No clutch? How does that work?
Honda Civic 2.2 Dtec
- Thread starter robj20
- Start date
No clutch? How does that work?
Are you sure that isnt the 8g one though, not seen any issues regarding the latest one.
- Joined
- 14 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 17,559
- Location
- Newcastle U/T
Was the 185 sport, just felt so flat compared to the civics.
Not what I would say... then again I own one.
All DPF equipped engines inject more fuel to start a regeneration.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Aug 2012
- Posts
- 4,550
- Location
- Wales
Ironic that i'm looking at the 2.2 diesel civics and a thread pops up, so i'll hijack a little.
Is it worth getting one for 12k+ a year and will I get a decent FN for up to £6k? My current job i'm with might be offering me a full time job with them, i'm agency right now, And I made a big mistake buying a 3L Z4, simply can't afford it really, not the best paying job either.
Is it worth getting one for 12k+ a year and will I get a decent FN for up to £6k? My current job i'm with might be offering me a full time job with them, i'm agency right now, And I made a big mistake buying a 3L Z4, simply can't afford it really, not the best paying job either.
Last edited:
The latest ones have a 1.6 Diesel engine
And a 2.2, the previous setup was the cdti and that did have clutch issues. Not heard anything about the i-dtec ones having any.
I think the plan is to go for the 2.2, the 1.6 goes for a fair bit more as its only on later reg numbers. Should be plenty frugal enough for me, currently getting about 51mpg out of the A3, and 46mpg out of the focus.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Exactly. You own one and appear to be on a crusade to convince yourself how wonderful they are. I don't think many others agree.
In my last job we had a load of pool cars - a lot of Mazda 3 and 6s with the 2.2 engines (and a few 1.6s in the 3s). There was also a single Civic 2.2
The Civic was smoother, less rattly, revvier and just generally less diesel-ey to drive - I'd always try to get my hands on that if I could. The Mazdas felt faster but that's because they delivered their power in one huge lump rather than actually being that quick. I actually personally preferred the 1.6D Mazda 6 over the 2.2 as it felt more like a mid size petrol.
This was several thousand miles in all of them - I'd certainly opt for the Civic myself if I was buying one
The Civic was smoother, less rattly, revvier and just generally less diesel-ey to drive - I'd always try to get my hands on that if I could. The Mazdas felt faster but that's because they delivered their power in one huge lump rather than actually being that quick. I actually personally preferred the 1.6D Mazda 6 over the 2.2 as it felt more like a mid size petrol.
This was several thousand miles in all of them - I'd certainly opt for the Civic myself if I was buying one
- Joined
- 14 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 17,559
- Location
- Newcastle U/T
Definatley felt like a diseasel to me like, and a sluggish one at that, felt a bit liek the missus' mums Leon with liek 90bhp
It was a fairly neweish one I test drove albeit a high miler.
Aye for me too, felt far less diseasely, must say tho the Type S I drove felt far nippier than the Mazda and also seemed far quicker getting off at lights and roundabouts. This was my problem with the smaller cars I test droev, they simply didnt feel safe at roundabouts and stuff like.
Same sort of position I was in mate, Just looking to cut down tax/fuel costs tbh, looked for the precise civic I wanted for about 5/6 weeks but then another 6mps popped up with low tax so I grabbed it haha.
I'd still be tempted by an early Facelift Type S GT in blue or black tbh, even the orange one at a push lol if one popped up locally
Having owned both .... I wish I'd kept the petrol!
- Joined
- 14 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 17,559
- Location
- Newcastle U/T
As silly as it sounds with the Honda's I'd not be ruling out saving a bit money going for a high mileage one, as long as its been fully serviced and had any potential recalls addressed the engines are meant to be pretty solid
There was the 2010 facelift with the improved clutch which carried over to the 9G. It was better but still not perfect. Mine was slipping on 55k miles, although I have a feeling its actually the auto adjustor alignment that's as much of the cause as the actual clutch
I had a 2008 CDTI 2.2 and did 125k in six years with no clutch issues, and yes I did thrash it a bit.
Now I have a 2013 1.8Ti VTEC petrol which has only done 20.5k, 6.7k when I bought it at 18 months old.
Average consumption on the 2.2 was 47 - 48mpg, mainly 20 miles ew commute plus work travel.
Average consumption on the 1.8 is about 38mpg (winter) and I am trying to get better at driving it. Less right foot.
Both nice medium size cars though.
If you are good with throttle control so it switches to economy mode they are very economic
