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?
Generally, I’m a big fan of Golfs but not the Mk7 platform, in particular early production samples (typical VW). To quote my mechanic: “they don’t make them like they used to”. My 2016 has been a never-ending series of issues, some of which I have never encountered before, even in 1st generation Hondas! I think the bean-counters have taken over at VAG and they’ve lost me.
my vote made it 50/50 exactly 249 to 249
My Golf vote 261-261.
I love a manual k-series
I don’t trust that Golf, but that Civic is ugly as heck, so VW, but I’m not happy with it.
Civic SI for me. I trust a 218,000 mile Honda K series engine more than a 179,000 VAG 1.8L turbo.
Golf because i’m not a college girl or backwards hat wearing bro
Honda is much better than VW, so the red car wins by default.
Absolutely the Golf. The Mk. 7 is just a tight, pleasant car, especially with the 1.8T. And 5 forward gears seems lackluster, but VW did a brilliant job spacing them perfectly.
Also…fun fact about the Mk. 7 Golf and parking brakes: for our market, the ones built in Mexico had handbrakes. That was most of them, including:
Golf TSI, Golf TDI (3-door and 5-door)Golf SportWagen TSI, Golf SportWagen TDIGolf GTI
However, the ones built in Germany had electronic parking brakes w/ auto-hold and a different center console with a sliding cupholder cover. Those included:
Golf Re-Golf
I’m going Golf this time. I test drove a 4dr when they were new and it was a hoot to drive. Although, this one would not outrun that Civic Si, I like the interior and practicality of the hatchback much better and this era of VW had less mechanical and electronic gremlins than the MK5 and MK6 which preceded it. Having to replace a parking brake cable rather than a clutch seals the deal for me.
Don’t get me wrong, I like Civics and I owned a 5spd Accord EX with a K24, but a Civic Si w/o a high revving engine just feels wrong to me.
Had to go golf on this one. Lower miles, better interior, and the hatch are most of the reasons. I just never liked the look of this generation of civic coupe. If the civic was a 2009 Si sedan, it would be no contest. This iteration of civic just lacks the design cohesion of the previous model. Golfs are always classic designs that age well. Plus a few little upgrades and the golf would be on par with the civic performance. Maybe I’m biased though since I already have a set of triple square sockets.
I chose the Civic. I’ve always loved these going back to my first car, an early non-CVCC 79′. Neither is a bad car for the money and I think you’re right about the manuals. Most people have no clue or interest so a smaller market to sell.
Being that these cars are in Wisconsin and Michigan, a really good look underneath and everywhere else is in order but they both look clean. It’s good to know you can get a decent and fun car like these for under $5k still.
I picked the Honda due to reliability reputation but either looks good. Can I see both and choose the one with the least rust?
Civic for sure. A coworker had a 2012 Civic Si coupe and it was a fun car. Honda went a bit cheap on parts of it, but it was still light, nimble, and the transmission was butter smooth. I love me a hatchback, so that is in the Golf’s favor, but the Civic eeks ahead for me.
Easy choice. My favorite car I ever owned remains my ’88 CRX Si (which gave me 13 wonderful years), and this Honda is all that and more, and it carries two passengers in the back with considerably more comfort than the old hot hatch.
Our experiences with the Wolfsburg iron, I’ll just leave unspoken for now.
I would need to know what the transmission “sticking” is all about but honestly, if it needed some serious work, it’d be worth it with this car.
Neither is a terrible option.
I took the Si though. Something to note, the Si didn’t suffer all the same “Cavaliering” that Honda did to the more basic Civics. You know, the cheapening so hated that Honda did an emergency facelift the following year.
Civic.
Naturally aspirated. More rare. Better color. Limited slip diff.
Not a used high-miles European car.
The Civic sounds like fun, but I’ll go with the Golf. It is a slightly different car, but my 2017 Golf R 6mt is at 135,000 with nothing but fluid, filter, and belt changes, (and rodents chewing on some wires).
Rodents got my 2025 Golf R last year. And my 2005 Phaeton V8. It’s definitely been the year of the pest.
I always quite liked this generation of Civic. A good course correction from the previous generation’s dry white toast base model and the crappy breadvan Si.
High mileage Honda over VW any day of the week.
I’d take the Golf, partly because I’ve worked on a lot of VWs and am familiar with some of their peculiarities. And partly because I never really liked the way those Civics looked inside or out. But I wouldn’t buy either without a thorough inspection of the undercarriage, given where they’re located.
I had no idea you could still get a five speed Golf in 2015. I thought all the ones we got in the States by then were six speeds.
How about neither one. Up north means both of these the subframe is about to fall out of them at this age. If it has not already. Also that Civic is IMO borderline mechanically totaled. New clutch=$2000 now days. Depends on how rusty it is if its worth fixing.
The VW is also on borrowed time. Timing chain job on that engine=$2000. And thats even if its worth doing, depends on how rusty these cars are.
If they were rust free southern cars, Honda all day. Although I still think even non rusty he is asking $3000 too much for a car with a bad clutch
I’m taking the Golf after checking out the rust and suspension components. I know those potholes in the D!
I suspect this is going to be a tight race. Civic has Honda’s reputation and an actual color going for it, but loses points for the slipping clutch and not being a hatch. Golf is just such a practical form factor and the e-brake should be a pretty simple fix. I agree with others that, based on their respective locations, rust is probably a toss-up. I think I’ll go Golf-ing today.
Difficult choice. I like the Civic, but the clutch issue bugs me. It’s a little more complex than dropping a driveshaft and undoing the bell housing. Plus, those extra miles are not encouraging.
Against that, the Golf is, IMO, loads more fun to drive, even if less powerful. Seats are more comfy for me, and I like the Old Skool dashboard.
Frankly, I’d be fine with either, except for that pesky clutch issue.
I’d go with the Honda. I just finished rebuilding a 2012 Civic Coupe (1.8 liter, auto, unfortunately) for my nephew. It had minor front-end damage, but the fundamental systems of the car were in remarkably good shape for 213k miles. All in, the total project was just north of $1,700 and I hope it’ll get him through college.