| Our long-term Honda Civic is getting much more use this summer as competitors flow into our test fleet. While a few may have grumbled about us pitting the redesigned 2013 Civic against the outgoing and outdated 2013 Toyota Corolla, they shouldn't have much to complain about with us pitting it against the even more thoroughly overhauled 2014 Kia Forte. Follow Our Long-Term Test Fleet However, there was a bit of a disparity this time around too. Our Forte test car was a fully loaded EX trim with a 173-horsepower, 2.0-liter four-cylinder. The base Forte comes with a 148-hp, 1.8-liter four-cylinder that is more comparable to the Civic's 140-hp, 1.8-liter four-cylinder, the car's only engine apart from the hybrid and Si versions. If the engine wasn't a big enough difference, the nearly $6,000 bump in the Forte's MSRP and all the associated goodies arguably didn't make for a fair fight. Would the results of driving the two be as one-sided as the numbers implied? Editors David Thomas and Joe Wiesenfelder took the two on a loop of city, suburban and highway driving to find out. Interior quality: Forte Joe Wiesenfelder: I'm favoring the Forte. The 2013 Civic's interior is definitely improved over the 2012, and it's elevated overall by the bright displays, but the Forte's interior quality is evenly high in all directions. I compensated for the additional features; we've seen more modest versions of the Forte, too, and it's damn nice. Acceleration: Forte DT: There were only a few times I thought the Forte actually "blew away" the Civic, but it was clearly faster in most situations. Braking: Forte JW: Though this is a clear improvement over the previous-generation Forte, I agree the matchup here is pretty close. The only difference I felt was under heavy braking where the Forte retained better pedal feel and linearity than the Civic, possibly because of our Civic's rear drum brakes. A Civic EX might fare better with its four-wheel discs, which are standard on the Forte. Handling: Civic DT: I was utterly confounded by the Forte's selectable steering modes. The most confidence-inspiring in tight turns was the Comfort setting, while Sport didn't add anything to the handling dynamics. Overall, the poor steering feedback on any of the settings had me choosing the more predictable Civic. Noise: Forte JW: Forte has this one. Even though its engine is a little raspy at high revs, it seldom intrudes — sort of the opposite of the smooth-revving but audible Civic. I noticed the tires singing pretty loudly, but it was only on certain surfaces and was probably more noticeable because the noise signature was inoffensive overall. Ride: Forte DT: I drove my parents in the Forte the following weekend, and they were impressed that a compact Kia had such a smooth ride. Compared to the Civic there was no question it won out. Mileage: Civic During our drive, the Civic's trip computer read 35.5 mpg while the Forte displayed 32.6 mpg. The difference is smaller than the EPA suggests. Combined EPA mileage is 14% better for the Civic, and in our driving we saw only 9% better. But since both were showing returns between combined and highway ratings — which are closer to 8% better for the Civic — the results seem quite accurate. *We filled up both cars at the same gas station at the same time and reset trip computers before this test. Weather was mild. Seats: Forte DT: If they were base model to base model it might be a hard choice, but if we're comparing the cars as-tested, the heated and cooled driver's seat in the Forte has to win out even if comfort wasn't its strong suit. Multimedia: Forte JW: This is the unfair part of the fight. Of course the Forte was better. As for the stereo, I'd have to test a base Forte to know for sure, but it's hard to imagine it's as bad as the Civic's. ... Results Related from KickingTires http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/ | |||
| | |||
| | |||
|
No comments:
Post a Comment