prelude or si?

[jdmcivic04]

i am currently looking into buying a new car. two choices..2000 prelude or 200 civic si. i am leaning towards the prelude but what would you suggest?

[juicy19]

If you can afford it, I'd always say Prelude. It really depends on your budget and what your plans are for the car. List these things and we'll be able to help give you the pros and cons of each.

[rubix777]

prelude...SH!

[jdmcivic04]

whats the difference between the SH or any other model. i am generally looking at gen 5s.

[rubix777]

the only difference between standard and SH is that SH has ATTS which reduces understeer that FWDs normally have.

[AcesHigh]

I've noticed that parts for the type SH are rarer to find than base models. Keep that in mind. The SH makes for an excellent stock Autocrosser, but from what I hear, the ATTS starts slipping in higher hp numbers.

Get the car you like the best.

[jdmcivic04]

gotcha, i'll just probably go out and test drive a couple of them, then i'll decide.

[510prelude]

prelude, for every 10 civics out there theres 1 prelude and i dont think anyone wants to be a trend follower =D plus atts, keep in mind it doesnt eliminate understeer just reduce's the chances of it happening but still thats better then nothing

[AcesHigh]

If you are a dragger (which most self proclaimed racers seem to be...), you'll want the base model Prelude. Or better yet, a 4th gen Prelude VTEC.

Civic Si aftermarket is HUGE. If you want options, the Civic is the way to go, at a lower stock horsepower rating.

What are your plans for the car?

[jdmcivic04]

im thinking about just exhaust, intake and possibly turbo, visual i want to keep mostly stock except for a nice set of rims. it would be my daily driver so i dont want to mod it too much.

[Digital Overdrive]

jdmcivic -
It seems you are more into performance of the engine than anything else at this point, so I can break a few things down for u.

They have an almost identical Power to Weight ratio.
The 99-00 Civic Si has been supported greatly by the aftermarket community, mostly because of Honda's choice to actually put the highly customizable B16 back into the American market.
The Prelude's got the torque, the Civic has the Rev, which do you prefer?
There are an awful lot of Civic's out there...:-/

If you do plan on turbocharging, then a nice high, quick, peppy revving motor like the one in the Civic could handle it a little better, but goodbye torque. I'm sure the Ludatics in here will prolly flame me though.

The choic is yours my man, you will be stuck with that car until you do one of three things.

1. find a better choice of car and sell
2. wreck
3. need money

better make your choice wisely my man.

[AcesHigh]

If all you're doing is intake/exhaust/header (the preliminaries...) then the Prelude VTEC is the choice here.

Personally though, I think that anyone who gives a damn about true upgradeable performance would steer clear of Honda (INCLUDING the NSX and S2000). We've got well tuned cars straight from the factory that don't like furthur modifications.

Either car, the Civic and Prelude, are not meant for turbochargers; and it shows. They are tuned for handling and a refined ride.

[Digital Overdrive]

Well I do agree about the whole turbocharger thing. If they were meant for turbochargers, then they would have them. That's the thing though, I beleive that if Honda can pull 240 HP out of a 2.0, naturally aspirated, and more streetable than a Eclipse GS-T, then you have to respect them. I'm not saying Honda is god of motor vehicles or anything, but I am saying that if they combined their High-Tech knowledge with their one disadvantage in motorspots (cubic inches) then maybe they would hold a lot higher of a ranking than "Most Dependable". They do all this without turbo's, cuz they don't need em!

[jdmcivic04]

i totally agree, honda is known for making nice reliable and powerful engines for their small size. No domestic manufacturer could possibly provide that power from such a small displacement. Aceshigh, if honda increased the size of the engines then all the internals would have to increase in size and most importantly, weight. They wouldnt be able to handle the high rpms like they can now, and thats where most of the power comes from for hondas. One reason i would chose the prelude tho, is for that fact that it isnt a civic like everyone elses (or at least the one i have now).

[Digital Overdrive]

Well, I disagree about the fact that the engine won't be able to turn as high RPM's. Yeah the weight will be more, but don't you got to remember the olden days of formula-1. They weren't that big in displacement, they just ran more cylinders (V10). Their 3.5 Liter V10 was a VERY low displacement motor because of restrictions in rules. Their concept was, "short ass stroke, big ass bore, turn 16,000, build it to run 1 track day of immortal hell at that RPM". Honda would do this, and sometimes, have the same engines for up to 4 track days before blowing. Their turbocharged motors were V6's (grandfather of the C30 in the NSX)not very normal of Honda to run such a long stroke, but less moving parts and they were turboed so they needed little more torque. If Honda could forget fuel-economy for 5 years (which they won't, but not a bad thing), I guarentee that a car like the new Accord would be marketed toward the young consumer, and they would want to break records, and necks. They would finally produce the near-perfect V8, B16 stroke, H22 bore, DOHC, 32 valve, i-VTEC motor. I bet this motor would push around 400 horses out of a 4.2 liter V8 with F20C cam specs and compression. And this is streetable and isn't too aggressive on gasoline. I'd say it would turn somewhere around 9000 RPM. Okay, I went WAYYYY off o the thread topic. I'm done!