Its amazing how few new Japanese performance cars

[deevergote]

I suppose your right, I re-read and it does come across a bit negative. I was more talking about the hate going back and forth between members then the hate on the car companies.



Couldn't agree more.

Thats also why I bashed though. I believe that the "Market" has a better idea-at least in terms of performance- of what a car enthusiast wants in a car. I imagine people that bought Si's off the lot, for atleast a decade now have dreamed that they came turbo like other cars in their class or atleast had an option for it. Other companies, such as Dodge tried to get on board with people modding their neons, hence the SRT-4 and the stage 1,2 and 3 upgrades.

Same deal as the cobalt turbo.

Granted, the aftermarket is there to get people where they want to be, but you'd think that the people claiming to be the "best" would understand and offer some better "stage x" upgrades from the factory.

And I also feel like if they are going to "create" the market for themselves, they should "take" the market themselves. Be the best, strive on quality, make people want your product. Dont jew them on their 35 thousand dollar purchase, that just lost 20-30% in value the second they drove it home.

Look at Bisi. He's forcing his way into a nitch, that he created on being the best. He has his issues just like any company in the market but thats just business.

If Dodge came out with an SRT-4 package, 40k, 5 link suspension, quality adjustable coilover system, direct fuel injection, brembo brake kit, something like a holset hx series turbo with a quality manifold, a tunable ecu and a designer interrior and they would draw the enthusiasts.


Everything I suggested can be found on different OEM vehicles-so I guess I dont understand why they hold back so much when considering a "performance" package. Its not like the people that engineer these cars that work at Mopar arent smart enough to figure this shit out. I do not believe that cost doesnt come to play when considering things like design, quality control etc.

So, charging me 30-40k for a car it better be nice as a MOFO and built with quality shit, and usually its just not.


Just using the SRT-4 as an example not trying to single it out.




Maybe we just have a difference of opinion. I understand the idea behind good business, but they are just creating an aftermarket for themselves. Isnt it bad enough that they charge you, 30-40k for your "sports car"-shouldnt that price tag warrant the full, balls to the wall deal?

I think it should, but I understand if you feel different.


My post was in no way trying to be a douche, just did a little multi quoting to sorta carry a conversation rather then answer to all that in one long paragraph.

Well, the cars you are using as examples are essentially factory tuner cars. That is the current trend... the souped up version of the budget grocery getter (usually because that car is inexpensive and lightweight.) They are not dedicated sports cars. They are cars that, until the factory started offering souped up versions, people would modify (much as we are doing to our CB7s). The car companies just realized that by offering a performance-oriented model of their cheapie cars, they'll draw the enthusiasts that want a head start. Honestly, if I wanted a turbo Neon, I could buy a used base model for $2000, and put $8000 into it... resulting in a faster car than a stock SRT-4, which I could get for about $10,000 now.

HOWEVER, if Dodge decided to release a balls-out, full race-prepped SRT-4 making 350whp... complete with lightweight forged wheels, big brakes, a transmission with carbon synchronizers, and carbon fiber body panels... and they wanted $40k for it... would I be interested? Absolutely not. Why? Because it's an overpriced souped up Neon. It might be worth it to some (the new STi is pushing $40k... I believe it could even be optioned over $40k), but to me, if I'm spending that kind of money on a factory car, I want it to be either a true sports car... or a luxury car. No amount of modifications will make a cheapie car worth that much to me... and since I'm SURE there are marketing analysts that have considered this scenario, there are enough people that agree with me to keep it from happening.
I'd much rather get a fairly sporty cheapie car (say, $20,000), and have the option to upgrade it... either at the dealer, or via aftermarket companies. Plus, you can build these cars a la carte from the dealer, and the end result would be a pricetag that would very likely resemble what you would pay for a fully built model with no better options above it. Hell, you could have walked into a Dodge dealer and bought a brand new SRT-4... and told them to do every performance modification available before you even laid eyes on it. There you'd have your $35,000 SRT-4 making buttloads of power.
Also, with the SRT-4... all the factory-approved upgrades were Mopar performance parts. Essentially, Dodge's factory aftermarket. Almost every major automaker has their own performance division. It's nothing new. Ford's racing division was founded in 1901 (and Ford Racing will supply you with some pretty potent parts to upgrade your Mustang...)

Now, if Mazda put an additional $10,000 worth of modifications into an RX-8 to make it 350whp turbo... I'd be more interested in that. Why? Because that's a genuine sports car. To me, significant sporty modifications to a car that's purposely designed as a sports car make more sense to me.
That's one reason why I don't think $110,000 for a Corvette ZR1 is all that obscene, even though it doubles the price of a base Corvette. Would I pay it? Probably not (if I had enough money to even consider the option.) Would I buy a base Corvette and attempt to piece together the parts from the ZR1 that I like? Perhaps. Would a base Corvette suit my needs just fine? Probably.


I didn't intend for this to be so wordy...
But one last point. Hyundai. The Hyundai Genesis Coupe comes in 2 flavors. The V6 model, which is squatting on the doorstep of $30,000... and the turbo 4 cylinder model, which makes 80hp less, but costs $8000 less. Hyundai hasn't been shy about advertising the turbo model as being "tuner friendly". They made that car specifically for the crowd that wants to upgrade it. The V6 model is more for people that want the car as-is. The turbo car is underpowered, as to not compete with the V6... but it can be modified by someone that is into that. That $8,000 savings over the V6 could result in a car that makes more power than the V6 after modification. I don't know if Hyundai sells upgrades, but there are certainly aftermarket upgrades available... and the aftermarket will surely grow as companies embrace the platform.

[h22sparkle]

Honda got their results from the new civic and the market dropped on them. time to go back to the drawing board. if honda could really get their heads out of their butts and come out with a attractive civic with a turbo, their market would sky rocket.

I do not think that will happen anytime soon. If it does happen people will begin modding the car and theyll probably blow it up or the price that they will ask for to people can get their worth will probably skyrocket and people will not buy the car.

Either that for the price they will ask me for they will go get an evo or sti used. I think perhaps if they used the acura rdx whatever its called and swap that motor and put it in that car perhaps if it will hold the boost significantly without any issues it would have a shot.

[deevergote]

Most people don't buy a Civic Si for the same purpose that they'd buy an Evo or STi. The Civic sells very well in it's target market, including the Si. Anyone who gets a Civic Si and throws a turbo on it is doing so for one of three reasons: 1) they are loyal to the brand, or the model itself, 2) they got the car cheap, and want to modify it to be different (rather than just buying a fast car), or 3) they are stupid.



Right now, Honda's bread and butter is NOT their performance-oriented cars. To continue pushing performance cars that don't cater to the market's desire for practical, efficient, reliable, comfortable, affordable cars is futile. Hell, just having a pricey (to r&d, produce, and sell) sports car in their lineup will effectively increase the cost of ALL of their cars... because their overall operating costs would rise. A new NSX would raise the price of a base Fit, I assure you.

Right now, much of the world is feeling an economic crunch. The US, which has long been one of the largest markets for powerful, sporty cars, is DEFINITELY feeling that crunch. Our demand for such cars in volume has dropped considerably. There's little point in offering such a car right now. However, Honda can probably afford to pay a small team of engineers to toss around a few hypothetical ideas for sporty cars... so when the market rebounds (and it will, eventually), and the demand rises... we'll see a badass new NSX or S2000 replacement.

[owequitit]

Most people don't buy a Civic Si for the same purpose that they'd buy an Evo or STi. The Civic sells very well in it's target market, including the Si. Anyone who gets a Civic Si and throws a turbo on it is doing so for one of three reasons: 1) they are loyal to the brand, or the model itself, 2) they got the car cheap, and want to modify it to be different (rather than just buying a fast car), or 3) they are stupid.



Right now, Honda's bread and butter is NOT their performance-oriented cars. To continue pushing performance cars that don't cater to the market's desire for practical, efficient, reliable, comfortable, affordable cars is futile. Hell, just having a pricey (to r&d, produce, and sell) sports car in their lineup will effectively increase the cost of ALL of their cars... because their overall operating costs would rise. A new NSX would raise the price of a base Fit, I assure you.

Right now, much of the world is feeling an economic crunch. The US, which has long been one of the largest markets for powerful, sporty cars, is DEFINITELY feeling that crunch. Our demand for such cars in volume has dropped considerably. There's little point in offering such a car right now. However, Honda can probably afford to pay a small team of engineers to toss around a few hypothetical ideas for sporty cars... so when the market rebounds (and it will, eventually), and the demand rises... we'll see a badass new NSX or S2000 replacement.

Funny, for someone criticizing negativity, here you are perpetuating it.

1) The Civic Si sells well because contrary to popular Sparkle lore, it is a GREAT car. It is a great platform to start from. It is light, stiff, aerodynamic, has sophisticated (relative to the market) suspension, and all the right ingredients of a good driver interface; including, but not limited to a sublime shifter, easy to use clutch, good driving position, good visibility and a fantastic interior (in the case of the Si, which is the only enthusiast model that matters).

The fact that it will last forever and be fuel efficient are simply plusses for most enthusiasts.

The reality is that the Civic Si is about the most corked up car on the market today. You make a few VERY conservative changes to the engine and suspension, and you have a COMPLETELY different car. Honda didn't do it from the factory, but the potential is there. Sticky rubber, shocks/springs and a rear anti-roll bar and there isn't a whole lot that will outrun it on a track short of a full on sports car. Boost it, and there isn't much outside of a VERY high end sports car that will outrun it period. Couple both, and you don't have a "sports car," but you DO have a car that is fast as fuck.

P.S. It is far from "stupid" to mod an Si. For $5K in upgrades (keep in mind that you are not starting with boost), it will produce 400+ WHP and will swallow 15 PSI pretty damn reliably. In fact, there are many that have. If you took the time to spend the extra $$ it would DEFINITELY swallow it reliably. For the record, on an otherwise stock engine, that 15 PSI puts you over 400WHP and right around high 11's to low 12's in the 1/4 mile. Now, tell me how many other cars are going to accomplish that, plus 30+MPG city for 28K? Couple it with the 2K in suspension mods, and you have serious little car that will lay a world of hurt down on most anything you could possibly run across in the real world. It will, at the very least, put up one hell of a fight. P.S. Some of the early boosters of the Si are pushing 100K on those setups with ZERO issues. I can't remember the last Chrysler product I touched that was issue free for even 50K miles, and EVO's are not far behind, as they have a pretty deserved reputation for being a bit maintenance intensive as well.

Unlike some people, I am NOT claiming my shit to be the bestest and fastest in the world, but it can certainly have some bite with little effort if I so choose. The fundamental premise is that headflow is key to ANY kind of power, and when you take one of the best flowing heads ever produced and start cramming boost through it, it gets serious in a hurry.

It is pretty shitty to get on my ass about something, and then do pretty much the same thing yourself.

[deevergote]

I'm actually not being negative at all. My comment about "stupid" is simply in response to the fact that it will take a considerable amount of modification to a naturally aspirated Civic Si to make the amount of power that could be had from a few simple bolt-on parts (and shelf-reflash of the ECU) for a turbo car such as the STi or Evo to make a bunch of power.

Could it be done? Sure. Could I make more power with a $1000 CB7 and $20,000 worth of mods than someone with $21,000 would make with an STi, Evo, or modified Civic Si? Absolutely.

However, the more you add to a car, the more you amplify the risk factor. Would it be smarter to start with a Civic Si or an Evo, if the intention is 400whp with extensive modifications? I suppose that's up to the person making the choice... but personally, I'd go with the Evo. That's not negativity, that's simply weighing the options.

You are MORE than welcome to have your own opinion. We all know you have a vacation home located in the shady area on Honda's nuts, Scott. That's cool. But that doesn't mean that your opinion is any better than anyone else's. Argue your own points all you want, but don't start criticizing those that voice their own opinions. From what I can see, you've attacked both me and h22sparkle personally, when all we've been doing was voicing opinions that didn't correspond 100% with your own.

[HappyGilmore]

I will stick to my Accord for now...It does the job. I like a new Si but can't afford one so I will stick with what I have.

Although I do wish Honda would make a boosted AWD car similar to an STi one of these days, I think it would change things...IMO

[deevergote]

I think that might be too much for the market right now. It would result in NONE of the boosted AWD cars selling enough to justify continuing to improve them in subsequent models.

That's kinda what happened in the mid-90s, with cars like the 300zx, Supra, 3000gt, etc... All the big Japanese names had 300hp sports cars with tons of technology dumped into them. As they improved, the price skyrocketed. In the end, there were Japanese performance cars competing with each other at the $40k+ range. VERY expensive for the time, especially for the Japanese brands that had just emerged as accepted high quality brands only a few years prior (much like Hyundai has done over the past 10 years... they were just cheap and crappy, and now they're selling $60,000 cars.)
Anyway, with all those high-priced Japanese performance cars on the market (not to mention the competition from the Americans and the Germans), they saturated the market. The competition resulted in overpriced cars, and the sheer number of options on the market resulted in low sales for everyone. Even then, the range was pretty broad. AWD, RWD, turbo, rotary, V6, I6, 2 seat, 4 seat...

If there were another player in the AWD turbo performance sedan category, all 3 (Evo, STi, and whatever new car) would suffer. The competition between the Evo and STi is good enough, especially since they aren't exactly volume-sales cars as it is. They're both quite pricey these days!

I'm curious to see what Subaru does with the new car they're making jointly with Toyota. It's rumored to come AWD and turbo, making about 300hp... so there will be the STi, which is a seriously souped up econobox... and then there will be the dedicated sportscar platform, offering the same driveline. I wonder, will this car be the end of the STi? Or will it exist side by side, much like BMW's M3 and M Coupe a few generations back.




IMO, Honda has always gone one step above the competition. The S2000 is essentially a Miata competitor, being a sporty 4 cylinder MR roadster... but the S2000 offered a lot more out of the box, and came at a significantly higher price.
The NSX was released around the same time as the cars I mentioned in the beginning of this post... and was essentially Honda's only comparable vehicle to any of those... however, it was nearly double the price of those cars, and offered much greater performance (even though it came with less power than most of the competition.)
Honda tends to outclass themselves when it comes to sports cars.
They also don't cater to the traditional "I just wanna go fast" meathead crowd. The S2000 and the NSX, the only modern Hondas that I consider to be true sports cars, are both very unique machines that require much more finesse to drive successfully than most other cars that really just require a heavy right foot. That being said... those cars appealed to a smaller crowd than, say, a Mustang GT (that can't turn for shit... but any idiot can make it go fast in a straight line!)

Whenever Honda releases another sports car, I expect it to hit above the mark for whatever they're aiming at.
Honda has never been big in rally competition, so going head to head with the likes of Subaru and Mitsubishi would be unwise. No doubt they could do it, but they don't have the market recognition for that sort of car... and developing a reputation through racing takes a good deal of time and money! Their claim to fame is the road course (where even their FWD cars shine... still doesn't make them real sports cars in my mind...) Right now, the powerhouses from Japan on the road course are the GT-R and LF-A. That sets the stage for an NSX replacement, for sure... but Honda's too smart to release something that would likely fall between the GT-R and LF-A price-wise while the economy is in the shitter. Maybe when China demands a Honda supercar...

[ChIoVnIdCa]

Honda has never been big in rally competition, so going head to head with the likes of Subaru and Mitsubishi would be unwise.

Maybe with Mitsubishi going basically all straight electric and hybrid in 2015 (Eight cars will be released more than there whole car line so I assume no more straight gas cars anymore from them) it will give Honda the opening to get back into the game.

Days after revealing the concept version of its upcoming Global Small Car, Mitsubishi has announced plans for an electric vehicle (EV) and hybrid onslaught.

Mitsubishi says it will launch eight electric and hybrid models by 2015.

[owequitit]

I'm actually not being negative at all. My comment about "stupid" is simply in response to the fact that it will take a considerable amount of modification to a naturally aspirated Civic Si to make the amount of power that could be had from a few simple bolt-on parts (and shelf-reflash of the ECU) for a turbo car such as the STi or Evo to make a bunch of power.

Could it be done? Sure. Could I make more power with a $1000 CB7 and $20,000 worth of mods than someone with $21,000 would make with an STi, Evo, or modified Civic Si? Absolutely.

However, the more you add to a car, the more you amplify the risk factor. Would it be smarter to start with a Civic Si or an Evo, if the intention is 400whp with extensive modifications? I suppose that's up to the person making the choice... but personally, I'd go with the Evo. That's not negativity, that's simply weighing the options.

You are MORE than welcome to have your own opinion. We all know you have a vacation home located in the shady area on Honda's nuts, Scott. That's cool. But that doesn't mean that your opinion is any better than anyone else's. Argue your own points all you want, but don't start criticizing those that voice their own opinions. From what I can see, you've attacked both me and h22sparkle personally, when all we've been doing was voicing opinions that didn't correspond 100% with your own.

I will address your post from back to front.

1) You can accuse me of clinging to whatever shady part of whatever nutsack you want. The fact that is the largest substance you have says something. That said, I haven't said much on this board for a long time, because there are too many people that think they know more than they do, don't listen to good advice, or think they are car masters because they can slap factory built crap onto their car.

I am not nearly as happy about Honda, or their direction as you seem to think. But its OK for you to assume apparently. This is a Honda enthusiast focused sight and as such I post from that perspective. I don't fall into the category of people who have to go onto a different brand's forums and tell them how stupid and lame they are. I drive what I like because I like it. I don't really give a shit what other people think, nor do I have a lot of tolerance for those who do.

Finally, I am very less than happy with Honda. I don't like the half assed powertrains, the bloated size of some models, the ugly styling, or the cheapened interiors. I don't plan on owning one after my current Si, unless they manage to get their shit together and build real Hondas again. But apparently, that is beside the point.

2) I didn't say anything in this thread until sparkle's post quoted directly below:

I saw one square off with a g35 I think that says it. The thing the si has on it only is vtec and weight. I think its all hype in my personal opinion all is over rated until boost comes in or try both vtec and boost mivec,gtec whatevertec its all bullshit and mostly hype.Everytime I see one its riced to all hell. I respect the people who just keep their cars clean and not mimick each other to death it shows lack of leadership and originality.

It would be one thing to come in and say "gee the SRT-4 is really a good car. It is easy to get power out of" The problem is that he is so insecure, that he has to belittle every little thing that isn't just like his so he can feel better about the size of his phallis. He is literally incapable of having a legitimate like of something based on its own merits and has to resort to slamming everything he doesn't like because HE is blinded by fanboyism. The thread wasn't even about the Si specifically, nor had I participated and still S.O.S.D.D.

The bottom line is this. You are trying to tell me that it is stupid to boost an Si. Yet, realistically, it takes exactly as much stuff to boost an Si to ~400WHP as it does to an SRT-4 to Stage 3. One is dumb, and the other is not. Actually, if you do Stage 3 on the SRT-4, you actually end up having to do MORE stuff to the car than you do with an AJP kit on the Si. Yet, the Si counts as "substantial work" and the SRT-4 isn't? What kind of double standard is that? And lest you criticize its durability, HART uses an AJP kit on their time attack Si, which spent its entire life on a track. They are doing 400WHP with ZERO internal modifications, and they are lasting like an OEM car. So, you aren't changing more componentry, you are getting as much power, and it is race track proven to be durably by many owners and a corporate Honda racing team, but it is "stupid." OOOOKKKK. The only parts that exist in boosting an Si that don't exist in boosting an SRT4 to stage 3, are the intercooler and plumbing.

You run into the same issues with some Subies, some Mitsus and most of the other boosted cars on the market because they all only build the stuff bolted to the engine just enough to get where they want it. Any substantial power increases usually require "substantial work." You will also find that those STi's/STI's and EVO's aren't really producing those power levels without reliability problems or many more thousands in modifications to get the reliability.

Keep in mind that I can buy Si's used at a substantial discount vs the numbers I have used, which are for a new car. So the used car discount thing doesn't just apply to everyone else.

You seem to be stuck in the assumption that the Si wasn't boosted from the factory, so it isn't strong enough. The problem is that the Si is very overbuilt (like most of the boosted OEM cars), and doesn't start to see structural problems until around 15PSI. While that is about stock boost in most of the other applications, keep in mind that at 15PSI, you are around 500WHP.

But hey, don't take my word for it. A simple search of AJP Civic on Youtube or yahoo/google will show you all you need to know.

Also, have you ever done research on the issues with EVO drivelines? They weren't really built for that much power either, and then you have the day to day headaches of dealing with it. Some run trouble free, but many do not.

You can say what you want about what constitutes a "real sports" car, and you can try to accuse me of hanging out wherever you want. If you modify a car from stock, you are decreasing reliability margin. There is no free ride. Doesn't matter if it is an SRT, an EVO or a Civic. I just think it is pretty lame to call one of them stupid (while accusing me of having a derogatory opinion and pushing it on everyone) while putting the others in a different category.

You are also allowed to have your opinions, but on the one hand, you don't like when your members blatantly lump people into the category of stupid, and yet, here you are. So, I am curious. Exactly which of your three categories do I fit into?

[rexload]

Honda has a lot of pros - for example, it has such a huge aftermarket, that EG Civic/Integra platform can be turned into a 9sec car with off-the shelf parts for less than what it costs to buy a new car. However, it isn't "cool" to drive that type of car.

Bottom line is if you get enjoyment out of driving and/or fixing your car, then that's all that matters. Other brands' enthusiasts will always think that their shit is better...

Driving and enjoying a vehicle isn't about trying to prove to everyone else that your shit is the fastest and that your shit has the best $/hp ratio. If that is the case, then we'd probably be all rolling in gutted foxbodys with LSx swaps and monstrous turbos.

[HappyGilmore]

After reading the above posts, I feel like I should have never mentioned the Si as a sports car, nor the TSX or TL. I just think they are pretty sporty for what they are and what they are up against. The deffinition of sports car is different in everyone's eyes. Didn't mean to open that can of worms...

[deevergote]

I will address your post from back to front.

1) You can accuse me of clinging to whatever shady part of whatever nutsack you want. The fact that is the largest substance you have says something. That said, I haven't said much on this board for a long time, because there are too many people that think they know more than they do, don't listen to good advice, or think they are car masters because they can slap factory built crap onto their car.

I am not nearly as happy about Honda, or their direction as you seem to think. But its OK for you to assume apparently. This is a Honda enthusiast focused sight and as such I post from that perspective. I don't fall into the category of people who have to go onto a different brand's forums and tell them how stupid and lame they are. I drive what I like because I like it. I don't really give a shit what other people think, nor do I have a lot of tolerance for those who do.

Finally, I am very less than happy with Honda. I don't like the half assed powertrains, the bloated size of some models, the ugly styling, or the cheapened interiors. I don't plan on owning one after my current Si, unless they manage to get their shit together and build real Hondas again. But apparently, that is beside the point.

2) I didn't say anything in this thread until sparkle's post quoted directly below:



It would be one thing to come in and say "gee the SRT-4 is really a good car. It is easy to get power out of" The problem is that he is so insecure, that he has to belittle every little thing that isn't just like his so he can feel better about the size of his phallis. He is literally incapable of having a legitimate like of something based on its own merits and has to resort to slamming everything he doesn't like because HE is blinded by fanboyism. The thread wasn't even about the Si specifically, nor had I participated and still S.O.S.D.D.

The bottom line is this. You are trying to tell me that it is stupid to boost an Si. Yet, realistically, it takes exactly as much stuff to boost an Si to ~400WHP as it does to an SRT-4 to Stage 3. One is dumb, and the other is not. Actually, if you do Stage 3 on the SRT-4, you actually end up having to do MORE stuff to the car than you do with an AJP kit on the Si. Yet, the Si counts as "substantial work" and the SRT-4 isn't? What kind of double standard is that? And lest you criticize its durability, HART uses an AJP kit on their time attack Si, which spent its entire life on a track. They are doing 400WHP with ZERO internal modifications, and they are lasting like an OEM car. So, you aren't changing more componentry, you are getting as much power, and it is race track proven to be durably by many owners and a corporate Honda racing team, but it is "stupid." OOOOKKKK. The only parts that exist in boosting an Si that don't exist in boosting an SRT4 to stage 3, are the intercooler and plumbing.

You run into the same issues with some Subies, some Mitsus and most of the other boosted cars on the market because they all only build the stuff bolted to the engine just enough to get where they want it. Any substantial power increases usually require "substantial work." You will also find that those STi's/STI's and EVO's aren't really producing those power levels without reliability problems or many more thousands in modifications to get the reliability.

Keep in mind that I can buy Si's used at a substantial discount vs the numbers I have used, which are for a new car. So the used car discount thing doesn't just apply to everyone else.

You seem to be stuck in the assumption that the Si wasn't boosted from the factory, so it isn't strong enough. The problem is that the Si is very overbuilt (like most of the boosted OEM cars), and doesn't start to see structural problems until around 15PSI. While that is about stock boost in most of the other applications, keep in mind that at 15PSI, you are around 500WHP.

But hey, don't take my word for it. A simple search of AJP Civic on Youtube or yahoo/google will show you all you need to know.

Also, have you ever done research on the issues with EVO drivelines? They weren't really built for that much power either, and then you have the day to day headaches of dealing with it. Some run trouble free, but many do not.

You can say what you want about what constitutes a "real sports" car, and you can try to accuse me of hanging out wherever you want. If you modify a car from stock, you are decreasing reliability margin. There is no free ride. Doesn't matter if it is an SRT, an EVO or a Civic. I just think it is pretty lame to call one of them stupid (while accusing me of having a derogatory opinion and pushing it on everyone) while putting the others in a different category.

You are also allowed to have your opinions, but on the one hand, you don't like when your members blatantly lump people into the category of stupid, and yet, here you are. So, I am curious. Exactly which of your three categories do I fit into?

You fit into the category of someone who personally attacks another member due to their opinion (however obnoxious it may be.) THAT is where I draw the line... and that is why I intentionally did the exact same thing to you (which, apparently, rubbed you the wrong way... point well illustrated, no?)

Not a single one of my posts has been directed at anyone in an offensive manner. Not a single one of my posts has been made to tell anyone that they are wrong. Anything that I say is merely an opinion, because that is what this thread is... a discussion of opinion.

As for the Si vs SRT-4 comparison... The two cars cost about the same new (I'm using this example as if the Neon SRT-4 were still in production.)
The SRT-4's Stage 3 upgrade can be done by the Dodge dealer, and remain under warranty. The Civic's turbo upgrade would need to be done by a custom shop, or by the car's owner (or their friends.) It would easily void the warranty.
For someone that likes wrenching on their car, that's fine. I'm not saying it's an invalid option. However, it is still boosting an engine that is designed for naturally aspirated duty (most likely with pistons that aren't made for the heat and abuse that comes with turbo), and it requires the proper introduction of a brand new system. A factory turbo car with dealer-installed upgrade options makes a hell of a lot more sense... especially to someone that isn't knowledgeable enough (or interested enough) to install everything themselves.


And yes, you are correct... the more heavily you modify a car, the more you reduce the reliability (as well as the practicality.) That's a no-brainer. That's one reason why Honda doesn't sell sporty cars that make a ton of power. They aren't competing in the horsepower wars, because their reputation is built on reliability, affordability, and practicality... all three suffer as the cars are more heavily modified (from the factory or otherwise.)

But hey... my opinions are wrong. Please, continue attacking me. OR, leave this forum, because you really seem to hate it here. You are someone that I respect. You have a considerable amount of knowledge, and a good head on your shoulders. However, your posts have gone from being helpful and informative to being outright offensive attacks at someone that doesn't agree with you. If you can't comprehend the point of discussing opinions isn't to "win" or prove someone wrong... then perhaps you should just avoid these threads completely. You have nothing to offer this discussion. Anything that COULD be contributing to the conversation is lost in your incessant brow-beating and insults.