[aklucsarits]

Even the ultimate Honda fanbois at Consumer Reports have no love for the Civic anymore in light of compact cars competitors like the new Ford Focus, Chevy Cruze, and Hyundai Elantra.

2012 Honda Civic LX: Scores too low for Consumer Reports to recommend

Quote

2012 Honda Civic LX: Scores too low for Consumer Reports to recommend
Aug 1, 2011 4:30 PM

...The new Civic feels insubstantial with a cheap interior. You don’t get much feature content for the $19,405 that our Civic LX automatic costs, either. That’s a problem given the high bar set in this class by the new-to-market Chevrolet Cruze, the redesigned-for-2012 Ford Focus, and the redesigned-for-2011 Hyundai Elantra.

But a savvy buyer could sit in a showroom and realize those Civic shortcomings. The problems that really hurt the Civic’s score run deeper and they showed up at our test track. Stopping distances are long. The steering is lightly weighted and comes up short on feedback. Body lean appears early in the corners. The ride is marred by frequent short pitches. And road noise still remains an annoying companion...

Andrew

[deepbluejh]

I wonder what they think of the current Corolla.

[s2kpdx01]

The corolla wasn't much better. If you aren't improving you are falling behind. Looks like it's starting to catch up with honda and toyota.

[cbehney]

Wait, where are the people who mock Consumer Reports when it praises Hondas and disparage its reviews??

(No, not a fan of the Civic; just will find it interesting to watch the responses to this.)

[TommyDeVito]

Couldn't care less as mother H won't be getting any of my $ anymore

[Chris S]

Hopefully they'll wake up from their prolonged period of complacency soon.

[A 2]

well I think road noise wont go away from the "Civic" experience. That said, compared to previous gen vehicles the new model is a let down. Hopefully it is a stopgap vehicle and Honda act fast and scrap it.

[S2KMiyo]

Not exactly sure what Consumer Reports is smoking - I have a Ford Focus on rental and it is terrrible (yes, with 3x "r"'s). There are so many freaking buttons that an average person that is older than 25 is going to have a hard time trying to figure this stuff out. Is it just me or does anyone else think that LCD screens, automatic climate control, and all these bells and whistles are unnecessary?? Don't get me wrong, I think all those options are pretty darn cool, but having to keep the price down means dumbing down the quality, and to be quite honest, everything in this car just seems overdone to make up for the lack of quality. I guess they chose to mask the ass-ness with design... but the only thing Ford added was more crap on crap.

I think they did a good job with the exterior though; the Focus looks good and feels like what an economy car should be - unlike the interior, where the Focus is trying to be this high-tech car, but fails due to poor quality.

I have yet to make a decision on the new Civic because I have not driven one - maybe Consumer Reports is right? But in any case, I disagree with their take on the Focus... and from what Motor Trend says, I'm not exactly leaning toward the Cruze either (exterior looks good too! )

[Saki GT]

Fwiw CR also trashed the Passat because the new one isn't as luxurious as the old one, despite the lower price to offset that, which is BS imo. Car reviews from pretty much everywhere else on the planet still call the Passat a nice car even if its not as nice as the old one.

CR is good for crunching numbers and showing trends and facts, but their opinions are junk.

[JonBoy]

They got 47 mpg in the car (!!!), it's quieter than the last one, more spacious, has improved features/amenities and the look hasn't changed much. It's less sporty but quite a bit more compliant while still handling as well or better than almost everything else (new Focus being better, most others being worse). While I understand that the GAP between the 9th gen and 8th gen is much smaller than the one between the 8th gen and 7th gen, the 9th gen is still the better car (by quite a bit, in some cases).

It's a simple case of people comparing to the old car rather than to the competition, I think. Virtually EVERY test does the same thing and it's getting old. The Civic isn't competing with itself - it's competing with the other manufacturers.

[OverBooster]

TommyDeVito, on 01 August 2011 - 05:42 PM, said:

Couldn't care less as mother H won't be getting any of my $ anymore

Agreed. I wouldn't spend a dime on a Honda right now.

[purplemonkeydishwasher]

JonBoy, on 02 August 2011 - 10:45 AM, said:

They got 47 mpg in the car (!!!), it's quieter than the last one, more spacious, has improved features/amenities and the look hasn't changed much. It's less sporty but quite a bit more compliant while still handling as well or better than almost everything else (new Focus being better, most others being worse). While I understand that the GAP between the 9th gen and 8th gen is much smaller than the one between the 8th gen and 7th gen, the 9th gen is still the better car (by quite a bit, in some cases).

It's a simple case of people comparing to the old car rather than to the competition, I think. Virtually EVERY test does the same thing and it's getting old. The Civic isn't competing with itself - it's competing with the other manufacturers.

Unfortunetly when it comes to performance characteristics of a vehicle, you can only compare numbers against the previous iteration of the car. Every car is designed and tuned differently. Comparing a 2900 lbs car vs. a 2700 lbs car's braking distance is comparing apples to oranges.

On the other hand, CR does compare the creature comforts across the vehicle boards and even still, the Honda Civic greatly falls short. I owned an 08 Si and while it was a fun to drive car, it had no creature comforts when compared with its direct competition, the GTi and the MS3. This goes on to reiterate that Honda has/is clinging onto their former glory and riding the Honda reliability name for all its worth. Meanwhile, the competition like Kia and Hyundai are creeping forward and companies like Honda and Toyota will be taken out of the limelight soon enough.

I am waiting for the day that happens as I am personally disgusted by Honda's attitude towards its loyal patrons.

[A 2]

American Honda has responded with a press release

Quote

Statement from American Honda Motor Co., Inc. 8/1/2011:

In a broad sense, we disagree with Consumer Reports' findings. Without question, the small sedan segment is more competitive than ever. In virtually every way, the completely redesigned 2012 Civic is a step forward. The new Civic excels in areas that matter to small-car customers, including fuel efficiency, safety, and reliability. Among the Civic's greatest competitive strengths, is a smooth and efficient powertrain that, in Consumer Reports testing returned, "... an impressive 30 mpg overall on regular fuel and 47 mpg on the highway." Also noted in Consumer Reports findings, the Civic excels in the area of safety, with a long list of important features standard on all trim levels, and a class-leading 'Top Safety Pick' rating from IIHS. Lastly, the Civic has a stellar reliability history with Consumer Reports, and we are confident that the new Civic will be a reliability leader as well.

[JonBoy]

CR evaluates the vehicle against others in its class, not against prior iterations. The magazines do comparos with current vehicles, not past vehicles.

As far as performance characteristics, the new car handles virtually as well (by the numbers), brakes the same, gets better fuel economy, has more interior room and weighs less while adding a few features with virtually no cost increase for them.

Your Civic Si was fully loaded with power everything, moonroof, LSD, big sound system, and bespoke seats, all for quite a bit less money than a VW GTI. The MS3 was similarly priced, for sure, and is a bargain in and of itself. That said, if you do any research, you'll see how many problems people have had (often for no apparent reason) and realize that they had to cut the quality SOMEWHERE to hit that selling price...

Do I think Honda needs to make improvements? Sure! However, I see this as yet another journalistic bandwagon based on media hype, not reality. Their own numbers damn their report and score for the 2012 Civic.

[s2kpdx01]

cbehney, on 01 August 2011 - 05:10 PM, said:

Wait, where are the people who mock Consumer Reports when it praises Hondas and disparage its reviews??

(No, not a fan of the Civic; just will find it interesting to watch the responses to this.)

most of the arguments about CR around here are related to their survey techniques and conclusions they come up with based on those. I don't here to much discussion about their reviews. I never look at their reviews as they are usually very bland and obvious. For sports cars it's stuff like, "it goes fast, but it's loud and the fuel economy is not very good."

This post has been edited by s2kpdx01: 02 August 2011 - 12:29 PM

[s2kpdx01]

JonBoy, on 02 August 2011 - 12:16 PM, said:

CR evaluates the vehicle against others in its class, not against prior iterations. The magazines do comparos with current vehicles, not past vehicles.

As far as performance characteristics, the new car handles virtually as well (by the numbers), brakes the same, gets better fuel economy, has more interior room and weighs less while adding a few features with virtually no cost increase for them.

Your Civic Si was fully loaded with power everything, moonroof, LSD, big sound system, and bespoke seats, all for quite a bit less money than a VW GTI. The MS3 was similarly priced, for sure, and is a bargain in and of itself. That said, if you do any research, you'll see how many problems people have had (often for no apparent reason) and realize that they had to cut the quality SOMEWHERE to hit that selling price...

Do I think Honda needs to make improvements? Sure! However, I see this as yet another journalistic bandwagon based on media hype, not reality. Their own numbers damn their report and score for the 2012 Civic.

In regards to road noise is honda still using the bottom of the barrel bridgestones on their entry level cars? Just changing those tires to...well...about anything resulted in my wife's old CRV being much quieter and that may explain the longer stopping distances then it's competitors.

[WolfpackS2k]

Saki GT, on 02 August 2011 - 09:39 AM, said:

Fwiw CR also trashed the Passat because the new one isn't as luxurious as the old one, despite the lower price to offset that, which is BS imo. Car reviews from pretty much everywhere else on the planet still call the Passat a nice car even if its not as nice as the old one.

CR is good for crunching numbers and showing trends and facts, but their opinions are junk.

If you're going to post accusations at least get the car right. It is the WV Jetta that everyone is criticizing, not the Passat. And I don't know anyone that prefers the new Jetta over the old one (this includes owners of the previous generation).

Quote

However, I see this as yet another journalistic bandwagon based on media hype, not reality.

I don't think CR really cares what performance car magazines say about these cars.

Car and Driver's road test (against the new Focus) was also pretty damning. They said it's turning into the Buick of the compact class and I can't see any argument against that statement.

[JonBoy]

The Buick? EVERY comparo has said that the Elantra handles worse than the Civic and somehow the Civic is the Buick? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

For the Focus, it may be a "great" car but with a problematic transmission, I don't think anyone is going to enjoy owning it for a long time plus it'll never get anywhere near 47 mpg on the highway. It certainly looks great, inside and out (I saw a bunch of them as rental cars on the road this weekend - the hatchback looks great), but it's certainly far from perfect.

As a side note, in our 2008 Honda Civic LX with two adults, two kids and 150 lbs of luggage on a camping trip this weekend, we averaged 39 mpg on the way there with speeds exceeding 80 mph much of the time in the mountains, plus hard bursts of acceleration in the passing zones, for 600 miles of driving. I took it easy on the way back and averaged just over 41 mpg with virtually the same load (slightly less due to the food we'd consumed while camping). That's in a car that is LESS fuel efficient than the new Civic.

[Saki GT]

WolfpackS2k, on 02 August 2011 - 12:32 PM, said:

[

If you're going to post accusations at least get the car right. It is the WV Jetta that everyone is criticizing, not the Passat. And I don't know anyone that prefers the new Jetta over the old one (this includes owners of the previous generation).

There's a difference?

[Popeye]

I agree the 9th gen is a step back and we'll keep out 8th gen Si until it dies

[thielepr]

JonBoy, on 02 August 2011 - 10:45 AM, said:

They got 47 mpg in the car (!!!), it's quieter than the last one, more spacious, has improved features/amenities and the look hasn't changed much. It's less sporty but quite a bit more compliant while still handling as well or better than almost everything else (new Focus being better, most others being worse). While I understand that the GAP between the 9th gen and 8th gen is much smaller than the one between the 8th gen and 7th gen, the 9th gen is still the better car (by quite a bit, in some cases).

It's a simple case of people comparing to the old car rather than to the competition, I think. Virtually EVERY test does the same thing and it's getting old. The Civic isn't competing with itself - it's competing with the other manufacturers.

Do you see how the 2012 civic looks? Have you seen 2012 Elantra? I undertsnad the looks is in the eye of the beholder but the 2012 civic look more like a last decede car. Sure the got 47 MPG! A geo metro puts 50 easy. The car looks bland, the interior is more cheap, it doesn't is more faster, and a corollla have more soul.

[WolfpackS2k]

JonBoy, on 02 August 2011 - 01:03 PM, said:

The Buick? EVERY comparo has said that the Elantra handles worse than the Civic and somehow the Civic is the Buick? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

For the Focus, it may be a "great" car but with a problematic transmission, I don't think anyone is going to enjoy owning it for a long time plus it'll never get anywhere near 47 mpg on the highway. It certainly looks great, inside and out (I saw a bunch of them as rental cars on the road this weekend - the hatchback looks great), but it's certainly far from perfect.

Numb steering is the main criticism towards the way the Civic drives.

As to the Focus, the transmission problem is easily solved by opting for the manual transmission.

[JonBoy]

Easily solved if you know how to drive one. Most people don't....

[JonBoy]

thielepr, on 03 August 2011 - 05:57 AM, said:

Do you see how the 2012 civic looks? Have you seen 2012 Elantra? I undertsnad the looks is in the eye of the beholder but the 2012 civic look more like a last decede car. Sure the got 47 MPG! A geo metro puts 50 easy. The car looks bland, the interior is more cheap, it doesn't is more faster, and a corollla have more soul.

I have seen the new 2012 and, in person, it looks fine. The Si Coupe looks very good to me and the Si Sedan actually looks better as well. The base car is not as exciting as the Elantra but are we buying cars based on looks alone, now? The Civic is more fuel efficient (real world numbers bear this out in EVERY test thus far, sometimes by a significant margin), better handling, more buttoned down and has proven reliability to back it up (no direct injection problems to worry about, either). A Corolla definitely DOESN'T have more soul - it's arguably the blandest car you can buy right now. A friend of mine just bought one and her and her husband hate it so much that they put it up for sale within a week.

[thielepr]

JonBoy, on 03 August 2011 - 09:29 AM, said:

thielepr, on 03 August 2011 - 05:57 AM, said:

Do you see how the 2012 civic looks? Have you seen 2012 Elantra? I undertsnad the looks is in the eye of the beholder but the 2012 civic look more like a last decede car. Sure the got 47 MPG! A geo metro puts 50 easy. The car looks bland, the interior is more cheap, it doesn't is more faster, and a corollla have more soul.

I have seen the new 2012 and, in person, it looks fine. The Si Coupe looks very good to me and the Si Sedan actually looks better as well. The base car is not as exciting as the Elantra but are we buying cars based on looks alone, now? The Civic is more fuel efficient (real world numbers bear this out in EVERY test thus far, sometimes by a significant margin), better handling, more buttoned down and has proven reliability to back it up (no direct injection problems to worry about, either). A Corolla definitely DOESN'T have more soul - it's arguably the blandest car you can buy right now. A friend of mine just bought one and her and her husband hate it so much that they put it up for sale within a week.

I don't know how loyal to the brand you are. But you are just blind. I'm not saying tha the civic is a bad car, that would be stupid. But the civic was the benchmark of the segment.

Even having a S2k and a 06 civic si right now, I'm not loyal to any brand. I usually go to drive new cars often just for fun. I had driven the 2012 civic and beilive me that doesn't inspire more than a corolla. The civic have lost it soul.

I have a 06 civic si. I was waiting for the 2012. Do you really think that it would make sense to trade-in my car to the new Si that doesn't it faster, doesn't handle better and most important it less fun to drive.