, actually it was a blast to keep going to the 8300 RPM redline. But the problem was there was no tourque and all the power was around 5800 RPM, way too high in my opinion, but probably how they got the 200hp out of the engine, being NA. It would seem like i would have to give too much gas to keep up with the other cars with traffic. Its dissapointing putting down the throttle a decent amount to keep up with traffic. When you got on the gas to the floor and stayed in the higher rpms though it was like a little go cart, after 2nd gear though it wasnt really anymore fun and the power just stopped. Vtec is fun non the less, and i liked the 6 Speed tranny.

SS: With 120 more pounds of torque than the si, its alot easier staying with traffic without having to put the gas pedal down as much. And with the throttle to the floor this car just keeps on going and going, the pull doesnt stop, still have yet to actually see what she can do, since Florida is nothing but traffic til like 12 at night. This car is way faster, like night and day difference, but i do miss the 6 speed, and sometimes find myself trying to go into 6th gear with not luck lol, also took a minute to get use to the lower rpm red line than the Si, but easily adjusted after a day.

Interior:
SI: The seats in this car were awesome, alot of support, but the material they were made of was some sort of suede or something, and to be honest i think by the time the lease was over on this car everything that was covered by that material (seats, armrest, and door arm rest) would have been totally ruined. Carpeting in the car was total trash, im a person that takes care of his car and any blemish dirt sport or anything bugs the **** out of me, and the carpet and mats were made out of a material that would not let the dirt go at all, like they were meant to be or something. The navigation was a nice option, i didnt use it too much and i got a phone that does the same feature but 100 times better, and the POI's were not too helpful at all. Cupholders were topnotch, held anything you put into it.

SS: Carpet is 100 times better in the car, like real carpet almost, i know sounds like im a freak but american cars seems to put nicer carpet from factory, maybe just me?? Bluetooth rocks my sock off and so does the ipod adapter, i was thinking though why didnt they put the ipod adpater like in the glove department or something, so that my wire is not being shown from the adapter to the glove were i keep the ipod?? i like the way it shows the songs info and time, and its really easy to navigate, reminds me of my clarion touch screen i had in my ranger. Cup holders sux the ***** hard, nothing really fits into them unless its like a 44 oz drink or something, there has to be a fix to this, cause its really gonnapiss me off if something tips over and get **** all over my brand new car. I thought i was going to be really dissapointed with the interior with all the reviews saying cheap and what not, but the quality is really about par with the civic, its a really solid feeling cabin, other than the coin tray to the side, and the rediculous excuse they have for a e-brake lever. Come on put a nice boot on atleast. Seats are better, alot more support.

Handling/Exterior(trying to sum up here)
SI:This car was pretty much on rails, really good suspension, took corners like a champ and wanted more throttle through each corner(if it had it). Tires on this car SUCKED ASS, in the rain if you even remotely tried to stop short you would skid a little, seriously im surprised honda has not gotten sued from someone or something. The best thing about the exterior was the front lights and the spoiler, i really liked that thing, it complimeneted the car really wheel, but the wheels looked like flowers. The paint chipped relly easy, and the body panels felt really flimsy. When you used the brakes often they seemed to get a little mooshy, you would have to use them alot, and im in florida so its hot outside im sure this had a factor into it.

SS:Even though the honda handled exeptionally, the SS does it better in every way, maybe just because the tires are better, who knows. I love everything on the exterior of this car, the rims, the lip kit, the spoiler, except for the front license plate holder, which i have to take care of soon. You get so much more exterior wise with this car, i didnt even get fog lights with the honda, for same price as this car, made no sense whatsoever. Body panels feel alot stiffer, not sure about the paint yet only two weeks into it.



Sidenote: The audio system is also better in the SS, the SI had a subwoofer also but it was a infinite baffle setup and was as loud as the pioneer in the SS. im sure that was the exact reason though since the pioneer is in a actual enclosed speaker box, instead of using the trunk as a box.



So there is my little review, which turned out to be a long review. Sorry for all the reading, but i wanted to get this out there since i always see people comparing cars.I did the same thing when i was looking at the Si, and never even though about the SS, which i prob would of bought if first if i though about looking at it.


Thanks
Mike

 

Good review , i enjoyed reading it .

 

x2...my old roommate bought an 07 SI and quite honestly my thoughts are pretty much bang on with your review. I admittedly like the car (ducks incoming rice *****) but in almost every aspect the TC runs it into the ground and is a far better bang for your buck. The one thing the car is lacking (as you said) is torque...I know Honda is famous for low-torque engines but god damn 6-speed and powerband or not...the torque of the engine is almost embarassing when a 2.2 Cobalt has higher numbers (no disrespect to 2.2 owners here, I used to own one and was more than happy with the engine) .

Nice review and a good read...glad you're enjoying your new ride and I really do hope this one stays in your driveway and doesn't get legs and walk away. I suppose there's a silver lining in it all...you got more car and more performance likely for a better price .

 

I enjoyed it as well, good job. And I am sure there will be others that will convert from the SI (or have) on this site. Both good cars.

 

i always love the new si wouldnt mind getting one but as you can see I already have a nsrt-4 and cobalt ss lol, but yea lack of tq makes me not want one but definitely wouldnt mind rocking one as a dd

 

Nail on the head. My buddy beat a stock Si with a 2.2 balt in manual form with just a drop-in airfilter and exhaust.....The si (driven by professionals that get
r the fastest acceleration) do 0-60 in 6.8-7.0 sec...... The SS\TC does the same in: 5.5-5.7 sec a 1 to 11\4 sec difference that equals 2 car lengths.. And the gap just grows by the second....

Same for the Mazda RX8 top of the line model with 238 hp. No tq... 0-60 in 6.5 sec..... ... I have to laugh out loud when people driving these two cars think they've got something fast........ Well, it's probably the fastest car they've ever owned....

There's something I've noticed: Truly slow cars are driven fast, truly: while truly fast cars are driven truly slow.......it's also funny how people think that because their speedo goes to 160 or 180 mph, that their car goes that fast.... 85% of cars ungoverned would not even get close to the top speed on their speedo... My neighbors kid has a eclipse GS 135 hp 4cyl 2002 model and his speedo goes to 180 mph, he thinks its that fast... So I took him for a drive in his car ( he's 18) and opened it up, car is unrestricted and we hit a brick wall at 118 mph.... He was shocked.... Then I pointed out some math, gears, hp, weight, aerodynamics and such to him....... He finally got it... Even the old turbo version only did 133 mph with 210 hp... My 2000 year model C5 vette tops out at 164 mph, not the 178 that the car mags say it will.. The 2006 C6 Z06 I had only made it to 187 mph, same track... Not 195-198 as the mags say it can do....My SS\TC has been run a test track and it topped out at 144 mph un-restricted radar verified on a flat surface and calm day..... Not 153 mph as the mags say it does...I have the low rise... the high rise wing is said to reduce top speed to 137 mph..
Even the LS2 vett from 2005-2008 could only manage 169 and it has a 200mph speedo.......

I must also say that this is the first car in 19 years that i've owned out of 9 cars that makes under 350 hp (260) It's also the slowest car I've owned in the same time frame... So to me the SS\TC even tuned is truly slow..... But you can't beat 25-26 mpg in the city when it gets compared to my other cars that got 18-23 on a hwy.....

 

my good friend has an 08 si but he has driven my car a bunch of times... he loves the torque and likes the fact he can go pass 135 mph lol... i believe si's are limited... than he got hondata or "flashpro" same thing as hp tuners just no credits necessary but anywho. he still likes the ss seats better (recaro's) and how like initially said. u dont have to get on the throttle just to keep up with traffic... and i have the s/c not the t/c. and yes the sound system in the ss destroys the si's for one reason at least... our subwoofers are boxed and the si's are rear deck mounted

 

hey champ that was a great review!

 

nicce review, i have a buddy who owns an 07 si and his brother has a ss/tc, and he tells me the performance is alot different.

 

good review. the si is a good car. but i will be sticking with my ss