Any 2014 Si owners out there yet?

kgf3076 said:
Alabaster Silver Coupe. Picked it up two weeks ago. Compared to the S2000, the steering is a bit vague and the shifts are about 3 miles from gear to gear, but overall, a very nice drivers car.
Once the short shifter is installed, the 3 mile gear shifts should be gone and a set of coilovers will get rid of the 4x4 look.
Click to expand...
I'm trying to find out if the Buddy Club SS fits the 2014 Si.
 
JonnyRotten said:
I'm trying to find out if the Buddy Club SS fits the 2014 Si.
Click to expand...
I don't see any reason why it shouldn't fit. However, it would be nice to see part numbers for the shift assembly for the '13 and '14 Si coupe.
 
kgf3076 said:
I don't see any reason why it shouldn't fit. However, it would be nice to see part numbers for the shift assembly for the '13 and '14 Si coupe.
Click to expand...
Exactly @kgf3076 . I noticed that the surround on the shift boot has been changed a little bit so who knows what other little changes Honda has made to the cars internals.
I would hate to buy the SS and take the car apart only to find out it doesn't fit properly :sadface:
 
JonnyRotten said:
Exactly @kgf3076 . I noticed that the surround on the shift boot has been changed a little bit so who knows what other little changes Honda has made to the cars internals.
I would hate to buy the SS and take the car apart only to find out it doesn't fit properly :sadface:
Click to expand...
That would rank about 10+ on the suck-o meter :)
 
I had a 2013 Si (drove for 12,500 miles) and now have my 2014 and there are many changes that range from subtle to significant.... I cannot imagine how people would say the steering is vague in this one. The ratio is faster than 2013 and the wheel is much, much stiffer. Also stiffer is the suspension.... considerably better handling than '13 and much more firm, which is noticeable on any large bumps, but mainly noticeable is that when you turn, it just goes where you turn it without leaning!

So, that said, I would imagine there's a possibility of changes. The 2014 suspension has new springs, dampers, and sway bars.... There are a lot more changes than you would really expect from 2013.
 
kgf3076 said:
I don't see any reason why it shouldn't fit. However, it would be nice to see part numbers for the shift assembly for the '13 and '14 Si coupe.
Click to expand...
It looks like it is the same shift lever in the '13 and '14 according to the part catalogue on hondapartdeals.com.

http://www.hondapartsdeals.com/hpa_parts_list.php?vin=&Label[ProductID]=CIVIC&Label[YearID]=2014&Label[DoorID]=2&Label[GradeID]=SI (NAVI)&Label[AreaID]=KA&Label[TransmissionID]=6MT&Label[SectionID]=CHASSIS&Label[IllustrationGroupID]=SHIFT LEVER&ProductID=4&YearID=45&DoorID=1&GradeID=521&AreaID=2&TransmissionID=8&SectionID=6&IllustrationGroupID=19865

http://www.hondapartsdeals.com/hpa_parts_list.php?vin=&Label[ProductID]=CIVIC&Label[YearID]=2013&Label[DoorID]=2&Label[GradeID]=SI (NAVI)&Label[AreaID]=KA&Label[TransmissionID]=6MT&Label[SectionID]=CHASSIS&Label[IllustrationGroupID]=SHIFT LEVER&ProductID=4&YearID=44&DoorID=1&GradeID=521&AreaID=2&TransmissionID=8&SectionID=6&IllustrationGroupID=19865
 
Last edited:
ZeroTX said:
I cannot imagine how people would say the steering is vague in this one.
Click to expand...
Depends on what you're comparing it to. In my case, I'm comparing it to my 6 year old S2000 (and believe me, in comparison, the steering is vague). There's a total lack of road feel but this may be a trait of front wheel drive cars. I haven't had a front-wheeler for a while.
 
kgf3076 said:
Depends on what you're comparing it to. In my case, I'm comparing it to my 6 year old S2000 (and believe me, in comparison, the steering is vague). There's a total lack of road feel but this may be a trait of front wheel drive cars. I haven't had a front-wheeler for a while.
Click to expand...

Okay, but the S2000 is a tiny sports car that rides like your *** is directly sitting on the pavement below you. You won't find the harshness of an S2000 in just about any modern 2014 car, including exotic sports cars... Did you drive an FRS/BRZ? It's rear-drive and I think you'll find it's nowhere near as harsh as the S2k and that the steering by that measure is more "vague."

I personally don't need the steering wheel pushing back at me in order to tell the limits of the car. If anything, this simply makes spirited driving require a lot more effort. Not interested.
 
ZeroTX said:
Okay, but the S2000 is a tiny sports car that rides like your *** is directly sitting on the pavement below you. You won't find the harshness of an S2000 in just about any modern 2014 car, including exotic sports cars... Did you drive an FRS/BRZ? It's rear-drive and I think you'll find it's nowhere near as harsh as the S2k and that the steering by that measure is more "vague."

I personally don't need the steering wheel pushing back at me in order to tell the limits of the car. If anything, this simply makes spirited driving require a lot more effort. Not interested.
Click to expand...
S2000 Specs: Exterior
Wheelbase (in.) 94.5
Length (in.) 162.2
Height (in.) 50
Width (in.) 68.9
Track (in., front/rear) 57.9 / 59.4
Curb Weight (lbs.) 2864
Weight Distribution (%, front/rear) 49 / 51
Horsepower @ rpm (SAE net) 237 @ 7800

2014 Civic Si Coupe: Exterior
Wheelbase (in) 103.2
Length (in) 176.1
Height (in) 55.0
Width (in) 69.0
Track (in, front/rear) 59.0 / 59.9
Horsepower @ rpm (SAE net) 205 @ 7000

So that makes the S2000 8.7" shorter in wheelbase, 13.9" in length, .1" in width, 5" lower in height, 1.1" in front track and .5" in rear track. With the exception of length, every measurement is less than one foot. Sounds pretty even to me. So much for "tiny sports car". :).
I've driven FRS's (which in stock form are way underpowered and don't handle all that well at all without suspension work), STi's, EVO's, Porsche's, Alfa Romeos, Jaguars, and even Corvettes (which I raced for 4 years). There's a fine line between road feedback and total isolation. If you can't (or don't want to) tell the difference between the road surface and the shoulder (or the track edge), you can drive a Buick. Too much dampening of road feel is not ideal. The Si isn't bad, there is some feedback, but not to the degree that I'm used to. Different strokes and all that.
(Incidentally, I'm not getting on your case, it's that my car background is probably a lot different than yours (how many rear-drive cars have you owned or driven? That's all I drove for a LONG time). I look for different things than you do and steering/road feedback is one of those things).
 
kgf3076 said:
So that makes the S2000 8.7" shorter in wheelbase, 13.9" in length, .1" in width, 5" lower in height, 1.1" in front track and .5" in rear track. With the exception of length, every measurement is less than one foot. Sounds pretty even to me. So much for "tiny sports car". :).
I've driven FRS's (which in stock form are way underpowered and don't handle all that well at all without suspension work), STi's, EVO's, Porsche's, Alfa Romeos, Jaguars, and even Corvettes (which I raced for 4 years). There's a fine line between road feedback and total isolation. If you can't (or don't want to) tell the difference between the road surface and the shoulder (or the track edge), you can drive a Buick. Too much dampening of road feel is not ideal. The Si isn't bad, there is some feedback, but not to the degree that I'm used to. Different strokes and all that.
(Incidentally, I'm not getting on your case, it's that my car background is probably a lot different than yours (how many rear-drive cars have you owned or driven? That's all I drove for a LONG time). I look for different things than you do and steering/road feedback is one of those things).
Click to expand...

Admittedly, the size and power specs aren't as different as I would have imagined, but the car was tuned very differently. I don't really think it's a FWD vs. RWD issue necessarily. I've driven some very "connected" FWD cars, in particular one that I owned: a 1988 VW Golf GTI 16v. Close ratio 5-speed, slightly power-assisted steering, but stuck to the road like glue and would turn sharp enough to just about turn it around inside a parking space :) As far as rear-drive vehicles, I've owned more of those than FWD, including some with some pretty darn vague steering (1979 Cutlass coupe, 1979 Malibu), as well as some more firm ones (2000 Camaro Z28), and some inbetween (2001 Mustang GT... stiff steering, but still no feedback).

For its purposes, I think the 2014 Si is just about spot-on perfect. You would definitely not like the 2013. Much softer, easier, and less feedback.
 
ZeroTX said:
Admittedly, the size and power specs aren't as different as I would have imagined, but the car was tuned very differently. I don't really think it's a FWD vs. RWD issue necessarily. I've driven some very "connected" FWD cars, in particular one that I owned: a 1988 VW Golf GTI 16v. Close ratio 5-speed, slightly power-assisted steering, but stuck to the road like glue and would turn sharp enough to just about turn it around inside a parking space :) As far as rear-drive vehicles, I've owned more of those than FWD, including some with some pretty darn vague steering (1979 Cutlass coupe, 1979 Malibu), as well as some more firm ones (2000 Camaro Z28), and some inbetween (2001 Mustang GT... stiff steering, but still no feedback).

For its purposes, I think the 2014 Si is just about spot-on perfect. You would definitely not like the 2013. Much softer, easier, and less feedback.
Click to expand...
I don't know. The extra weight on the front-end associated with having the transmission located at the front of the car almost guarantees that softer power steering is a foregone conclusion. (not always, but it almost seems to be standard. Some American cars feel like you're pushing a feather pillow with a strand of spaghetti when you steer them). I think in a lot of cars aimed at the North American market (and especially the U.S.), the tendency is to make the steering more isolated from road feedback. Maybe manufacturers think that our roads are so good here that we don't need to feel the road. That's what I miss in the Si, not the turn ratio which is pretty nice. I'm used to quick ratio, mildly muted road feel which the S2000 delivers. I don't feel quite as connected to the road in the Si. (That's not a fault, it's a personal preference for road feedback coming from using the "warning" edge on race tracks to know where the front wheels were on the track). My last American car was the "67 Corvette without the benefit of power steering. Made for a great upperbody workout. Don't think I'd ever want to go back to a vehicle like that and the Si is a definite improvement in steering effort and feel in comparison.
 
The car I learned stick-shift on was a 1983 Mazda 626 sedan. It was actually fairly fun to drive, 5-speed, fairly light clutch and power brakes, but had a full manual steering rack and if the car was sitting still or moving slowly, it was a BEAR to drive. Definitely no one-handed parking. I wouldn't want to go back to that, either.

BTW, not enough feel is a common complaint that goes with electric power steering, which our cars have... I remember when Pontiac came out with the G6 with electric power steering, they made the G6 GTP model come with a hydraulic rack to retain the steering feel over the standard model. They are getting better at the electric steering, though. I love how consistent the boost feels.
 
ZeroTX said:
The car I learned stick-shift on was a 1983 Mazda 626 sedan. It was actually fairly fun to drive, 5-speed, fairly light clutch and power brakes, but had a full manual steering rack and if the car was sitting still or moving slowly, it was a BEAR to drive. Definitely no one-handed parking. I wouldn't want to go back to that, either.
Click to expand...
Hmm, the car I learned to drive was a 1956 Renault Dauphine. Think I might have a year or two headstart on you :D.
 
ZeroTX said:
I came from a 2013 Si sedan to a 2014 Si sedan, and I agree with you on the suspension and shifting. I was actually a bit apprehensive when I got into the '14, because I instantly noticed that the shifter was stiffer. I thought negatively of this at first, but after driving it a while, it actually seems to aide in fast shifting somehow. Also, the suspension feels COMPLETELY different in the 2014 vs. the 2013... If my eyes were closed, I would assume it was a completely different car I was driving and not just one model year newer of the same car. The springs, sway bars, and I presume the struts are updated, and it is significant. I think the automotive reviewers actually need to re-do all of their reviews on this car, because there are significant improvements for 2014.

As far as the "rev hang," it's hard for me to say, because I never really had an issue with that on the '13. I also haven't driven my '14 hard yet, as I only have 250 miles on it.

I'll add that I also love the 18's. I was extremely skeptical of these as well, but in person they really set the car off and give it a great stance. The negative I would say is the extra weight and drag, and the fatter tread seems to give the car some torque steer that wasn't there with the skinnier tires. I guess there's always a trade-off, and there aren't many narrow 18's available.

Here's my 2014 Si sedan:

silversi1.jpg

silversi2.jpg
Click to expand...
Wow I love that color! I'm shopping for a new car and right now the Civic Si is a heavy favorite. I didn't like the red seat inserts or the new 18" wheels at first but they've grown on me. Can you elaborate on the suspension? I assume it handles better than before but is the ride much stiffer.... or can it be described more as "firm"? Also what has the iMid display been indicating to you in terms of mileage? Thanks and congratulations!
 
kgf3076 said:
S2000 Specs: Exterior
Wheelbase (in.) 94.5
Length (in.) 162.2
Height (in.) 50
Width (in.) 68.9
Track (in., front/rear) 57.9 / 59.4
Curb Weight (lbs.) 2864
Weight Distribution (%, front/rear) 49 / 51
Horsepower @ rpm (SAE net) 237 @ 7800

2014 Civic Si Coupe: Exterior
Wheelbase (in) 103.2
Length (in) 176.1
Height (in) 55.0
Width (in) 69.0
Track (in, front/rear) 59.0 / 59.9
Horsepower @ rpm (SAE net) 205 @ 7000

So that makes the S2000 8.7" shorter in wheelbase, 13.9" in length, .1" in width, 5" lower in height, 1.1" in front track and .5" in rear track. With the exception of length, every measurement is less than one foot. Sounds pretty even to me. So much for "tiny sports car". :).
I've driven FRS's (which in stock form are way underpowered and don't handle all that well at all without suspension work), STi's, EVO's, Porsche's, Alfa Romeos, Jaguars, and even Corvettes (which I raced for 4 years). There's a fine line between road feedback and total isolation. If you can't (or don't want to) tell the difference between the road surface and the shoulder (or the track edge), you can drive a Buick. Too much dampening of road feel is not ideal. The Si isn't bad, there is some feedback, but not to the degree that I'm used to. Different strokes and all that.
(Incidentally, I'm not getting on your case, it's that my car background is probably a lot different than yours (how many rear-drive cars have you owned or driven? That's all I drove for a LONG time). I look for different things than you do and steering/road feedback is one of those things).
Click to expand...

Those measurements, even if less than a foot, are a huge deal especially the wheelbase. Then take into consideration overall length difference of almost 14" it implies the wheels of the S2000 are pushed further to ends of the car (a la go kart), the lower overall height which lowers the CG, and no roof and no rear seats. You showed the weight distribution of the S2000 at 49/51 f/r, but conveniently not the Civic Si Coupe which clocks in at a crazy 61/39. The S2000 weighs in at about 2,840lbs while the Civic Si Coupe comes in at about 3,002 (meaning to make it even you'd have to put a passenger in the S2000 to make it weigh the same as the Si). And the the S2000 is rear wheel drive, while the Civic is not. And the Civic has four seats. As racer I would think you would know those are big differences.

I have no idea how these two can be comparable to you. The Civic Si is not a race car nor is it a high performance car like your "STi's, EVO's, Porsche's, Alfa Romeos, Jaguars, and even Corvettes (which I raced for 4 years)". The FRS/BRZ and Si's last I checked can be had for 25k or less. The cars on your list of references can't be had for less than 40k except maybe for a base STi or EVO... plus whatever you spend to make them race ready.
 
elementrace said:
Wow I love that color! I'm shopping for a new car and right now the Civic Si is a heavy favorite. I didn't like the red seat inserts or the new 18" wheels at first but they've grown on me. Can you elaborate on the suspension? I assume it handles better than before but is the ride much stiffer.... or can it be described more as "firm"? Also what has the iMid display been indicating to you in terms of mileage? Thanks and congratulations!
Click to expand...

Thanks!! The seat color is growing on me as well, and the wheels look better in person and really give the car a nice stance vs. the smaller and skinnier 17s. I would say the suspension is firmer and it handles better. It is still compliant over somewhat rough roads and is not uncomfortable. It is definitely stiffer than 2013 and the dampers seem faster. I drove my 2013 more than 12k miles, so plenty of time to get used to it, so the differences were apparent right away. I also love how the metallic silver accentuates the lines of the car, which were kind of washed out on the white car.
 
elementrace said:
Those measurements, even if less than a foot, are a huge deal especially the wheelbase. Then take into consideration overall length difference of almost 14" it implies the wheels of the S2000 are pushed further to ends of the car (a la go kart), the lower overall height which lowers the CG, and no roof and no rear seats. You showed the weight distribution of the S2000 at 49/51 f/r, but conveniently not the Civic Si Coupe which clocks in at a crazy 61/39. The S2000 weighs in at about 2,840lbs while the Civic Si Coupe comes in at about 3,002 (meaning to make it even you'd have to put a passenger in the S2000 to make it weigh the same as the Si). And the the S2000 is rear wheel drive, while the Civic is not. And the Civic has four seats. As racer I would think you would know those are big differences.

I have no idea how these two can be comparable to you. The Civic Si is not a race car nor is it a high performance car like your "STi's, EVO's, Porsche's, Alfa Romeos, Jaguars, and even Corvettes (which I raced for 4 years)". The FRS/BRZ and Si's last I checked can be had for 25k or less. The cars on your list of references can't be had for less than 40k except maybe for a base STi or EVO... plus whatever you spend to make them race ready.
Click to expand...
At no time have I ever equated the Si with the S2000. What I said (and I'm repeating myself because this is all written in the original thread) is that in comparison to the S2000 the steering in the Si was vague. VAGUE! Okay? It goes where you point it but the road feel is not the same as it is in the S2000 which has faster steering and fewer turns locl to lock. You really need to read the whole thread before going to all this trouble. At no time have I ever said the Si was a race car, never inferred it, never alluded to it, never even hinted that I thought it might be. Read the original posts and then you'll understand the reasoning of the response. I didn't post a f/r weight ratio for the Civic Si because it's not posted on the owners.honda website. I'm so glad you pointed out that the Si is a frontwheel drive car. I'll now know where to go on the car to service the diff. Does that mean the Si doesn't have a driveshaft as well? You may also note that I also own both a S2000 and a '14 Si. I bought the Si as a daily driver/fun car, the S2000 is my play toy and gets driven when I want to do serious play. Incidentally, the S2000 also has a hard top.

I see you just joined, welcome. Now, what are you driving and will I see you at the Dragon in September?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Perhaps you didn't say comparable, but then you are comparing them as if they should be, especially since you emphasized how close you think they were in size. In my opinion not every car should have the driving dynamics that you look for since not everyone has your driving skills. I personally wouldn't want an elderly person driving a car with such sensitive steering that a badly timed sneeze can cause him to jump across lanes. Perhaps its because you have such a narrow scope of experience with cars that it limits your openness to a different point of view. If you read my intro you'd note that I've owned a variety of vehicles, but I've driven others from slammed Integras to ancient Ferrari's. I'm sorry that I don't have your "street cred" and probably won't make it to your Dragon, but at least I won't let you help me make a bad decision on a car by giving such a narrow and finite point of view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top