2010 Volkswagen GTI or 2012 Honda Civic Si

GTI.

"170 pound-feet @ 4,300" and "2,845 lbs" for the Civic!

Its short 37ft-lbs of torque at more than double the RPM and is only 252 lbs lighter than the GTI?

If left stock the GTI is the no brainier choice...

or for the same amount of cash you can get a 2-4 year old Mustang GT or a 8-10 year old SVT Mustang or even a 4-6 year old Corvette in various trims and editions or a BMW M3.

Pardon the ranting its late here.

no question

GTI

german engineering feels more luxurious looks better more practical

need i go on

well... i own a GTI so i'm certainly biased.

the reason i LOVE my GTI is balance. its fun on empty curvy roads, it behaves impeccably at extra-legal speeds on highways, and its enjoyable to drive even in miserable traffic. and it's not very expensive.
basically it's a cheap, FWD 3-series.

i HATE, HATE, HATE vw's recent american market decisions... but from my perspective, the GTI is pretty much the perfect daily driver.

GTI.
Not one iota of doubt.

I got a GTI vs. the previous Civic Si, and I still would for the following reasons:
HATCHBACK!
Interior Quality/Design (though the previous Si had some comfy seats)
Looks
Engine sounds better (to me)
The previous Si's gearing was so short that I was constantly shifting to the point of it being very annoying, and it's highway revs would be quite high (I'm guessing the new one is geared at least slightly longer).

The torque of the turbo vs. throttle response of the NA is a draw, handling is not a big difference either (if they're both on summer tires)

What I missed out on going with the GTI...the best shifter/clutch combo you can get on a transversely mounted engine/FWD car.

GTI

Sometimes, it's what is inside that matters most.

Definitely GTI.

Honda needs to bring over the Type-R and stop feeding us with these Si crap...

GTI.

BTW, you forgot to mention that the Si was wearing summer tires while the GTI was tested with all-seasons.

Haven't we established that there is no way that GTI is making a mere 200 bhp?

Furthermore, it's more powerful, it's more livable, it's more practical, it's more stylish....And I'll bet the GTI also gets better mileage.

Honda continues to labor under the misapprehension that it's the 1990s and they don't need to innovate to compete.

@e36guy

Funny thing is, Honda was all about innovation in the 1990s. You could get the same performance as this Civic Si in any number of DOHC VTEC Hondas from the '90s.

And what have they done since the '90s.......as someone else said, theyve replaced DOHC with SOHC and taken away all the old high revving character. And made their cars bloated and ugly and cheap inside.

"How to destroy your brand's hard-won identity in 10 years or less: the Honda story"

-Rod

Not even close. I have the 1.8T in my Jetta it's a fantastic engine, torquy and fantastic in traffic. I can only imagine that the 2.0 is even better. Throw in the more practical square shape and the available DSG and the for me, the GTI is miles ahead of the Si.

2010 Mazdaspeed 3 because that's what I got after considering all 3 cars (well last gen civic si but that's splitting hairs as the performance is exactly the same as in the interior!). Faster than both, handles better than both and in Canada while costing more than the out going civic as honda tries to unload them costing a lot less than the GTI. Plus it came fully loaded with all the kit that you can't get in a Civic Si in Canada (we only get fully loaded speed 3 last year). And finally the Speed 3 (and i know some would disagree) has a pretty good interior. I'd rank GTI, Speed 3, Civic Si in order of how much I like the interior.

Yes both GTI and Civic Si are better at fuel economy by the official numbers. However, I really doubt that works out in real life as with any of these cars who's buying them to never bury the throttle in the carpet?

The GTI is all over the Si in every department, save perhaps for price. Just spend a few minutes in the GTI's cabin, and you will understand. The darn thing feels like an Audi, whereas the Honda feels like a Honda. The exterior styling of the GTI, while not terribly exciting, will look good ten years from now. The GTI possesses one of the sweetest engines around, with lots of usable torque. I can go on and on here, but some things can't be measured by instruments or graphs. The VW is a real car, while the Si is a clownish experiment.

Neither. I'd be bored to death with either one. But at least the GTI can be modded for some fun so give it points.

@ rod_stewart

Completely agree with you. I'd rather have the 1993 Prelude VTEC. Same performance out of a better looking car.

As for GTI vs SI...

GTI if keeping the car for less than 3 years.
SI if keeping the car for more than 3 years.

Honda reliability >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>VW reliability.

GTI!

But truth be told, none of those two really appeals to me.

I want to say Civic Si, but purely because of that amazing motor

But everything else the GTI absolutely trumps, no competition. The Civic is just a completely bland and boring car.

I think it's such a waste of those Si engines. Honda tuners make such stupid power with those engines. Honda still builds some great engines, but no good cars to put them in.

Civic Type-R needs to come to the US

I'm in the "none of the above" camp, since I hate how lazy, arrogant and complacent Honda has become, thinking I'll take a product that is inferior/ no improvement over its predecessor because they slapped an "H" on it. Neither do I want an unreliable maintenance headache with inferior handling characteristics and brakes that might even be worse than Honda's.

@exyia

What motor are you talking about? K Series motor is gone. The new Si motor is a warmed over Accord EX 2.4L.

Honda doesnt build great engines anymore, sorry.

-Rod

i really want to be able to say that i would choose the Si. i think Honda is much more capable than VW of making an amazingly involving performance vehicle at the right price. and so i am frustrated by the fact that the GTI would be my choice, because Honda wants to be the new Toyota apparently, and i've been left out to dry...

Having driven the old Si as well as a TSX with essentially the same 2.4 as the new Si...I'd go with the GTI. I loved the engine in the TSX, the gearbox was a joy to operate, but there's no substitute for having torque everywhere. And plaid seats.

I'd have to go Si for the reliability, like a previous poster said. But, in all actuality, let's go with NEITHER and select the Mazdaspeed3, instead.

I'm not a teenager who wears jewelry and baggy pants that hang below my butt. So therefore...

GTI

I am a long time Honda fan. My last car was a 99 civic Si and I don't think I will ever own another car as much fun to drive as that one... The new civic doesn't deserve the Si moniker. Its almost the completely opposite car... Its too big, too heavy, the powerband is all wrong, and it handles like garbage. Not to mention they are making it more difficult to extract power with aftermarket parts with the addition of things like an integrated exhaust manifold...

I tried really hard to like the 06-11 Si and test drove them multiple times but I ultimately got a 2011 GTI base model... I ended up getting it for less than the MSRP of a civic... It really is a fantastic all around car and easy to extract more power to put it on par with cars like the mazdaspeed 3 (loved the car just couldn't get past the happy face)...

Not comparing the new civic to the old civic Si the new one just isn't class competitive plain and simple...

GTI.
German engineering over Japanese indifference.

GTI

GTI

GTI

GTI

As a former Civic S owner/fan (yeah, that goes way back), I'd have to go with the GTI, because it gives you more of what you want in this class--torque, perhaps more power since the HP appears to be underrated, and comfort. But I think this battle for buyers will be aligned on demographics--I can't imagine that the over-40 crowd is the market for all the body-clad boy-racer models like WRX, MSpeed3, Si. The GTI is definitely favors the mature crowd. Surveying our office parking lot as a barometer, it's all GTIs and Mustangs. Checking out the high school parking lot, it's Civics, and Lancers, and I saw one Genesis coupe. I think we can leave the other cars out of the discussion based on price point, at least for the higher performance models.

GTI.

More practical, richer material quality, better styling, additional feature content, lack of aftermarket fart-can support.

Basically? More bratwurst, less rice.

GTI. Better yet, why even buy a hot hatch when you can get the last of the RX-8 Sports for 24K.

GTI

It depends. If I had to choose THIS second, probably the si for the lower maintenance costs. But if money were no object, or I had no debt, id take the gti, for many of the aforementioned reasons.

I don't mind the new si, but there are other cars in the honda stable that better embody what they used to be about.

Biased since I own one, but definitely the GTI. It has something the Honda doesn't - the option of 4-doors. And in my opinion, the GTI is the only car I've seen that looks *better* as a 4-door model than a coupe.

I've owned lots of Hondas, and I was wary of VW at first, but 4 years later I'd buy another GTI (or better yet, an R) in a heartbeat!

'07 Si owner here. After reading about the new Si, it sounds like they took the two things that actually made the Si an interesting car (high-revs and a great transmission) and killed them (~7K vs 8K redline and longer shifter throws? WTF?). Honda's been going backwards. The new Si might as well be compared to a Corolla S (yikes).

In this comparo, I'm going with the GTI. The Mk VI is hot and has way more character than the new Si.

Where is the question?

GTI.

That Civic is so painfully underwhelming that more interesting comparisons would be:

2012 Civic Si or used TSX
2012 Civic Si or used RSX Type S
2012 Civic Si or used Prelude

and plenty more interesting than this woeful excuse for a sport compact.

Gotta agree, the old Prelude Si was more impressive. Better looking to boot.

GTI is the easy choice in this shootout.

Hatch, appearance, available 4-door and DSG. VW by a mile. The only advantage the Honda has is 5 years from now when the warranty is but a memory; the Honda will be a helluva lot cheaper to keep on the road.

If this was the previous generation Si, it might have been a harder choice. I've driven that car, and compared with the GTI, even though it wasn't a hatch, it more closely embodied what I think a hot hatch should be (i.e., not a FWD 3 series but rather a lighter, more raw, exciting vehicle). Honda appears to have stripped some of that character away from this new Si though with the lower redline and portly weight.

So, I'll say the GTI wins easily (but I'll reserve final judgment until I get a chance to drive the new Si).

Used GTI from owner. Dealers are douchebags...

I am in the old geezer demographic, and I guess I don't understand why other, similarly priced and reasonably capable, cars have not been mentioned-- such as the current Mustang V6. It will run rings around either of these contenders. Even a new V6 Camaro is in the same game, although with fewer tools than the Mustang.

And, if you want to get into the more practical vehicles, a new SE Focus, with a manual transmission, sport package and sunroof costs a lot less than the Si. And, it gets reasonable acceleration and gas mileage. 7.6 seconds 0-60 may sound slow, but it is almost as fast as my '95 Taurus SHO. And where are you going to take advantage of the slightly better acceleration of the GTi or Si? Mostly, you are going to appreciate the subtle things, such as the clutch and shifter smoothness, or the way it just slightly oversteers into a corner. Skid pad? Who cares? Slalom is a valid safety spec, but how often do you need to swerve to avoid a truck?

Cars today are just so competent, that now we are nitpicking. In the old, old days, we were happy if we could get a car to go around a corner without squealling the tires. My Subaru Outback does everything right-- for me-- and that is good enough.

Mini Cooper

Oh wait, what was the question?

I can't imagine why anyone would pick the Civic Si. I'd go GTI all the way, though like firstwagon I'd still rather have a MINI Cooper.

Wow I don't think I saw a single person choose the Honda. I like them both, it would be a DSG Gti or the 6MT Si. There would be a price difference of at least 3K which may sway me to the Honda. Then again, I can spec the GTI with leather if I want....hmmm. How much money do I have to spend? LOL

GTI but has to be:

1 leased,
2 under factory warranty
3 dealership has to be within walking radius of workplace
4 dealership must provide free passat loaner for weekends when GTI is being fixed

when VW warranty over => purchase used Si

"I am in the old geezer demographic, and I guess I don't understand why other, similarly priced and reasonably capable, cars have not been mentioned."

Because the topic is GTI or Civic.

@crackheadalley

You do bring up a good point. I had a three-year lease on the fifth-gen GTI, and must have returned to the dealership five times for minor repairs. Had the warranty not been in effect, my wallet would've been skinnier than one of the Olsen twins. I must be foolish or a glutton for punishment, but I'd still buy a new one. Nothing else feels like it for the money.

Easily the GTI, even if it is a little soft.

GTI. Although like a few others have said I still prefer the speed3 over both.

If I was old enough to drive 20 years ago, my answer would be different, but in 2011 I have to go with the GTI........ I've always had a soft spot in my heart for VWs.

I can speak as an owner of a 2007 GTI 2.0T and currently a 2008 Si Sedan; I'll be totally independent since I love/loved both; I lived with each respectively for over a year.

I dreadfully miss the torque of the GTI, but the sharper throttle response of the civic makes up a little. I still am not comfortable having to rev so high (and so loud!) to get flying.

Stock sound is a draw: the (2.0) Si reminds me of an F430 with its raspy high compression scream. The GTI has a subtler but equally as enjoyable Teutonic-tone. I'd admit I'd pick the wishhh of the turbo ideally over the snap-and-aw of the VTEC.

As said, drivers naturally have heavier throttle shoes, and with spirited-driving I averaged around 23 in the GTI, 32 on the highway. With the Si I average 25, up to 34 highway.

Handling-wise, is just about a draw. GTI has a much better weighted steering,. but with the higher center-of-gravity and greater weight, it offsets the noticeably Si with the mechanical-LSD, which you really do feel throttling out of curves.

The hatch-back was obviously more versatile, but as a recent college-grad a sedan feels, (for whatever reason), a bit more mature, (I know,.. that's arguable).

I had both manuals: and being perfectly honest, the Si's stick-shift is the best front drive manual I've ever driven. I've read it's the best transverse-fwd manual out there. THAT BEING SAID, it needs to be all of those things to edge itself on the sweet GTI stick. BOTH HOWEVER have far too long of throw on the clutch pedals!* *See Porsche - no excuses VW.

Stereo is better in the civic. Steering wheel far better in the GTI.
Ride quality goes to the VW. The Si was better in snow,. oddly enough??
Interiors obviously goes the way of the GTI - but I will say the buttons on the civic are softer to press - tho I believe they've bettered this in the 6th gen GTI.

IN THE END: the GTI was a VW and even though I take better care of my cars than my own body. The GTI had an O2 sensor fail, TPMS system bug, and in my last 1000 miles of warranty had a xenon bulb go that cost $320 (parts and maintenance, under warranty). It was going to cost me too much to keep going as a recent college grad. The Honda is a Honda. Oil change every once in a while and it remains as reliable as the universe to quote Jeremy Clarkson.

My rambling .02 as an owner of both = I'll keep my Si til it dies. If I had had a larger disposable income at the time,. I'd have kept the GTI. In the end - both are VERY fun sport compacts - can't go wrong either way in my mind.

fundango,

The previous generation Si was 2,895 in base coupe form. The 2012 is 2,877 at the same trim. Why does losing 18 pounds make the new car portly?

I'd take my 2007 MS3 over either. If I am going to put up with FWD, I might as well have @287 bhp in hand to thoroughly abuse the front tires...

The GTI with 17" wheels and good summer tires, please.

Probably the Honda.....for no other reason than I simply dont trust a VW to be as reliable in the long term. I keep my cars a long time so that is my reason....if I just leased for two years then maybe the VW. The last VW dealer I went to was such a complete creep that I doubt I would ever go back.

@mrb5091

Yeah, I figured someone would ask about that. "Portly" was more of a description of the newer Si's generally, as compared with older generations. For comparison:

1989 Si: 2291 lbs
1999 Si: 2612 lbs
2002 Si: 2744 lbs
2006 Si: 2877 lbs
2010 Si: 2895 lbs

Also:

1997 Integra GSR: 2668 lbs
2002 RSX: 2694 lbs
2002 RSX Type-S: 2767 lbs

You can see the weights steadily ballooning over the years

body blue:

+1

2000 SI(Current Car) or GTI(Dad's Car). New GTI is such a fatty though.

Wingsnwheels,

"BOTH HOWEVER have far too long of throw on the clutch pedals!* *See Porsche - no excuses VW."

Really? My 06 Civic SI with 105k on the clutch is incredibly short - in fact, my 99 Boxster probably has literally twice the travel (and 3x the weighting). After driving the boxster for a few days, when I hop back in the SI the pedal feels like it has 1/2" of travel and absolutely no feedback. Takes me about 10-20 miles to re-acclimate and feel the engagement point.

06 Civic SI owner here - 105k miles, basically not a single repair yet. Changing spark plugs and adjusting valves tomorrow for the first time since new.

I'd buy the new GTI. That being said, after having owned this Civic SI, I've been absolutely blown away by Honda's quality construction. I have WHIPPED this thing on a daily basis for 5 years. Redlining, taking turns to the point of lateral traction loss, braking hard. The only things I've been gentle on is the trans and I haven't been really rough with the clutch.

Not a wheel bearing, not a oxygen sensor, not a MAF, not a water pump, not a clutch, not a CV boot, totally original suspension and bushings....

I don't know of another 105k mile car that has been driven like this and doesnt' creak or make noises going over speed bumps, unless it's had it's suspension/bushings redone at some point.

I'm not saying I didn't just get a dream car, or that Honda may not even build 'em like this anymore, but based upon this experience....it's really hard to say "I'd be comfortable driving a GTI 100k miles and expecting the same experience".

It's all about the MY2005 Subaru Legacy 2.5 GT Wagon. Case closed.

How about a Mustang V6? If I could trust the VW, I'd take that over the latest example of beige to be barfed out of Honda, but I can't, so I would rather take the third option.

"Not a wheel bearing, not a oxygen sensor, not a MAF, not a water pump, not a clutch, not a CV boot, totally original suspension and bushings...."

I've never had to replace anything in a japanese car inside of 100K and that's going back to 1987. You must be coming from detroit crap.

Suby - I'm currently looking at doing a swap for a 2005 Legacy GT wagon 5-speed manual with a FMIC, opened exhaust, intake, AVO420 ball bearing turbo, etc. putting down 350awhp on e85 at an elevation of around 5500 feet. Coilovers, rear sway, etc...

So, yeah :)

Wag2vr - I had a 94 mitsubishi 1.8 liter whose alternator went under 100k (on the way to me selling it too) and my 2008 Subaru Legacy GT just had it's map-light cluster fail causing the airbag system to fault for awhile. Also, it's suspension endlinks are quite poor :)

From where I'm sitting, I see an all-season tired GTI that puts out numbers that are on par with a summer tire shod Civic Si. Like rod said, I think Honda has been very complacent the last few years. On the flipside, I don't know much about VW reliability nor do I know the quality of area VW dealers. So the GTI is the better car, and the Civic will most likely have a better ownership experience (i.e. dealer, reliability). I'd say, wait a year and get a Focus ST. I don't have a VW dealer in my town, but I do have a FoMoCo dealer 3 miles away. Plus its got more power. On the rare chance that Alfa comes back to the US with the Giulietta Quadrifoglio Verde, that is my favorite hot hatch for now. Italian personality, good looks, GTI-like dynamics with more power, yep, sounds about perfect, Italian reliability be damned.

I've driven an older 6-speed TSX with the 2.4 and the performance is great! No doubt the GTI with direct injection and a turbo has a lot of performance and the potential for more with an APR or similar chip. I'm a Honda guy personally and have appreciated the hundreds of thousands of trouble-free miles I've driven in my Hondas. I doubt VW can match that. A similarly optioned VW is thousands more too.

I'd buy neither. Civic interior is so alien, it drives me nuts. The GTI to me is just a carbon copy of another, mainly Jetta/Golf. No thought on the interior and the plaid seats are hideous.

I'd go out on a limb and buy a Volvo C30. Different, equally powerful and it actually has a vague status symbol attached.

I could write a novel on this subject, but I think everyone's pretty much covered all the finer points. The GTI is better and that's an end to it.

"I've never had to replace anything in a japanese car inside of 100K and that's going back to 1987. You must be coming from detroit crap."

I guess Mazda didn't get the memo; my 2007 MS3 needed a left front strut and a new turbo at 26,000 miles, a variable valve timing actuator at 49,000 miles, and an EGR valve as well as rear shocks prior to 70,000 miles...

"I'm not a teenager who wears jewelry and baggy pants that hang below my butt. So therefore...

GTI"

Hate to break it, but I see just as many if not more in pimped-out VWs.

Regarding the unreliability of VW's - I'm on 50k with my '07 MkV GTI and haven't had to take it back for *any* repairs. No, I'm not saying that means it will last another 50k without opening my wallet, but I do think that this car is getting a bad rap for some crappy vehicles that VW has manufactured in the past. Honda definitely is more consitistent, but they are by no means perfect. We went through 2 tranny's on my wife's TL-Type S (both covered by Honda outside of warranty).

True about Honda/Acura V6 transmissions failing. My Uncle is on his 3rd transmission in his 2006 Accord V6.

In regard to Civic interiors being "alien" I personally love the two-tiered dash. I have a 2009 Civic LX and my wife has a 2008. For us 40+ folks who drive with glasses I can see the digital miles-per-hour heads up gauge much easier since it's farther away.

Interestingly for those CR subscribers GTIs are "Recommended" and Civics are not!

"I'd go out on a limb and buy a Volvo C30. Different, equally powerful and it actually has a vague status symbol attached."

I like Hondas beacause they're good cars that you can own WITHOUT being accused of seeking "status". I'm old enough to remember when Bimmers were like that... Wealthy people would drive them so as to not "show off".

GTI. Hatch style is super versatile.

An added bonus is that I don't have an urge to put a coffee can sized exhaust on the VW.

GTI hands down. Better exterior looks (imo), far superior interior design and material quality (the steering wheel alone is miles better), German car feel on the highway (feels very planted/stable), cool factor (GTIs are cool, Honda = appliance), versatility (hatchback means you can fit a lot of items when you go on a weekend getaway). GTI is built for a mature person who loves a luxurious sporty car, while the Si .... well I am not even sure who their target market is because MS3 has it all over the Si if you want an all-out performance compact.

Not to belabor the point, but I've seen much faster 0-60 times outside Edmunds, even when taking "rollout" into account.

I cross shopped and test drove everything else in the segment. WRX was a hoot, couldn't tolerate the interior, especially when a loaded Subie pushes 30K pretty hard. MS3: shallow as it seems, I HATE the red inserts on the seats. Was solid all 'round otherwise, I had reservations about fuel economy. SI: Folks seem to talk about the ability to rev all the way to 8k as a desired feature. I think HAVING to rev to 8K to find usable power is a drag for a consumer car that is used outside a track. I did like the shifter and the content available for the price. It also lost points b/c I wanted the utility of a hatch. GTI felt right, and since I got a 2010 as a CPO w/only 3k on the clock, I got extra warranty to hedge against VW's reliability reputation. Don't regret it at all, except there's nowhere to put stuff, which is one area where Honda still shines: cubbies.

I own both a 2010 GTI with DSG and a 2006 Mazda3 GT(same 2.3l engine as a speed3 i think).

@those who doubt the fuel economy of the GTI
The GTI fuel economy is really incredible. I do 400 km on my weekly commute. My fuel consumption with my Mazda3 was a bit over 10l/100 km and the GTI do easily 7l/100km. I save a whole tank every month, which is about 90-100$ Canadian right now in Quebec. If some weeks I'm tight on budget I can adjust how I drive and get a lot of mileage for my money. Last week on a road trip with my wife and 20 month old baby I made 880km with a full tank with the GTI at about 6l/100km on 95% highway. It's about 40 mpg.

@the main question
About the Si and the GTI. The Si is really cheap to buy and you do get pretty good result for the price. I was a new dad looking for a fun, classy, practical, small car and I was shopping in the upscale car class (BMW serie3,Audi A3...) I tried the GTI last and brought it right away it was everything I wanted and fitted my lifestyle perfectly. I was scared by the reliability issue but i convinced myself that the money I saved from the gas would make it for the risk (1200$ per year) and finally I'm not a VW guy I just really like my car.

yanoch: that is impressive for a gti, and while i had a 09 that got slightly less mpg, you must be babying your car.

the reliabilty will be fine with your vw. people still playing that card are stuck in 2003.

maintenance costs are whats going to get you. thats the only place the honda really excels at here. you are gonna love the price to service your dsg.

its funny...very little would have been required to make this si amazing.

1.stiffer suspension
2.an engine making about 220 hp that revved to about 7800 rpm
3. the old steering ratio
4. and a non-integrated header design.

bam-instant classic.

05forenza: lol and what status symbol would that be? its a better styled two door mazda 3. or an overpriced volvo, whichever you prefer. and dynamically, it cant meet or beat either of the two cars shown here.

Honda HAS gotten boring but VW remains unacceptably unreliable so the answer to the question posed above is Honda for sure. (GTi could mean "Gets There intermittently")

I don't need to meet any more tow-truck drivers or incur "excessive use" penalties on my AAA membership by driving a reliably unreliable KrautVagen.

Still, a base RX-8 is a real 4-passenger sports car (and a truly unique vehicle) for essentially the same $$.

Even a base V-6 Mustang (with the Performance Package) would be better than the GTi or the Si for about $25K.

I can't believe some of you actually think the Mazda Speed3 is faster than a GTI! I own a 2003 Jetta 1.8t with a chip / 2.5" down pipe and short ram intake. I'm running 230hp and I had a nice little race with a 2010 Speed 3 and he could not pull away from me...lol...pussy Japanese garbage. He was not happy. Now if I take a MKVI GTI and chip it then I have 267hp and 277 ftlbs of torque...put in the DSG transmission and now the Speed 3 is toast. Stock vs Stock the GTI is 2 seconds faster on a road course than the speed 3. How is that possible if it only has 200hp and 207 ftlbs of torque? It's call XDS limited slip which results in no under-steer which the mazda has loads of under-steer. Suspension is too stiff in the mazda, interior and exterior styling is butt ugly, quality is poor. You can't even have a sunroof on the car because it will ruin structural integrity....and don't try pulling the excuse that mazda says its to save weight...that's a bunch of bull. You can't even get a mazda in all wheel drive as it will put too much stress on the frame. Sounds like a poorly engineered car. Now the Civic is just a joke of a comparison. Who wants plastic all over the dash with a engine with no low end torque? If you were in a GTI and pull up beside the mazda or honda they have to gear down to get the rpm's up so they have some acceleration while in the gti you don't. Which means if you pull up beside the mazda or honda you can just simply press on the accelerator with out gearing down and your gone while they're trying to downshift. What a bunch of losers. GTI is the benchmark for other manufacturers to build a great daily driver sports car with some performance. Yes it may not have the most HP but it's about how the car puts the power down onto the road, how the car rides and handles. GTI FTW!

ive driven both cars and i think that the si suspension is tuned more towrds sport also the shift action is much better in smoothness and short throws the gti is more practical in the long run with hatchback versatility but when it comes to reliability the honda probably will win and resale value

No question here. The Si has to be driven at 90% just to make it move. Anything below 5k RPM is just awful for a car like this.

The GTI is faster,, more luxurious, better built, more comfortable, has more features, and is better looking. It gets better gas mileage and has a better warranty too.

In fact, the only thing the Si does better then the GTI is reliability.... And if that was important to you, buy a Scion tC or something.