Okay so let me get this straight, now I'm fat, my life is an epic fail, and you make more money then me? Got anymore assumptions?

And seriously I could really care less about spelling / grammar errors most of the time (I defiantly make errors) but reading your post is board line painful, it’s that bad.

Finally, I think it's abundantly clear now that you’ve lost your mind and have no clue what you’re talking about. I suggest you just go a head and log off unless you want to continue displaying your lack of intellect.

Okay back on topic. Anyways, I’m not saying the Civic SI has no merits and or that it’s a bad car, etc. I’ve owned one for a good 6 months and thought it was pretty fun to drive, had a great stock audio system, ergonomics, clutch, shifter (granted 3rd gear was flaky).

My only reservation is the idea that the Civic SI is some how comparable to the Mazdaspeed 3. The ONLY ways these two cars are “comparable” is by “price” and from a basic drive train set up perspective (FWD, 60/40 weight distribution, 6speed MT, etc).

The MS3 is flat out a way better performance bargain which is a fact. The Civic SI needs at around 2k in modifications just to match the ¼ mile time of a bone stock MS3. Yes, the Civic is N/A and the MS3 is turbocharged but so what? This is how they come out of the box!

Yes, Honda does make good relatively high performance low displacement naturally aspirated motors. But if Honda really wants to compete with to day’s turbo 4’s it isn’t going to happen by sticking with N/A.

This isn’t “not respecting other platforms” or “being a fanboi”, etc.

This is the truth.

^Well said. I test drove both Ms3 and a white Si coupe one after another. Automall ftw. After that it was a no-brainer. It comes down to personal preference too; some would probably rather the softer feel and reliability of the Honda. The looks are subjective. For me it was the more spacious interior, better stereo, supportive seats, rock solid brake feel, firm clutch feel, and stiffer suspension that made me buy the Mazda. Also the xenons, leather, leds, rain-sensing wipers were more important to me than having for instance an Si w/ nav or an Si w/ the factory body kit and upgraded wheels. Throw in the fact that I only have to spend $750 to be able to run a quicker time than a stock new Evo and I was sold lol.

Unfortunately that's the conventional two-dimensional thought. Honda is, for lack of a better word, primarily a "green" company. If performance were THE primary focus among the sport compact crowd, the Si would dominate the used car lots and be laden with factory discounts. But it's not.

Why? Because FWD is essentially a giant compromise to begin with. Most enthusiasts who REALLY care about core performance are looking at AWD/FWD first. That in turn creates very unique comparison margins/sub-classes within the sport compact segment.

Si was tied for #2 on my list for very different reasons (obviously). Better fuel economy, rear passenger room, suspension design (especially the dampers), transmission, reliability, and short term resale value. Yet I chose the MS3 based on the GT interior, HID's, LED's, auto wipers, and the overall practicality of the hatch. Performance was simply icing on the cake.

CN: Complimentary, not mandatory.

Cobalt SS Turbo is a arguably a better performance bargain than both cars. And we can't forget the WRX!! $25.5K OUT THE DOOR & 12.9 IN THE 1/4 STOCK ROFL!!

If it doesn't do anything, then why did you put it in your tank? ... idiot

I was comparing an i/h/e Civic vs an MS3 with an intake. Not an i/h/e Civic vs an MS3 with an intake, and tuned with 93 oct & oct booster that raises oct by more than one point if it is real oct booster, not the shit you get at the local gas station.

Hey, why don't I compare a Civic with a N2O shot, that's would be a valid comparison according to you. It's only a fuel additive, right? What a moron.

Here's another thing that doesn't add up, how do you go nearly a half second faster than the fastest MS3 + intake time I've seen with a worse 60' if you are not either lying about your mods, or the race gas tune makes the difference, or both?

1/4 mile times with slip

Because anyone who mods their care should be tuning for the mods. It pretty much goes without saying whether its an Civic or an MS3, which is why I don't bother listing the TUNE every time I list the mods.

Oh wait, I forgot to list that both cars have tires and an engine, too. You win the e-debate, einstein! Congrats!

Civic Yes FTW!

i don't have a tune for my care yet. the care is still is there and the grass is still green. so si, u can mod your care without a tune.

Here are some details about the whole cost argument that ms3077 keeps bringing up:

2009 MS3 $22,740
Intake $200
Tune $700
Total $23,640

2009 Civic $21,905
Intake $200
Header $670
Exhaust $550
Tune $700
Total $23,935

So the MS3 is $300 cheaper, right? Now add plugs ($50), OCC ($50) & fuel pump internals ($300) supporting mods (NONE of which are necessary for the NA Civic) and the MS3 is now more expensive.

The point? Dollar for dollar, the MS3 performs slightly worse, and costs slightly more both to buy AND operate (gas mileage).

We can argue about it for 100 more pages, but the numbers simply don't lie. The fact that I don't have to worry about throwing a rod if I want more power than listed above is just a bonus.

Again; it is a preloaded tune for 93 oct gas, not a "race gas" tune. Never said the octane booster didn't do anything- I get it to insure I don't get any detonation and to make sure the gas I put in is at least really 93 oct when I'm going to drive it hard. A lot of times I am stuck buying that lukoil piss. And yea I did get it at a gas station for like $5 lol. If it may help and costs 5$ why not use it? Better than taking out my passenger seats like a fucking ricer. Keep crying about my time loser.

Cobb Sri: $150
Cobb AP: $550
Octane Booster: $5
Smoking Civic Sis so bad they don't believe what happened actually did: Priceless

its ok badams118 you will continue to argue over a civic vs an ms3 but the point is moot. i have seen problems in all motors most of the time when a stock engine blows its due to driver error. the nice thing about my ms3 is that i can fix it when i do break it as where you can just throw on some lame ass bolt ons that a monkey can do! plus horsepower doesnt mean shit on the true power of an engine its nothing but an esoteric meaning of content where torque shows the true power of an engine. and no where in this topic have we seen anything about your car just a bunch of shit you pull off of your forums that other ppl post where is YOUR dyno runs or YOUR 1/4 slips. go back to kiddie land and the rest of the me too civics and hope one day you will have enough money in your pocket to pay for a true build and dont have to ask mommy and daddy for lunch money!

and just for your info i use to spank bolted Si's with my old stock SVT focus. torque is everything

This is like that troll with the 350z all over again.

:danems6: 21905 + 200 + 670 + 550 + 700 = 24025

plus, rofl @ ur "ms3 is now more expensive" comment. u added stuff that WASN'T NEEDED. durr? dollar per dollar? how bout 263 vs 197, ~1 sec 1/4 mile advantage?

civic si w/ summer tires w/o nav is around $500 cheaper than the sport ms3.

Then it's not a legit comparison. Simple.

The header without HFC is $580. I forgot to correct the header price. Sue me.

No fuel pump = lean. No plugs = detonation. No OCC = oil blow by or worse. The fact that the MS3 needs all three just proves what a POS it is.

Also, if you are going to start adding options, then don't compare the highest line Civic with the lowest line MS3. Did you think I wouldn't notice?

lol u don't need any of those for the ms3. highest line? rofl. that's straight out of kbb:

2009 Honda Civic - Kelley Blue Book
MSRP: $23,015.00

2009 Mazda MAZDA3 - Kelley Blue Book
MSRP: $23,490.00

comparable cars both with SUMMER tires WITHOUT nav.

Nice try with the sedan Si, dumbass. Let's throw in your summer tires & do the math again:

Si: $22,815
Intake: $200
Header: $580
Exhaust: $550
Tune: $700
Total: $24,845

MS3: $23,490
Intake: $200
Tune: $700
Plugs: $50
OCC: $50
Pump Internals: $325
Total: $24,815

That's a whopping $30 less for a slower gar that gets worse gas mileage. You win!


Yes, you need all three supporting mods on the MS3 if you are upping the boost.

Cobb recommends both plugs & OCC for their tunes: http://www.accessecu.com/accessport/...in%20v1.03.pdf

Here is a TSB on the fuel pump: http://www.accessecu.com/accessport/...02208 CDFP.pdf

Here are several discussions on the need for pump internals on this board: Mazdaspeed Forums - Search Results

this thread is still open??

wtf

New Civic SI's sell for above sticker in Southern California since there is such high demand for them. There are never more than a handful in the whole of Southern California.

babyms118 take you opinion and shove it straight up your fairy ass get off of this forum with your cry baby my Si is so much be crap. just so you know i ate an si for lunch today and guess what i didnt blow a rod and my car is stock. and thats from a dig and i know the guy that drives it he is a great friend of mine and his is a 2010 with 2k on the clock with header and intake but no tune. but he also told me that honda sold him the car dirt cheap cause no one wants them cause they are buying real performance compacts like the Ms3 or gti or a wrx for the price they want for a stock Si you would be nothing but an idiot or a teenager to want one. And the saddest part about your car now it looks like the new kia forte that just came out so now how do we know what your really driving a kia or a honda. plus i once heard what honda stands for Homos. Of. Negligence. Desperate. Actions. try that on for size.

OCC? who needs that, tune? who needs that in a speed. all3 supporting mods to up the bost? i was running 20psi with just a ATP BCD no problems, untill it was fully bolted up. i'd like to see a SI with 225whp beat a speed3 lol it will never happen unless you have some secert sauce in that POS car.:tool:

this guy reminds me of franky86 and his theroy about 350z DE and HR faaaaiiiilllllll

LOL........oh boy...Ill throw in my 2 cents..why not... Before my speed3, I had a 2007 Honda Civic Si..it was the 4 door version in a very sexy fuji blue pearl color...Nice car, I liked it..but wanted more power..at the time, there was no Cobb AP or a Hondata tuning for it, other than the "reflash" which all that did was lower the vtec in the rpm range, a extra mid range power yes,but nothing like the Kpro setups that Honda and Acura fanbois had been used to. Now its got the Flash pro and AP..You can now tune the cams which is even better..full bolt ons and cams and tune and your looking at a very reliable 240-250 whp 2900lb daily driver...if you go with a k24 block and lower comp. pistons..your at 270 whp..with the CT-E stage 2 supercharger..your running around 300+ whp...reg. intake-header-exhaust-ported intake manifold-spacer-will do around 215-220 whp....these are solid numbers for a car thats gonna give you great gas mpg,and uber reliability. Now to the speed3..I did infact trade the si for my current car, and im lovin it..the speed has all that tq that I missed. and with just a couple of mods and a AP im running almost 300 whp, cant complain really. How do I say this,cause im no pro driver..but from driving the si..the gears seem to be taller-theres no where near the tq in the si, so you dont worry about tq steer while launching..I know at redline in 3rd in my si I was @80mph..and I wanna say around 6000 rpm on my ms3 im around 70-71..I dont go past 6k on this car-stock turbo...anyways on a open highway though..speed 3 hands down on most occations...I just think that 1st and 2nd gear combine with a narrow powerband hurt our cars somewhat on the 1/4 mile. There both great cars, I try to judge the car by the car itself, fuck the driver...cause ive seen dickheads in corvettes-mustangs-civics-vw's ect. I think weve all been there. I do enjoy my cars power, and dont look back at all over the Si. I think whatever floats your boat is what works for you, It would be pretty lame if we liked all the same things and acted the same way, least imo. :)

I still don't see why people compare mods against mods. On FWD no less. It's a pointless argument where the "rules" constantly change; basically comes down to who has more money to spend lol. No offense to anyone in this thread.

That said, MS3 does 12's with less than 1K in mods, stock tune.

Yes, this is the point. Meanwhile the Civic needs thousands in bolt-ons, weight reduction, tune, racing slicks and no more than 1gal of fuel to barely break 13@ 107. That is not a better cost to performance ratio as nub nutz was trying to say. It’s not even close.

And this has nothing to do with not appreciating Honda and what not as I said. I would love to own an S2000.

Civic Yes: $23015
Intake: $200
Header: $580
Exhaust: $550
Tune: $700

+ some more shit coz it can't keep up with a lightly modded ms3

= $25,045+


MS3: $23490
Driver Mod: $0
Modified Stock Airbox: $0
Gutted DP/TP: $0
Plugs: $25

= $23,515, with more power to spare

:headbang:

good luck with your spaceship. it doesn't even have a REAL speedometer. 263>197 all. fucking. day. i'm not even going to show the torque, we all know ms3 practically triples that number :wank:

Let me get this straight. The guy who BLEW his engine is telling me what supporting mods are needed? OH THE IRONY!

Lol, dumb scrub.

Meh. tough crowd. It's very obvious the guys who aren't real enthusiasts when they just badmouth and shit on other cars just because they aren't the car they like.

Also a 4 cylinder with no internal work, no boost and no spray doing 12.8 IS FAST. I don't see how someone could say that it's slow straight faced and actually believe what they're saying.

especially in a 2900 lb car.

Well, they can always brag about how they have a better speedometer...

I'm saying it's not very impressive "straight faced" considering:

1.) It requires weight reduction (It's not 2900lbs)
2.) It requires thousands in bolt-ons / tune
3.) It requires racing slicks
4.) It starts off roughly the same price as an MS3
5.) It makes less than HALF the torque of an MS3

This has nothing to due with not being a "true enthusiasts"

What is really impressive is a 13.97 with an intake. Holy shit that's fast!

^^ sure it doesn't.

So far your main reason of saying it's not impressive is because a boosted car takes less money to make fast. Congratulations, everyone already knows this.

And fyi, taking out the spare and front seat is about 100 lbs. If you want to argue that making the car go from 2875 to 2775 is a massive amount of weight reduction, by all means, go ahead.

Torque does not make you fast, stop arguing it. You look pretty stupid to me.

Also i have no idea why you're arguing about this anyway, your ms3 is slow.

Eh, I'd be impressed if he got that time with street tires.

Did I say 13.9 in 95 degree temps was fast? I didn't but it's A LOT faster than your Civic. Your Civic needs over 2000.00 in bolt-ons / tune to even dream of that time. And I know for a fucking FACT you wouldn't run 13.9 on the 1/4 mile track I go to. Civic with I/H/E/Tune run around 14.7 here. Your fucking car is SLOW AS BALLS SON!

Your CIVIC is not impressive buddy, get over it already! The ONLY people that think other wise are the 17yrs olds on the Civic Forums.

We aren't impressed over here. It's weak sauce. You look pretty damn stupid trying to convince ppl your Civic is fast when it's defiantly not.

MS3’s are way quicker than Civic SI’S that’s a fact. You're living in a fairy tale world.

LOL

Yeah, that's FUNNY because it takes a Civic SI over 2000.00 in Bolt-ons + Tune to even dream of running under 14sec. Doing it on the 1/4 mile track I go to would take an act of GOD. Civic SI's with I/H/E and tune run about 14.7 where I go. SLOW AS BALLS.

Look guys! We're being ambushed by Ricer Civic SI owners because we don't think a 12.9@107 is very impressive considering it takes:

1.) Weight reduction
2.) Racing Slicks
3.) Thousands in bolt-ons /tune

Keeping in mind this is a car that starts off at roughly the same price as the MS3 and makes less than half the torque.

Considering that I am more modded than this guy, I am pretty sure your car is no where near "A LOT" faster than mine. But you do have a cooler speedo, so that more than makes up for being more expensive AND slow!

What the hell do you consider *way* faster? Because 2-3 mph faster trap speed doesn't make something way faster to me.

I'm specifically speaking about my car at this time. Because i know i trap 99-102 mph...

I don't know what modifications (must have ALOT to increase the trap speed by 5-8mph though) your car has but yes 2-3 mph in trap speed is significant.

My car with just intake / test pipe ($350.00) is defiantly capable of 13.6/7@ 104-105mph (Right condition, no miss shifts, etc) I've only raced at the strip a few times and the last time I went I ran 14.0@100mph MISSING 3rd..

Hell, we have MS3's running 13.3@108 on street tires , NO weight reduction Cobb AP and SRI. That's less that 1k in mods with no other compromises. Slicks and the car is under 12 no problem.

Sorry, your Civic SI isn't in the same league. It is significantely slower on the strip and the track.

Dude, the way you speak of torque, you act as if it denotes the cost of the car based on how much torque it has.

with just bolt-ons and a tune i gained 44 wtq and 50 whp.

from 178/133 to 228/177

I spent:

700 for tuning solution
600 for header
400 for exhaust
250 for intake

that's 1950... and i tuned it myself.

TURBO CARS ARE GOD!

The fact that an all motor car can trap the same speeds as a turbo car that you think is "fast" makes me LOL.

And you will still get burnt by a stock Ms3.