Good morning! For this week’s Showdowns, I’m conducting my searches with exactly three criteria: 2010 or newer, five grand or less, and manual transmissions only. I’m finding some interesting stuff, and quite a bit more variety than you might guess. I’m sure I can find eight good ones for you to check out, and narrow down to four, and then to one. Our first pair looks promising to me, with a few caveats.
Friday’s final was a four-way contest between some unlikely competitors. Three of them kind of made sense being mentioned in the same breath, and then there was that VW van. Predictably, the big blue box came away with the fewest votes, though some of you agreed with me that a stickshift might have leveled the playing field a bit. The winner and still champion? Saab, of course.
The topless red Swede isn’t my first choice, though. I’d have to go for that MX-6, especially since it’s been all but confirmed that it’s a GT model. I really liked my Ford Probe LX on the same chassis, and I imagine that an extra thirty-five horsepower and rear disc brakes can only improve things.
Last week, I got accused of being a Luddite, and living in the past, because of my assertion that cars built twenty years ago were more worth owning and driving than cars today. I stand by that statement, but it did get me thinking: What the hell am I going to drive in the future, if I don’t like any of the cars being built now? My current daily driver is a 2013 Chrysler 300, and even it’s too loaded down with gadgets and tech for my taste. And at 92,000 miles, what’s starting to be a problem? Not the engine, not the drivetrain, not anything chassis-related. Nope, it’s the gadgets. The climate controls are glitchy. The backup camera works when it wants to. The Bluetooth has been refusing to sync to my phone for more than a year now, despite repeated attempts to reset the system. All of it makes me long for simpler cars, and in fact, if and when I do get a new daily driver, it will be a much less feature-laden vehicle.
And… I think it will have to be a manual, especially if it’s anything newer than the Chrysler. In a world where everything is electronically controlled, I still really like the idea of pushing fluid through a hose with my foot and moving a lever with my hand to make the car go. Add all the engine management software you want, control the throttle by wire, whatever; the damn thing isn’t going anywhere or doing anything until I put it in gear and let the clutch out.
But I’m also a cheapskate at heart. I haven’t made a car payment since 2007, and I don’t intend to ever do so again. So for the purposes of this thought experiment, I’ve capped prices at $5,000. The one thing working to my advantage there is that with fewer and fewer people being willing or able to drive a stick, prices on used cars with manuals should stay low. At least that’s what we’re hoping for this week. Let’s check out our first two contenders.
2012 Honda Civic Si – $4,980
Engine/drivetrain: 2.4-liter DOHC inline 4, six-speed manual, FWD
Location: Sun Prairie, WI
Odometer reading: 218,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
The Honda Civic Si’s history in the US dates all the way back to 1985, when it was first applied to the CRX. “Si” stands for “Sport Injection;” advertising that a car had fuel injection was a big deal back when most cars still had carburetors with a rat’s nest of vacuum hoses. The Civic line went all fuel-injected in 1988, but the Si model remained as the sporty Civic. Older Civic Sis were hatchbacks, but this ninth-generation car was only available as a coupe or sedan.
Power for this generation of Civic Si comes from a 2.4-liter K-series engine, making 201 horsepower. It sends power to the front wheels through a six-speed manual gearbox with a limited-slip differential. No other powertrain was available; if you insisted on an automatic, you had to settle for a lesser model. This one has well over 200,000 miles on it, and it’s still running strong, though the seller notes that the clutch may be starting to go. It’s fine for now, but it’s something to keep an eye on.
The interior is in decent shape for 218,000 miles; there’s just a little wear and tear. And the seller says the air conditioning works fine. The ninth-gen Civic’s dash is a little weird; it has a two-level effect. I’ve never driven one, so I don’t know what’s on what level, but I bet the arrangement takes some getting used to. Probably still less annoying than Toyota and Scion’s centrally-mounted speedometer, though.
It’s in good condition outside, and it’s a great color. It is also, however, a fourteen-year-old Honda in Wisconsin, so check underneath for rust. In fact, now that I look closely, there are a couple of suspicious spots around the rear wheel in the photo above.
2015 Volkswagen Golf – $4,800
Engine/drivetrain: Turbocharged 1.8-liter DOHC inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Detroit, MI
Odometer reading: 179,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
I have a soft spot for two-door manual Golfs. I drove one in college, a blue 1985 model that I put through the ringer. I’ve test-driven a few others over the years, but never bought one. I honestly didn’t know the two-door was still available as late as 2015; you never see them. And with a five-speed stick? This is basically the same as my old Golf, just thirty years newer. I wonder how it handles on gravel roads?
The Golf has always been offered with a wide array of engines, but typically the US version only offers the bigger options. For the Mk7 Golf, that meant a 1.8-liter TSI four-cylinder that makes 170 horsepower, or twice what my ’85 had. The gearbox is a simple five-speed manual, which still feels like the correct number of forward gears to me. The seller says it runs great, and it’s a veteran of many road trips. It does have one thing wrong: the parking brake is broken. This is just an old cable-operated handbrake, not the dumb electronic kind, so fixing it involves replacing the cable. If you’re handy, you can do it yourself without much trouble.
My old Golf was quite a lot plainer inside than this one, but Volkswagen made serious moves upmarket in the US in the early 2000s, and never really moved back down. The quality hasn’t always been there, but from what I’ve heard, this era is considerably better put-together than some of the earlier ones. We only get these two photos of the interior, and they don’t give us a great view of it, but what we can see looks good. And the A/C works fine in this one, too, by the way.
It looks good outside too, except for some rock chips on the front. That’s the trouble with black cars; every little flaw sticks out like a sore thumb. I don’t think these are particularly rust-prone, and it’s only eleven years old, but it is in Detroit, so best to check.
I could see myself driving either of these, actually. True, they’re not as simple as cars from the ’80s and ’90s, but compared to current models, they’re pretty straightforward. And they’re interesting cars beyond just having manual transmissions. Which one catches your eye?
The high revving K20 + LSD. There’s no fucking competition in my mind!
Last time we’ll ever get ever get anything like this. God that breaks my heart.
Yes I know they ditched the double wishbone suspension but an LSD on econo-box that’s got 4 doors ans weighs 2800 lbs, how can you not?!!
This gen has the 2.4-liter K24. Not quite the screamer of the K20.
Thomas, please find a base model CTS with the 3.0 in it sometime this week.
They’re probably both equally rusty, so we’ll call that a wash.
A fried clutch junks a $5,000 car, and the ‘It’s not a big deal’ yet it’s mentioned in the Civic ad gives me pause.
If the VW clutch seems better, God help me, I choose the VW. At least you can have fun with cranking up the boost and frying the clutch that way.
I did not vote so my non votes counts as a tie. I miss hot small two door cars. I would be happy flog either one of them. Both cars are in the fuck-it-money zone.
Two great choices today. Took the Golf, only because of the flexiblity that the hatch offers, but the Honda would be an equally good choice.
Additional thought – either one of these would be a great first car for a young driver. Learning on a manual, relatively inexpensive, sporty and youthful, but not overtly powerful. I live close to the local HS and I see a lot of 15-year old cars from luxury brands in the parking lot…Audi, BMW, Benz, etc. I have to think that whoever is buying these kind of cars for their kids is either trying to position them above their peers or knows zero about the baggage that cars like those carries as they age. God knows a VW isn’t a pantheon of inexpensive long term ownership, but even they wouldn’t be as big a problem to own as one of the old luxury brands. As for the Honda…well, it’s a Honda. Ain’t gonna be perfect with 200k, but it’s less likely to break your heart/wallet as well.
…I could drive that Civic until the clutch goes out. Then put that K24 in the FR-S. Then put the FA20 in my Bug.
Or I could just replace the clutch, which should be easier than the nightmare FR-S clutch job. Nice little high mileage sporty beater. The Golf is ok, but it’s not the Civic.
“Last week, I got accused of being a Luddite, and living in the past, because of my assertion that cars built twenty years ago were more worth owning and driving than cars today. I stand by that statement, but it did get me thinking: What the hell am I going to drive in the future, if I don’t like any of the cars being built now?”
Great minds! I don’t usually comment on the showdowns because they almost always strike me as; Yeah, they knew when to unload. $ keep depreciating, and in my experience, you are better off shopping in the $7,500- $15,000 range where near pristine, low mileage, garage queens can be had. I think it will continue, as I’ve seen estate sales where the kids have no interest.
The fact that the Golf made it that many miles makes me think it’s one of the Golden Child VWs that will somehow last until the heat death of the universe
I want to vote for the Golf, but as a former owner of ’15 Golf Sportwagen with the V-Tex seats, I’m getting nightmares just thinking about those sweaty seats. Loved the car, but holy hell, those sweats were the sweatiest seats I’ve ever had.
After my problems with VW’s I have to go Honda. The Si wouldn’t be a bad option for a fun weekend car.
(Although my first Honda has let me down – my wife’s Acura needed a new timing chain at only 100K miles)
What model and year?
Acura? 2011 TSX Sportwagen with the K24. Hydraulic tensioner failed.
Car came with records that showed the first owner had the Acura dealer change the oil every 3K miles so that wasn’t the issue.
That’s unfortunate. Not the kind of failure I would expect at that mileage.
Yes, not the rock solid reliability I was expecting. The HVAC fan motor failed too at about the same time.
This year of the Civic was so disliked that Honda did an emergency facelift for 2013. TL;DR is that Honda misread the market and made the Civic feel cheaper when that’s not what people wanted. The Wall Street Journal‘s review was brutal:
Now, if this was a 2016 Civic, I’d pick that in a heartbeat. I adored the 10th gen! In this case, I’ll take my chances with the German hatch. At least I’ll have fun right until I break down on the side of the highway. 🙂
All that is true, and I’d still take the Civic over the VW.:P
And you’ll pass right by me as I’m stuck in limp mode for some confusing issue that needs a high-level scanner to diagnose. lol
Why are we like this? LOL
Because logic left the chat long ago. 🙂 And in my case, I don’t actually need a true daily driver, so everything I own can be unreliable!
Well, in that case; do you have a Plymouth (Un)Reliant yet?!
Ha ha
Saaaame. I never pick the sensible car.
While 2012 is the worst year for the 9th gen, it’s still got the right drivetrain. This would become my Winter Ride so my 03 and 13 Civics stay salt free. Once the rust gets too bad It can donate it’s core to the 03 for future shenanigans.
A VW won’t enhance my current two Honda fleet at all.
I think this coupe looks better than the sedan. It’s a tad boring, but the coupe looks wedgy-enough to be interesting.
Until my kids move out, or at least start driving I’ll be living the small sedan life, just for ease of use. Unless I actually buy a Slate SUV, then I won’t.
In general I prefer Sedans as they are more practical, and practicality is what sells me on small cars to begin with. Also they are less cool than a coupe, which I’m okay with.
I can relate. When I first read about the e28 M5, and then the ’89 SHO, I decided that 4-door sports cars are the way to go. I think liftback sedans are neat, even though I’ve never owned one.
Sedan practicality: I’ve hauled landscaping bricks in a Taurus SHO. The brickyard operator had seen this use of sedans before and called it the “Half-ton Taurus”, although I probably didn’t quite get up quite that heavy.
I went with the Civic, as I trust a Honda from this era much more than a VW.
Also, newish? Time flies, these cars are average to above average age for cars on the road. These both being northern cars, a peak underneath for rust could flip this decision pretty quickly. It’s easy to rust out any car in fewer years if not cared for.
As someone who lives in the salty North, I’ve always felt VW has been “above average” when it comes to anti-corrosion.
Maybe they break down before they get old enough to rust; I dunno. But I’d take a 11 year old VW over an 11 year old Honda when it comes to rust.
Now the rest of it… I’m not sure. The Mk7 was kind of a high point for VW if you ask me, and they are generally considered reliable. I think the 1.8T has a few known issues, but I think it’s mostly turbo related.
I don’t know bupkiss about ’12 Civics though.
My past VW experience is the same. The engine and body will live forever, but that’s because nothing electro-mechanical works after 5 years.
VWs are/were the best cars to drive but the worst to own…
We owned a 2015 Jetta until last year and it never gave us any trouble. It was also a 5spd but the 2.slow 8V engine.
I know the 1.4T/1.8T/2.0T engines are needier but they’re still much more solid than the earlier 2.0 TFSI and previous 1.8T 20V engine from the decade prior.
Yet I’m aware the Civic comes in a nicer color and will likely last longer, although it will require a clutch soon so I have some spare $$ when the inevitable breaks on the VW. For me it came down to styling, age and overall condition. Which gave the VW the nod.
Anything after the year 2000 is newer to me, ha ha…but it’s all perspective + preference of models/body styles/etc
I’ll take the Civic today, it would be a fantastic car to thrash at AutoX events that could get me to work occasionally if need be, and the fun color puts it over the top as well. Would seriously give it a look if it wasn’t 900 miles away and I had a place to park it.
Since it’s a Monday, I haven’t used up my quota of pedantry. So, in addition to thinking that this is one of the best year ranges of the Si, since it’s got the right engine, right transmission, and still uses a double-DIN head unit, I must also point out that:
A “ringer” is what your phone announces an incoming call with, and a “wringer” is what you put clothes through in an old-fashioned clothes washer to squeeze out the excess water.
Now, having used up my allowance of idiomatic pedantry for the week, I return us to our regularly scheduled automotive debate.
Sadly, the 2012 is the worst of the Ks. Honda went hard into cost cutting, the 13s got better, and the 15 is the best spec.
Even still, a K24 over an NA VW anyday.
I’ll take crusty Honda over ticking time bomb VW. I had my fun with high mileage low displacement gas turbo cars.
I like the practicality of the golf. But black is bland, and the Civic Si has an LSD which is a nice bonus.
I’d have to go Civic for now. If this was a GTI with fewer miles, it might be a different story though.
The Honda may be good for another 100K miles while the Golf could grenade while driving it home after the sale. I’ll take the Honda if the clutch replacement isn’t an engine out job.
If the VW were a 2012 Mk6 with the 5-cylinder, I’d go for that instead, fwiw. These Mk7s are nice, but the Mk6s were nicer.
Also, I didn’t think the central mounted gauge clusters in the Scions were nearly as bad as so many say. But this Civic’s bifurcated setup is indeed better.
MK6 Golf/GTI was the peak. I’ve had a MK5 GTI, MK6 TDI/GTI and now have a MK7 GTI Autobahn. I miss my MK6 GTI so much.
Prefer the hatch to the sedan and would rather replace a parking brake cable than a clutch. VW.
Tough choice, I like both of these.
The VW 1.8t is a really nice little motor and the Golf overall feels refined and quiet for a compact. But the shifter is so-so, the color combo is bland inside and out, and while I wouldn’t hesitate to own this golf from new to 180K, I’m less confident in mileage beyond this.
Every time I drive a Civic I’m appalled at the road noise Honda permits, but beyond that this seems like a good car. The shifter is better, I prefer cloth seats, it’s hard to argue against the K24 engine, particularly compared to the bland buzzbox 1.5T Honda replaced it with. Plus, it is painted in an actual color.
I’ll go Si today, I think it’s more interesting and I have an SUV if I need to haul stuff.
VWs scare me. If I’m getting a potential maintenance nightmare from the rust belt I’m getting a more interesting one.
This is a really tough choice, since I like Hondas and hate leather interiors – you’d think the VW would automatically be out of the running. But I’ve had Hondas, and neither VWs nor turbos. With such a modest price point, this would be a relatively pain-free means of popping those particular cherries and see if the having reflects the hype. My dad has had a couple of VWs and some measure of issues with them, so who knows?
It’s only fantasy money. Besides, I have a very strong preference for hatchbacks. I’m taking a flier today, I’ll say Volkswagen.
I’ll take the VW, tho both look decent. Hatchback, no VTEC YO stickers and the Golf is what I was looking to buy before my wife found my first Wrangler.
Hooked me then. Stay off Stellantis, kids.
Hatchback always wins for me. (All things being equal of course.)