I saw a comparo b/w a modded ford focus and a stock corvett, and the focus won. The only catch was the fact that the focus had about 100k in mods ect, which kind of flows with the argument that $ for $ is the only real comparison here.

Ive said it before and I will say it again, its not that tuff to outperform a Tc, its not a race car. For me its a practical ride that looks cool. The Si is going to be more of a performer. It runs on 91 octane and will cost you an arm and a leg to ensure. If you have the cash go with it, if not, you are not going to find a better car for your $ than the Tc, period.

We could make ourselves blue in the face with Tc vs. WRX, Srt4, Eclipse, Si, ect posts. Turth of the matter is this, they are all faster than the Tc, but they cost more, run on 91 and cost more to ensure, ect.

Also, if you are a bigger guy, the Tc is hands down for you.

But for all out performance, the Tc is at the bottom of the sport compact for raw speed and handling. Its a Tc as in Touring Coupe, not a drag car.

I will say for 20k you get alot of car with the Si, but like any car it has its downsides and upsides.

Cheers

 

Actually, the Si insurance isn't too much more than the tC. It is more, obviously. But its not too much more. Maybe at most $40-$50 more a month will an excellent driving record. Which, if you want a performance compact $40-$50 isn't that much for the car you are getting.

 

$40-$50 more per month for insurance and an additional $20-$30 for 91 octane gas and you are going to be paying quite a bit more for ownership of the Si. Also, you are going to have every damn kid on the block pulling up next to you revving their motor wanting to race.

I am 6'5'' and about 3 bills, so as I said if you are a big guy the Tc is the only sport compact for you. Thoughts?

Truth be told if you are looking for a race ready car and the Si is in your budget, go for it. If not then the Tc, or one of the other cool cars in the Scion lineup is your car.

My insurance agent advised me not to look into an Si or any other FI car until I was 25, because it would pretty much send him and his family to Hawaii on my dime.

Keep truckin!

 

First off, I doubt the Si is in any sense "race ready"... Second try fitting 6'5" 300 lbs. into an Si and than tell us its dramatically faster than the tC and I just might believe u..

 

No car short of sports cars and super cars are "race ready" with very few exceptions. The Si isn't so much race ready, buts its a car you could definitely take to the autox track and take home very good times stock. So in that sense, its semi-race ready.

 

^^^^ what jakedudeta said

And the fanboy is soooooo full of it

 

Which fan boy?

killerxromances is probably one of the most openminded guys on the internet that I know of.

If you look at all of his statements objectively, you'll notice that none of them are explicitly wrong.

Comparing a modded tC to a stock Si is somewhat wrong like the comparison of the 100k+ Focus against the stock vette. I like comparing dollar to dollar (in which case, the tC wins. A turbo tC is about the price of a bolt-on Si.) killerxromances doesn't like dollar to dollar but stock for stock and I can see why. Stock for stock, the Si wins hands down. He also says it's dump comparing the Si to the tC as both are in different classes.

So I don't see how he's the fan boy? Don't forget there are tC fan boys too.

 

killerxromances, I don't think you are getting the point R2D2 is trying to get across: By the nature of what Scion is trying to do there is no "stock" tC equivilant to the Si. Scion does not produce "performance" variations of the tC because they let the owner customize the mods. The Si basically starts out life as an EX, but all the engine/performance mods are determined and installed by the factory.

Maybe an Audi RS4 vs. a BMW 330xi is another similar pairing. The RS4 comes "stock" (it started as a base A4) from the factory screaming with high-performance, but there are no options from the factory to make the 330xi perform equally. Sure you can mod the Bimmer, but then it's not "stock vs stock."

 

Dollar for dollar is the only way to go. Its like this: "Dude, my 80,000 dollar viper totally rocked your 17,000 dollar compact" Viper-stock, compact-stock. Truth be told (in my opinion) is that the amount of cash that is racing is the test. Take my original corvette vs. modded ford focus. If you throw a big turbo, nitrous, and a suspension upgrade on your moms 87 toyota trecel that thing is going to move, so in my opinion its the amount of cash that you have sunk into your car that counts.

To compair a stock 17,000 car with a stock 20,000 car leaves a 3,000 void, which is unfair in my opinion.

 

Might be a cross-section of age/location and per insurance company. For my '06 Si with the same coverage at my old tC, coverage was only $22 more per 6 months. However, I have quite a few years over 25, though Vegas is the third worst place to insure a car.

I have heard some outrageous quotes from folks in other forums though. It seems many insurance companies are classifying the Si as a 'sport car' regardless of it actual performance.

 

My insurance agent who is a friend of the family told me that the Tc escapes the sports car rates, but the Si does not. He had this to say. "If you get the Si it will send me on a nice vacation" He was joking but one can expect about 20-30 more per month, or about an additional 300/6 months. Not to mention the 91 octane gas.

Truth be told, the Si is a more expensive car to own and operate.

Also, when/if the hi-preformance parts go out they will be more to replace as well.

But, its a faster car, that in my opinion is race-ready.

 

I get what R2D2 is saying, but as i stated before, i didn't start these "tC vs. Si" threads. However, it is a popular comparison for whatever reason. With that said, people know when comparing the two that the tC doesn't have trim levels. The Si shouldn't be downplayed just because of its rank on the performance scale of Civics. Everyone could easily compare the tC to a different Civic but they don't. I'm simply comparing the two cars the threads are about, not getting complex and saying because the Si is the performance civic, we should dump $5,000 into the tC just to even everything out. Its pretty ridiculous. We are not talking about price vs. price and what you could do to the tC to equal a Si, we are strictly talking about performance aspect.

kungpaosamuraiii; yes i have the label "fan boy". Probably because i'm not going with the tC and making up excuses as to why the tC would lost/would loose to the Si with overall performance. Apparently they don't like that, but oh well. Not my problem. And thanks for the kind words, at least someone out there actually reads my posts clearly and doesn't misread into the things i say.

 

killerxromances, please stick to the xB boards. I'm sorry you chose to buy a car that resembles a toaster, but the constant jealousy you exhibit by trolling our forums has gotten annonying. If you're going to make bold claims about your car's handling, back it up with a video like you promised. Furthermore, dollar v. dollar is the only comparison between cars. Before buying the tC, the options I was considering were the SS Supercharged, SRT-4, WRX, WRX STi, Evo, RSX Type S, Legacy GT, and a tC (supercharged). Based on the fact I dislike the appearance of most sedans, that pretty much limited it to the SS, tC, and RSX. When I looked at performance for the dollar, the tC is the clear winner, as for less money, you can buy and supercharge a tC to put out the same amount of power (more actually) than the other two. If I were in the same position today, I wouldn't touch an Si, because it is ___ ugly. Even ignoring this fact, 16.2k+3k+installation is less than 19.9k.
Telling us that a supercharged tC should not be compared to an Si is like telling a Stage 3 Mopar SRT-4 owner that he can't compare his car to an Evo RS, since "it isn't stock." STFU and go back to box land.

 

I love people like you. Just because i own a certain car, does not mean i'm ignorant with knowledge of other cars. How am i jealous, and how do you even come to that conclusion? Because i post on the tC threads? I have a news flash for you, i post on all the threads. Xb, Xa, tC, i also still post on honda/acura forums from when i owned the gs-r. Funny how everyone says honda/acura owners are always stuck up and cold hearted when it comes to their threads, but they show me more respect than majority of the tC owners do here. Maybe if i owned a tC you would shut up about it. (i also might point out, if i wanted a tC i would have bought one. Being that i didn't, don't think so highly of yourself)

And as i've said numerous times, i'll back up my cars handling when someone provides me a cam. That, or whenever i can get the one i want.

By your bold claims of ignorance, your doesn't really amount too much as far as knowledge. Comparing the performance of two cars doesn't mean matching prices. Matching prices is something you could do for overall best bang for the buck, not straight performance talk. Again as i once stated above, i have discovered most of the tC owners on this forum seems to make up excuses as for what the Si has to offer and what the tC lags. It appears its just too hard for you guys to admit the Si is a better performing car than the tC. Si was built surrounding performance, tC wasn't.

Edit: Your claims of the Si being "butt ugly" as a fact is false. Its your opinion, not a fact. I'm glad you dislike the Si so much, it doesn't bother me at all. But facts are facts, Si is a better performing car than the tC. With, i might also add, a better platform for performance than the tC. tC as i've said numerous times, its a nice car. But its not a performance compact from the factory and still has a while to go with aftermarket before it claims defeat over a K20. If it ever does.

 

And ain't that the truth.

First off, I think everyone needs to remember that the tC was not made to fight the Si. The tC was made to practically kill the Civic EX. The price range of the Civic EX and the tC are almost comparable (actually the tC prices out base a little closer to the LX.)

Adding the supercharger is nice but (I hate to say this but) it's still a Camry engine. The 2AZ is still made for fuel economy over performance. The "performance" of the tC comes from the fact that the 2AZ was made for a much heavier car than the tC. The performance from the Si comes from the fact that the Si's engine and transmission were both made to run fast.

This isn't to put down the tC - it's just to put the tC back in its place.

I still think that the tC is a better value overall. I also think that, despite its fuel economy roots, the 2AZ has a LOT of potential (and I'm really clinging to the rumor of a 2AZ-GE for a GE head) with turbocharging and the like. But all this doesn't change that, stock for stock, the Si and the tC aren't made to compete.

I do disagree with killerxromances with one thing though - a TRD SC tC is totally comparable to an Si. Since the tC comes monospec, the closest thing to a factory trim level is the TRD SC. It's not quite the same but considering Scion's approach to marketing, the TRD tC comes pretty close.. it just needs to have the springs and wheels and struts and sways too. It comes pretty close.

 

Even so with the S/c equals trim level of Si. It still doesn't say all that much being tests are out, $3,500 into a tC with the s/c just equals the Si on 1/4 times, and doesn't improve handling (obviously) so the Si still is overall best performer. People also don't take into account that a S/c alone will only dyno the tC around 185whp. These dyno's that have been made to date consist of other mods working with the s/c to produce in the range of 190-200whp.

However, K20 is still the better, or ideal platform to begin a build up. Even if top speed isn't your thing, (is not mine) Si is still the better performing car. There are k20a2's, k20z3's, k20z1's and other K series motors putting out 250-270whp n/a. Of course, theres tons more aftermarket for all honda motors vs. the 2az but that does say a lot. (i used all K series motors being the Si now has a K-series)

 

U guys in the US get so shafted when it comes to available engines and the like

any way my $0.02... I will always compare performance vs dollar why? Because of the old saying....'speed is expensive, how fast can you afford to spend?'

 

killerxromances, let me put this a little more clearly. Nobody on this thread respects your opinion in the least. Try and use your time to do something productive rather than continuing to talk out of your ___.

 

It appears kungpaosamuraiii respects my opinions. I bet if i agreed with you and majority of those posting that the tC was better you would have nothing to say about my opinions nor about me not driving a tC, now would you?

 

I hate to sound like an old fart; but some things just never change. 20+ years ago, as a Camaro owner i wouldn't think twice about ripping my buds' Challenger or Mach 1; but at the end of the day we still respected each other's cars and what we put into them. It should matter more to what an individual does to his/her car to modify it, rather then what the factory put into it. Our old cars all were in the 300 hp +/- area from the factory, but that didn't mean my 70 1/2 Camaro was the same as my future bro-in law's 69 Roadrunner. And we didn't worry about what a mag said about one or the other. We stuck with our marque, and remained faithful to Chevy/Ford/Dodge, which is fine.
Now it's similar: Honda vs Toy vs VW.....
My wife has over the years had a CRX, an Integra, a turbo Mitsu, 2 Civic coupes, a CRV, and finally a Civic 4dr ( soccer mom period ). She was tired of the sedan; and just had her fill of Hondas for awhile. Her list to look at included an Eclipse, a Cobalt SS, Saturn redline, RSX, among others. The TC wasn't on her list as early on the ped spoiler was not available, and she wanted that look. But once it was, and she drove the car, & she ordered hers same day. The sc didn't come in for her for a few months; so that wasn't even a main factor ( but has been a blast so far ). What she/we were trying to get was the most car for the money that she liked. And we have been both more then happy with what this car gives us. Yes there are other cars in this bracket that will outperform it; & i'll tip my hat to them. The SI will please some people, the TC others. The TC did it for us.
I guess my point is don't put too much into what a mag says-- they will put a 275hp Rav4 against a 175hp Equinox and proudly show off the quicker times of the Toy; or you'll see someone compare the new SRT Jeep to a loaded Explorer cuz they're in the same $ range.... think one is faster then the other? Let the cars speak for themselves on the road, and whatever the car is if it's done well--a thumbs up is always appreciated. Sorry for the ramblin' here.