2016 Civic - Now with turbo?

[Ecky]

This might've been posted before, but I just came across some info on the 2016 Civic.

See here: 2016 Honda Civic Sedan Press Kit - Overview - Honda News

Economy-related points mentioned:

-31/42/35 mpg with the 1.5T + CVT combo
-Electric Power Steering
-Fully belly pan
-Flush-mounted windshield
-12% reduction in CdA over outgoing Civic, Honda claims best-in-class (anyone have a number for the old Civic?)
-LED options for all exterior lighting (?)
-Weight reduction of ~75lbs

The bit that gets me is that it does 0-60 in ~6.5 seconds, which is faster than the last-generation Si model, which was rated at 22/31 mpg.

I'm somewhat curious how this motor would perform in an Insight, which weighs about 33% less and has better aerodynamics. Seems to me that 50-60mpg on the highway wouldn't be unrealistic without any eco-driving techniques, and it's conceivable that it might be a sub-10 second car.

[Vman455]

Honda has been pretty cagey about drag coefficients for the last 15 years or so, only characterizing the total drag of redesigned models as "x% reduction in drag." If you search some of the Civic forums, you can find a few people who have attempted to calculate current drag coefficients by backwards-comparison to the last known figure, but that's now two or three generations away for the Civic and who knows how accurate.

[Vman455]

Here's video of the underside:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqC_Xoz-Lqw

The cladding looks to be fairly extensive ahead of the rear suspension, but room for improvement behind it.

[Baltothewolf]

I test drove a 2016 sedan with the turbo. I was actually fairly impressed, for what it is. It's quick off the line and you get boost at very, very low RPM. I remember feeling it as low as 1500rpm. The CVT quickly spins up off the line and it will pull good all the way to redline.

[user removed]

Weighs about the same as our former 1999 Nissan Maxima.

regards
mech

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

That's a good move from Honda. I'd like to see how this engine would fare in a C-RV.

[darcane]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

Weighs about the same as our former 1999 Nissan Maxima.

regards
mech

It's as BIG as your old Maxima was too...

'99 Maxima
WIDTH 5 ft. 9.7 in. (69.7 in.)
HEIGHT 4 ft. 7.7 in. (55.7 in.)
LENGTH 15 ft. 9.4 in. (189.4 in.)
WHEEL BASE 8 ft. 10.3 in. (106.3 in.)

'16 Civic
WIDTH 5 ft. 10.8 in. (70.8 in.)
HEIGHT 4 ft. 7.7 in. (55.7 in.)
LENGTH 15 ft. 2.3 in. (182.3 in.)
WHEEL BASE 8 ft. 10.3 in. (106.3 in.)

Less overhang past the wheels, but otherwise as big or bigger. The Civic was a subcompact when your Maxima was made, but not anymore.

[darcane]

Oh, and I just saw this...

Originally Posted by Ecky

I'm somewhat curious how this motor would perform in an Insight, which weighs about 33% less and has better aerodynamics. Seems to me that 50-60mpg on the highway wouldn't be unrealistic without any eco-driving techniques, and it's conceivable that it might be a sub-10 second car.

sub 10-second... for what? 1/4 mile?

174hp is still a long ways off for that... even in an Insight.

[Ecky]

Originally Posted by darcane

Oh, and I just saw this...

sub 10-second... for what? 1/4 mile?

174hp is still a long ways off for that... even in an Insight.

I'm thinking that with a 33% weight reduction, acceleration would be close to 50% better? Maybe that's not how it works though.

[darcane]

Originally Posted by Ecky

I'm thinking that with a 33% weight reduction, acceleration would be close to 50% better? Maybe that's not how it works though.

Not really.

It's more of an exponential growth curve.

Typically for a small FWD car (CRX, older Civic hatch, etc), gutted out and built for drag racing, you need somewhere around 500hp to break into the 9's in the quarter.

That engine in an otherwise stock 1st gen Insight is probably good for low 14's in the quarter mile.

For reference, my parents own/operate a drag strip...