Which would you rather have?

[SingleStylish]

Which one do you like???

[Flybrian]

Cobalt. *I hate this lame inset decklid trend. *Hey, Civic, it's not 1996 anymore. Ditch that goofy wing. (Ditto SS) *What a horrendous place for an ancillary digital speedometer. Why not incorporate it into the regular gauge cluster like everyone else does? *Civic's interior simply looks awful with three different HVAC vent designs.

[Variance]

I'm assuming you're referring to the SS Supercharged since it's about equal in horsepwer to the Si. It's kind of a tough choice for me as I find both to be good-looking cars. I think I might take the Si because I prefer it's interior to the Cobalt's.

[El Scorcho]

Cobalt.

*I hate this lame inset decklid trend.
*Hey, Civic, it's not 1996 anymore. Ditch that goofy wing. (Ditto SS)
*What a horrendous place for an ancillary digital speedometer. Why not incorporate it into the regular gauge cluster like everyone else does?
*Civic's interior simply looks awful with three different HVAC vent designs.

[post="11536"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Agreed on every point. I prefer the smaller, more tasteful spoiler available on the other trim levels of the Cobalt. Not to mention the Cobalt SS/SC is my current favorite compact.

[frogger]

Too close to call without driving them back to back.

[sciguy_0504]

Exterior design: Civic Interior design: Cobalt Overall: Need to drive Based on looks alone, I'd pick the Cobalt. Though I think the exterior design of the Civic is more substantial, I'm not fond of the Ion-esque front and the interior downright sucks.

[Cory Wolfe]

Sorry... I'm going to have to go with the Civic. It looks less ricey and ungainly outside. The interior sucks... but I have a GA, so I can't really complain much. I'm sure the build quality is better too... Not sure about driving dynamics as I haven't driven either, obviously.

[bobo]

If the new Civic Si drives more like an old Integra than the outgoing Civic Si, I'd take it. The Cobalt SS is a decent drive. There's nothing really wrong with it other than I don't care for the way the supercharged engine sounds.

[HarleyEarl]

It's a tossup for me. Because my loyalty tends to be with GM, I would go with the Cobalt. It's a liitle more aggresive looking as well.

[daves87rs]

Cobalt: Simple, yet doesn't look like a bar of soap...

[LosAngeles]

The Cobalt would do me well in any trim, as long as it's a stick. Leave the Civic to the 604373407406702357967 Honda customizers who will do everything from remove the springs to adding lights from a Ford Fusion to be different.

[Dsuupr]

Cobalt - The interior and exterior of the honda are way to 80s for me. That digital dash is down right horrible.

[bdc]

Cobalt. Most likely I would not be comfortable in the Si if it comes standard with a sunroof.

[siegen]

Civic.

Neither of them look super sporty in my opinion. The Civic's interior is georgous minus the speedometer and multistyled air vents. The Chevy's interior looks.... well, too Chevy. It looks cheap, old and plastic. On the outside, the Civic is a Civic, and not incredibly sporty. However it does look very refined and classy, where-as the Chevy's large spoiler and chrome rims look awful (I sure hope those are not the actual wheels that come on it). The basic body style of the Chevy is not that great either, it looks like a late 90's body design, not a big upgrade from the Cavalier.

Of course the Civic would benefit greatly in the sporty department by using a farther back A-pillar, longer hood, and a spoiler more similar to the 99-00 Civic Si's spoiler. But the car was designed with interior room and passengers in mind.

I'm not even going to comment on the longevity or resell value of the cars, as that is not really a choice.

The Chevy is probably faster in a straight line, being supercharged and having more displacement. The powerband is much broader. I believe a comparison has already been done between an 05 RSX-S and the Cobalt SS, and the Cobalt was slightly faster in the 0-60 and 1/4 times. And since the 05 RSX-S is comparible in engine power and weight to the Civic Si, I can only assume the same would be true in a Civic Si vs Cobalt SS performance comparison. This does not, of course, say anything about engine quality or refinement. Nor does it speak of track performance.

Edit:
Here is the RSX-S vs Cobalt SS R&T article for an idea of the performance aspect (take it with a grain of salt, no mag is unbiased or perfect). The Civic Si is rumored to be taking the place of the Acura RSX for 2007 and a 2 door TSX being introduced as Acura's entry model sports car (although I think it's a horrible idea and probably not true, we'll see). Like I said, the new Civic Si and 05 RSX-S are very comparible in performance, with the Si having a slight edge due to being lighter (although I can't say for sure since I haven't found any specs on it yet). I'm going to guess that the Si and SS are going to be very close in track times. Edited September 10, 2005 by siegen

[CSpec]

I think the Civic has a better interior, but I would still take the Cobalt. The engine is underrated by a good amount and has a lot more torque than the Honda.

[Cremazie]

Cobalt... Interior is simple and clean, exterior doesn't look like it is going to jump!

[Snate]

Cobalt. Exterior looks much better. The spoiler could definitely go but the overal design is much more "sporty" and aggressive than the civic. The civic looks like a mutated Ion...which they actually managed to make look worse. The civic interior is downright nasty. The design is horrible and I wouldn't put much stock in the "higher quality" thing...the same thing has been said about the RSX and yea...that one is anything but.

[Dsuupr]

I remember honda saying the last generation was of better quality than the previous, but we all know that didn't turn out to be true.

[siegen]

I wouldn't put much stock in the "higher quality" thing...the same thing has been said about the RSX and yea...that one is anything but.

How is the RSX anything but? Honda's have been known to be extremely well built and last over 200k easily, even with a lot of abuse. So far I have not seen any proof that the RSX is anything different from its predecessors.

[ToniCipriani]

Cobalt without the wing. But again, I won't really be considering sports cars. If it did exists, a coupe with the LT(Z) chrome would look interesting.

[avro206]

Cobalt--no question. Steering wheel and IP of the Civic is disgusting!!!! If Chevy did that everyone would be all over them. Only Honda can get away with that. Plus the Coblat will kill the Civic in a race and lookks way better. (hate the wing) I saw the estimated 0-60 of the Si in a magazine---7.3 seconds! If thats true I might be able to beat that in my 2.4L SS Cobalt!!! :P But I'll reserve judgement on that until some test numbers come out.

[siegen]

I saw the estimated 0-60 of the Si in a magazine---7.3 seconds! If thats true I might be able to beat that in my 2.4L SS Cobalt!!! :P  But I'll reserve judgement on that until some test numbers come out.

The new Civic's tighter gearing requires an upshift to 3rd gear to reach 60mph (it is a 6 speed transmission). I'm sure the 0-100 numbers will be a lot more flattering to the straight-line acceleration fanatics.

[Polish_Kris]

Honda, Because it is obviously better built, and in terms of reliability (the superchargers are never to be trusted, I've seen how superchargers burn out on GTP's), and of course the resale value compared to Chevy will always be higher for Hondas, so you get your money's worth.

[avro206]

Honda,

Because it is obviously better built, and in terms of reliability (the superchargers are never to be trusted, I've seen how superchargers burn out on GTP's), and of course the resale value compared to Chevy will always be higher for Hondas, so you get your money's worth.

[post="12996"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

In the past I'd agree about being better built but don't write off the Cobalt so quicky. Mine is tight and rattle free. Plau at 27 HZ I wonder if Honda can match that

[Snate]

Honda,

Because it is obviously better built, and in terms of reliability (the superchargers are never to be trusted, I've seen how superchargers burn out on GTP's), and of course the resale value compared to Chevy will always be higher for Hondas, so you get your money's worth.

[post="12996"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

and you have drivin the new civic? or are you just guessing? and of course you are basing the reliability of a new engine on a completely unrelating engine?

[z28luvr01]

Since I am the registered owner of a Cobalt, I'd have to answer this question with "Cobalt". The new Civic does nothing to win me over. It looks rather bloated and ungainly, but mostly weird.

[Sixty8panther]

If you don't know what I'd pick by now then you will never, nerver, NEVER know me... My GM bias Aside the Cobalt is a nicer looking car inside and out, but it's the performance that seals the deal! Edited September 13, 2005 by Sixty8panther

[pow]

I'd pick the Civic Si over the Cobalt SS Supercharged, but not the cheaper and more interesting ION Red Line... I kinda like the Satty's dashboard design, blue/black seats, and exterior styling. If it were my money, I'd still probably choose the Civic to be on the safe side... the Saturn's questionable safety and quality would probably scare the rational part of my mind.

[siegen]

Just for those interested, over at Temple of Vtec, they have posted the first dyno of a stock Si. You can view it here (you'll have to register to see the article, look below for chart). It is done on a very accurate Dynopack, which reads HP directly from the wheel hub. This gives a HP readout slightly higher than what you'd read at the wheels, but lower than what a manufacturer would usually rate for BHP (which is usually the engine minus accessories). It can be estimated that the new Civic Si will be making 190 peak WHP, since it is making 200 HP at the hub.

If you look at the chart, it is making very good power from 6000rpm to the 8100rpm redline. Coupled to the 6 speed transmission and hopefully light weight of the civic (I'm hoping for less than 2800 lbs), this car is going to be very fast.

Note: the top line (209peak HP) was Dyno'ed with the airbox off and hood open. It just shows that the civic definately has room for improvement just from an intake modification.


Sure the Cobalt wins in the Torque game, hands down, but after 2nd gear, the Civic isn't going to be dropping below 160 WHP (horsepower = torque * rpm \ 5252). I don't know the gear split exactly, but based off of current RSX Type S transmission info, it should be pretty close.

and of course you are basing the reliability of a new engine on a completely unrelating engine?

The K20Z3 is only marginally different than the previous K series engines that come in the RSX Type S'. I think it's safe to assume this engine will be just as reliable as those. Edited September 13, 2005 by siegen

[bobo]

Unfortunately, the Civic Si has gained weight, to about 2900 pounds. It's still 100 pounds lighter than the Cobalt SS S/C.

[Cory Wolfe]

Only 154 lb/ft of torque? Holy hell... My Quad4 powered Grand Am GT has more than than. Of course it only has 155hp, 5 gears, a 7000rpm redline, a 2900lbs weight and would get its ass whooped. But, damn, though... I was expecting more than that. :unsure: :P

[avro206]

Unfortunately, the Civic Si has gained weight, to about 2900 pounds.  It's still 100 pounds lighter than the Cobalt SS S/C.

[post="13488"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

you have bad info. The S/C SS weighs 2800-2900lbs.

Mine weighs 2840 with 1/4 tank

[Snate]

and of course you are basing the reliability of a new engine on a completely unrelating engine?


The K20Z3 is only marginally different than the previous K series engines that come in the RSX Type S'. I think it's safe to assume this engine will be just as reliable as those.

I was referring to the comparison of the 2.0L SC to the GP GTP 3.8L SC...they aren't related in any way.

[bobo]

you have bad info. The S/C SS weighs 2800-2900lbs.

Mine weighs 2840 with 1/4 tank

[post="13517"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

According to GM, the curb weight of the SS S/C is 2991 lbs.

http://eogld.ecomm.gm.com/NASApp/domestic/...genum=2&butID=9

According to Honda, the 2006 Civic Si weighs 2877 lbs. Last year it weighed 2782 lbs.

[Dsuupr]

Who cares if it maxes out at 200 hp, especially with the terribly thin rpm range one would have to deal with to get the power. With most GM products, including the Cobalt, the HP & Torque are achieved via a broad power band. Another words it holds the upper horsepower / torque for a 3000 to 4000 rpm range, instead of a short 500 rpm range.

[CARBIZ]

How is it that import buyers justify the horrible rust problem HOndas continue to have? In the Great White North, I have yet to see any of the last generation Cavaliers showing signs of serious rust (and they came out in 1995!), yet I've seen many Civics of the same era with rot. Honda's reputation resides solely on its engine expertise, not on its overall build quality. That said, I believe the Cobalt SS-SC and the new 2.4 ecotec will finally show those rice burners what its all about. Or at least they better do that. GM won't get another chance. So far, the Cobalt has been a hit and customers are happy, but if GM does to the Cobalt what they did to the Cavalier, then the company will be sunk.

[honest trev]

Honda,

Because it is obviously better built, and in terms of reliability (the superchargers are never to be trusted, I've seen how superchargers burn out on GTP's), and of course the resale value compared to Chevy will always be higher for Hondas, so you get your money's worth.

[post="12996"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

i might never understand people's aversion to superchargers. the thing has one freaking moving part! how do you simpler than that?
if you can remember to get it serviced every 40k or so they should last you forever.
superchargers rule! B)
Cobalt SS BTW Edited September 13, 2005 by honest trev

[The O.C.]

Well, this one is a tough choice..... Styling? Both look good. I hated the last Civic, but this one is a conservative "looker" with a bit of a more upscale feel and appearance compared to the last one. Cobalt coupe has always looked good. Interior? Cobalt is SERIOUSLY lacking in interior fit-and-finish and quality of materials....almost guaranteed that the new Civic, hard plastic or not, will be light-years ahead of the Cobalt in this regard (especially since the CURRENT Civic is light-years ahead.) However, the Cobalt DESIGN inside looks good...kindof VW-ish...kindof European. The new Civic DESIGN is simply cool...although I'm not crazy about the digital speedo.... Performance? Civic will lack outright torque of Cobalt, but will be a beautifully-sweet, smooth, high-revving performer and there's a nice draw to that as well. I would bet the Honda shifter will be sweeter than Cobalt's as well. I predict Cobalt will have the "numbers" in handling and acceleration, but Civic will have the better "feel." Frankly, it will all come down to the "deal." Sticker-for-sticker, Cobalt's not good enough for me to pick over the new Civic. However, if the "deal" is good enough on the Cobalt versus the Honda, I'd pick the Cobalt because I do like the car....but not for the money they are asking ($24K loaded.) Unfortunately, that's the whole GM problem in one paragraph. The GM car has to be the "deal" in order to compete with the imports....

[siegen]

Who cares if it maxes out at 200 hp, especially with the terribly thin rpm range one would have to deal with to get the power.  With most GM products, including the Cobalt, the HP & Torque are achieved via a broad power band.  Another words it holds the upper horsepower / torque for a 3000 to 4000 rpm range, instead of a short 500 rpm range.

[post="13557"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The Civic is making very nice HP from 6100rpm to 8100rpm. That's not horrible at all. The 6 speed transmission will help keep the Civic in that rpm range easier, with only 1st -> 2nd and 2nd -> 3rd dropping it out of that range by only a small amount.

The higher displacement of most GM engines compared to Honda engines usually gives them a higher peak Torque output. However, the torque curve usually drops off quickly in part because the head is designed to breathe in a certain RPM range (like 0-5000rpm). Since Horsepower = (Torque * RPM) / 5252, this usually gives the GM engines a similar peak TQ and peak HP number (like 200 and 200 for the cobalt). Then you'll see a Honda engine that has a peak TQ of 135, but a peak HP of 210 (like the JDM ITR), and a lot of uneducated people will laugh and make jokes like "You're rice if you have twice the HP as TQ" (I love that one). When they really do not understand engines at all (nor do they understand how well designed Honda Vtec heads are). There's two things wrong with that statement, first you're looking at just the peak numbers, and two; Horsepower is horsepower, regardless of torque. Honda uses RPM's to make more HP rather than displacement (to put it simply).

Honda engines rev higher and breathe better both at the high end and low end. I would like to see a 1.8L N/A GM engine make the kind of power the b18c specR does (or even the non-vtec b18b LS engine).

And finally I'm not supporting the Civic neccessarily (although I do like it), I just want to bring factual information to this board, as I'm sure you guys are used to the usually "Honda Fanatics". And for the record, one of my close friends used to own a 95 white Cavalier with a few mods (mainly appearance), and I honestly liked that car a lot. It was sad when he flipped it merging onto the freeway =P.

[CARBIZ]

O.C., you need to take another look at the Civic. Know what you are talking about. I get really pissed when people make blanket statements like.."especially since the CURRENT Civic is light years ahead." REALLY??? Strange, but a month ago, we were sent to a clinic where the Civic, Corolla and Cobalts were there - just the mid-line models. From any angle, the 2005 Civic is crap. Try standing beside the engine bay with the hood open - you can see most of the wheels through the engine bay, not good for spray and splashing. Frankly, the interior plastics and knobs look like my buddy's '91 Accord. The 2006 may be an improvement - I haven't driven one yet, but the 2005 is no match for the Cobalt. HOnda has been decontenting and cutting costs like crazy. No trunk release on the key fob. Crappy, thin material on the back of the rear folding seat (just waiting to rip or tear.) I could go on. It is my job to know what the competition is doing. GM bashers just won't let up, even when they are licked. I believe GM still has a way to go with interior materials, but they are clearly going in the right direciton: the Cobalt is a light year ahead of the Cavalier and the new Impala is a nicer improvement over the old.

[CaddyXLR-V]

The Civic is making very nice HP from 6100rpm to 8100rpm. That's not horrible at all. The 6 speed transmission will help keep the Civic in that rpm range easier, with only 1st -> 2nd and 2nd -> 3rd dropping it out of that range by only a small amount.

The higher displacement of most GM engines compared to Honda engines usually gives them a higher peak Torque output. However, the torque curve usually drops off quickly in part because the head is designed to breathe in a certain RPM range (like 0-5000rpm). Since Horsepower = (Torque * RPM) / 5252, this usually gives the GM engines a similar peak TQ and peak HP number (like 200 and 200 for the cobalt). Then you'll see a Honda engine that has a peak TQ of 135, but a peak HP of 210 (like the JDM ITR), and a lot of uneducated people will laugh and make jokes like "You're rice if you have twice the HP as TQ" (I love that one). When they really do not understand engines at all (nor do they understand how well designed Honda Vtec heads are). There's two things wrong with that statement, first you're looking at just the peak numbers, and two; Horsepower is horsepower, regardless of torque. Honda uses RPM's to make more HP rather than displacement (to put it simply).

Honda engines rev higher and breathe better both at the high end and low end. I would like to see a 1.8L N/A GM engine make the kind of power the b18c specR does (or even the non-vtec b18b LS engine).

And finally I'm not supporting the Civic neccessarily (although I do like it), I just want to bring factual information to this board, as I'm sure you guys are used to the usually "Honda Fanatics". And for the record, one of my close friends used to own a 95 white Cavalier with a few mods (mainly appearance), and I honestly liked that car a lot. It was sad when he flipped it merging onto the freeway =P.

[post="13803"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

From the graph you posted the Honda engine looks to have more of a peak than GM engines. GMs torque curves a flat and smooth until the redline, then it drops off. The graph you posted is up and down, it looks like a graph of the stock market. GM engines hit the peak soon and stay there. By the time you shift 3 times to get in the powerband the race is over.

[The O.C.]

No question the Cobalt is light years ahead of Cavalier and a DRAMATIC step in the right direction....but it still can't match Civic for interior materials, fit-and-finish, seat comfort. AND, I've had experience with BOTH cars....current Civic and the new Cobalt. I just saw my first new Civic today at a Honda store in the L.A. area....and it's just as impressive as everyone feared....interior quality is top-notch....regardless of what one thinks of the style of the interior....roominess is high too... Hey...I'm a Cobalt fan overall....but I can also recognize where we still have quite a way to go to matching the competition....and the '06 Civic is going to make it that much harder for Chevy..... The car I looked at was an '06 Civic EX sedan, MSRP $19,600, with 140hp 1.8L and EPA estimates of 30city/40hwy. The only option this Civic seemed to lack was leather.

[Snate]

No question the Cobalt is light years ahead of Cavalier and a DRAMATIC step in the right direction....but it still can't match Civic for interior materials, fit-and-finish, seat comfort.

AND, I've had experience with BOTH cars....current Civic and the new Cobalt.

and I'm inclined to disagree...as I've driven/been in both vehicles. I'll be the first to admit alot of Honda cars have excellent interiors....the civic just isn't one of those vehicles...in fact its probably the only Honda car that is totally eclipsed in its price range by competitors. The accord probably has the best interior in its class...too bad its so damned ugly..oh well you win some you lose some.

[sciguy_0504]

I know I harp on quality materials and fit and finish but the Civic is where I draw the line. Interior design has to add with quality materials and good fit and finish to be the perfect interior equation. design + quality materials + good fit and finish = great interior. Cobalt doesn't have it and Civic doesn't have it.

[siegen]

From the graph you posted the Honda engine looks to have more of a peak than GM engines. GMs torque curves a flat and smooth until the redline, then it drops off. The graph you posted is up and down, it looks like a graph of the stock market. GM engines hit the peak soon and stay there. By the time you shift 3 times to get in the powerband the race is over.

Most of the dynos you'll see with a nice smooth torque curve are a result of the inertia of the wheels smoothing the TQ curve out (or an automated process to make the dyno more "pretty"). This dyno has not been, and is the raw data being derived straight from the hub.

I'm not too knowledgable on the Cobalt's specs, but I highly doubt the torque curve is flat until redline. Has Chevy developed a system similar to vtec yet? I suppose a supercharger is the easy way out. Does anybody have any dynos of a stock Cobalt SS? Preferably on a Dynopack and not a Chassis Dyno (since those can be +/- 10whp or more off).

[pow]

The current Civic's interior, for the most part, is a pleasant place to spend time in, and I rank it as good as the Corolla's and better than the Cobalt's. The plastics themselves are hard, but they are grained and finished nicely. The general shapes of the seats and dashboard make it seem more substantial than they actually are:





The Special Edition's aftermarket stereo doesn't look right on such a conservative car, though.

[CARBIZ]

When you say "current" model, do you mean the dated 2005, or the newer 2006 because there is a significant difference. At our testing facility, it was unanimous that the (2005) Corolla and Cobalt were tied for tactile, appearance and function, but the Civic was woefully behind the times. The (2005) Corolla does make a good first impression, but with items like no trunk release on the remote fob, and the vastly underpowered engine, we gave the Cobalt the slight edge. However, the (2005) Civic was dated, plain and not even in the same league. It had so many deficiencies. I have no doubt that the new Civic is far better than the old one - it had better be or Honda won't be moving many of them. The great advantage the Chevrolet has is that there are now 8 small vehicles to choose from at one dealer (and that isn't even counting trim level designations). If you go to the Honda store and don't like the Civic, well - tough.

[pow]

When you say "current" model, do you mean the dated 2005, or the newer 2006 because there is a significant difference.
  At our testing facility, it was unanimous that the (2005) Corolla and Cobalt were tied for tactile, appearance and function, but the Civic was woefully behind the times.  The (2005) Corolla does make a good first impression, but with items like no trunk release on the remote fob, and the vastly underpowered engine, we gave the Cobalt the slight edge.  However, the (2005) Civic was dated, plain and not even in the same league.  It had so many deficiencies. 

[post="14032"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I'll concede that the Civic is dated and plain, but its interior is still far more pleasing to my eyes than the Cobalt's.

[SingleStylish]

The wife and I went to the Honda dealership last night and drove both an '06 Civic EX and the '06 Accord. The salesman wouldn't let up about how GREAT the Civic was and how "Honda has made great strides to up the power of their vehicles. Every vehicle on the lot has been tuned to produce more HP." Little did he know that it was a function of SAE and not Honda. The guy was a sleeze to say the least but, the Civic was really a nice car for its market. I place it 2nd to the Mazda3 and the Cobalt as 3. I won't get into the interior bits here because for some reason so many like to do that these days. The Mazda3 has a thoughtful, modern, and high quality feel to it. Longterm is it worth it? Who knows?! The Civic it felt modern and restrained. The interior takes some getting used to but, overall the car made me feel like I was driving a car at twice the price with little to no road noise or engine racket. The Cobalt simply could be the better car with some extra bright work, a unique exterior much like the coupe version, and better engines. Some will argue the last point but, the Ecotec just doen't feel as robust or smooth as the Honda engines. The Corall is just ASS! PS I have driven all three...

[The O.C.]

When you say "current" model, do you mean the dated 2005, or the newer 2006 because there is a significant difference.
  At our testing facility, it was unanimous that the (2005) Corolla and Cobalt were tied for tactile, appearance and function, but the Civic was woefully behind the times.  The (2005) Corolla does make a good first impression, but with items like no trunk release on the remote fob, and the vastly underpowered engine, we gave the Cobalt the slight edge.  However, the (2005) Civic was dated, plain and not even in the same league.  It had so many deficiencies. 
  I have no doubt that the new Civic is far better than the old one - it had better be or Honda won't be moving many of them.
  The great advantage the Chevrolet has is that there are now 8 small vehicles to choose from at one dealer (and that isn't even counting trim level designations).  If you go to the Honda store and don't like the Civic, well - tough.

[post="14032"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The "dated" '05 Civic is light-years ahead of the Cobalt in terms of interior fit-and-finish, quality of materials, seating comfort and support, and feel of switches, knobs, and levers.

I just sat inside a "new" '06 Civic (after just looking at one the other night) and it's even better. There are abundant SOFT-touch plastics inside the interior and the hard-touch plastics that are there are of top-quality grain and finish.

LORD I wish I could be in person with some of you guys next to a Cobalt, Corolla, Civic, and Mazda3 so I could SHOW you how easily Cobalt fails to make the grade. AARRRGGGHHH