Civic VS Lancer
-
I've seen quite a number of these cars in sg roads...
what are their strengths? or are they popular coz they offer value for money? -
well, there is more toyota on the road than civic and lancer. lolOriginally posted by ronnie_2600:I've seen quite a number of these cars in sg roads...
what are their strengths? or are they popular coz they offer value for money?
personally, i tin tat taking the 1.6 to compare. i tin civic consider expensive to the other 2.
how bout engine wise? can anybody tell me? -
Engine wise Civic bit better, pick up slightly faster (if both cars compared are manual geared). But sounds a little noisier at high revs. Fuel consumption similar.
In terms of handling Civic is more enjoyable to drive, being a little more responsive at the wheel.
Space is pretty similar, tho the Civic as a flat floor behind, bit better for middle passenger.
As for looks i think Civic looks better stock, but Lancer looks better with the visual upgrades.
But in terms of cost, Lancer is a much better option. -
I feel Lancer engine lacks slightly less power than the Civic and even Toyota for that matter... Toyota quite responsive... it's really a "I want to go there and it does" car... engine also just right... you don't have to feel like you're flooring the acclerator when you start off...Originally posted by slacker001:Engine wise Civic bit better, pick up slightly faster (if both cars compared are manual geared). But sounds a little noisier at high revs. Fuel consumption similar.
In terms of handling Civic is more enjoyable to drive, being a little more responsive at the wheel.
Space is pretty similar, tho the Civic as a flat floor behind, bit better for middle passenger.
As for looks i think Civic looks better stock, but Lancer looks better with the visual upgrades.
But in terms of cost, Lancer is a much better option. -
Sit in a Manual Corolla when going up shears bridge and you will know ....
with gear 5 under 2.5k rpm you can feel the car pull even when you accel
And i am talking about stock here with 4 pax in the car
*For heng@ : No NAWWWWZZZZZZ no Quad Turbo Supra hor
-
Which year/models u tokking abt?Originally posted by ronnie_2600:I've seen quite a number of these cars in sg roads...
what are their strengths? or are they popular coz they offer value for money?
If the latest few, I agree wif the bros above. If u tokking abt the older series 92-2000 Lancers n Civics, the Civics (well at least the DOHC VTECs), will own the Lancers, even if they are MRs wif Mivec.
This topic always cause flame war, but Lancer MR owners themselves admit the MR does not live up to the 170bhp stated on its spec sheet. In fact, dyno results pulled only 130bhp (crank). It came out in one of the old motoring magazines. Think Lancer MR will draw wif a mildly mod ESi/EK VTi!
But of course LanEvo will decimate them all! Heehh... so, since the Evo is still called a "Lancer" Evolution, then Lancer is better!!!
To answer ur question more directly :-
Strengths : Powerful engines (up to 170bhp) original spec, not bad handling, 'affordable' (esp renewed COE ones), very moddable
Weakness : Ah bengish!!, some older ones rattly and problematic, poor low end torque
Strengths : Got big brudder Evo to protect the name... haha
Weakness : overstated power
I used to drive Civic and also Lancer so pls no mindless flame...hee.. constructive argument only! =P -
are they of the same engine displacement?
in terms of gear ratio (in auto), is civic/lancer the same oso?
i suppose most will compare manual.... but on the road nowadays i still see lots of civics/lancers driving auto macham like manual car. -
Displacement same, Lancer 1584cc Civic 1590cc.
Not sure abt gear ratio, but the 2004 auto Civic is a normal auto transmission (not CVT like earlier 2001-2003 models) so step-down response bit better than Lancer's CVT (which some ppl don't like...sluggish, slipping clutch sensation etc). 0-100 abt even, Civic 11.5 sec to Lancer 12 sec.
But if considering manual, Civic more pleasant to drive, gears shift more accurately. Stiffer clutch than Lancer, tho not like Rex one (like doing weights).
However for performance better to take the EK series, the current model like a kitten compared to a tiger. -
Is the Civic VTi-S worth the extra $5000 over the standard Civic VTi?
-
WAKAKAOriginally posted by guitarman1:Which year/models u tokking abt?
If the latest few, I agree wif the bros above. If u tokking abt the older series 92-2000 Lancers n Civics, the Civics (well at least the DOHC VTECs), will own the Lancers, even if they are MRs wif Mivec.
This topic always cause flame war, but Lancer MR owners themselves admit the MR does not live up to the 170bhp stated on its spec sheet. In fact, dyno results pulled only 130bhp (crank). It came out in one of the old motoring magazines. Think Lancer MR will draw wif a mildly mod ESi/EK VTi!
But of course LanEvo will decimate them all! Heehh... so, since the Evo is still called a "Lancer" Evolution, then Lancer is better!!!
To answer ur question more directly :-
Strengths : Powerful engines (up to 170bhp) original spec, not bad handling, 'affordable' (esp renewed COE ones), very moddable
Weakness : Ah bengish!!, some older ones rattly and problematic, poor low end torque
Strengths : Got big brudder Evo to protect the name... haha
Weakness : overstated power
I used to drive Civic and also Lancer so pls no mindless flame...hee.. constructive argument only! =P -
if u tin tat VTi not power for u, then go for S lor.Originally posted by cornyfish2000:Is the Civic VTi-S worth the extra $5000 over the standard Civic VTi?