1998 Honda Civic VTI-S (hatchback) from UK and Ireland - Comments

Front anti-roll bar joint broke away from the anti-roll bar, dealer replaced it for £60 inc labour.

Battery needed replacing at 57k.

On the whole pretty reliable.

I bought the car standard and was more than impressed with the performance, for a 1.6 the engine had a lot of grunt and despite the common misconception I thought it was actually very torquey low done for a 1.6, even more so then my Pulsar GTI-R at low revs and that was 2L turbo.

The model I have is the dealer special edition VTI-S, I believe 200 were sold in the UK. This means that the car has a different gearknob to the standard VTI and a set of bumper lips front and rear as well as a mid level rear spoiler.

My VTI-S came with all the dealer options so I have the full black leather interior, leather door cards, leather steering wheel etc. Honda cat 1 alarm and immobiliser. The car was fitted with the Honda Accessories lowered supension option too, but in my opinion this makes the car sit a bit too low. Bizarrely it has the bumper mounted parking poll option too.

I have changed quite a few bits since buying the car 2 years ago. The standard alloy wheels are very heavy and not good for acceleration so I replaced these with a set of 15" Rays TE37s in gold, these are extremely light and made the car feel a lot better. I've swapped the motor out for a B18 out of the Integra Type R as well, I had the block stripped and pistons etc replaced with Spoon Parts. I've fitted a Mugen 4-1 exhaust manifold and full Mugen twin loop exhaust with decat, an AEM V2 intake and had the car unichipped. It now makes about 200 BHP and 140 ft/lbs torque. I can recommend going to the 1.8 from the 1.6 as the added power especially off VTEC makes a huge difference to the way the car drives and did not effect fuel economy. The car now makes the same power off VTEC then it did at peak when it was standard!

The handling on the car is terrific, the Civic is very balanced and precise and feels stuck to the road.

Brakes are excellent too, but do get hot a little quicker then one would like, if track days are your thing then I would recommend swapping the brakes for ones out of the MG Rover as they have bigger discs and calipers that are not so prone to brake fade.

Fuel economy is good, I get about 30-38 MPG on average depending on how hard the car is driven, motorway MPG is around 40 MPG.

Before this I had a Pulsar GTi-R that was heavily modified, running around 350 BHP. Although the Civic is slower (actually not that much slower!) The Civic is the better handling car, far more fun to drive and gets considerably better MPG (Pulsar was 8-12 MPG!)

Buy one, you won't regret it!

Well written review, I've got a standard one, what does yours do 0-60 in.

"not that much slower than my pulsar" - You are either lying or have bad judgement.

I know cars can be under-rated, but not that much, especialy when it's a 1.6 N/A vtec vs a 2.0 turbo and a 350 BHP turbo at that!

And you said it felt more torquey low down? Well that flies in the face of everything a vtec and turbo are, vtecs are rev happy, but crap low down, and turbos give you power right through, but can't rev so high.

I've seen a lot of sexed up VTI comments on this site recently, next thing they'll be beating 600 BHP skylines.

DMd

My vtec beats ferraris for fun, its got a 2.2 prelude engine which is turbo charged.

**Review writer**

Low down torque is better in the Civic as the Pulsar suffered from quite severe turbo lag, worth adding the Civic is 1.8 by the way not 1.6 as you said.

Also the Civic does feel almost as quick as the Pulsar, it really does, now don't mis-interpret that. I'm sure on a 1/4 mile or such the Pulsar would get substantially better times, but on a track the Civic inspires far more confidence and handling ability then the Pulsar, and yes, I have raced both at length on the track (have you?) leading me to believe there would be very little, or nothing in it.

Actually you said it is a 1.6 in the review!!

Sounds like you're making it all up now! On a track the Honda would get slapped by a Pulsar!

End of!!

**Review writer**

Yes my mistake I did say it felt better at the low end when it was a 1600 (before the engine change) and yes I believe that to be true.

On the track it IS better, my opinion of course, but having driven both on the same track (Donnington Park) I am certain the Civic is the better car.

I have seen a civic bet a sky line so is you don't beleth it look on my space it's a 500bhp civic a sky line bet er.

Http://www.myspace.com/civiclevi.

You must have the b18 engine from the uk spec integra type r then coz the JDM version is 197bhp standard rather than the 190 UK version. so with exhaust, de cat, uprated pistons, cold feed induction and a chip you should be seeing a few more HP than 200.not huge amounts more I'm aware of that as I have a japanese integra type r and the engines are quite pushed towards the limit as standard (unless you turbo it like I did on my last one) but with those mods you should be seeing more like 215bhp I would think.

I hav a vti-s but I got no front or rear spoilers I got a leather gear knob and steering wheel an just black velor interior I don't kno if its lowered how would I tal.

You can tune a Skyline to 1300 bhp; just look on youtube.

Type this in Nissan Skyline 1300 Hp Top Speed Runs.

So the Skyline wins doesn't it.

Hey there, I have a VTi DOHC vtec.

I have: Type R cams, 4 1 manifold, straight through piping for my exhaust, japcan back box, BMC induction kit, with 17 inch rims.

The best time I have got out of it is 0-60 in 5.8 seconds.

Depending on what you do, I think a vtec could take down a Pulsar. By the way, my vtec is a 1.6.

You can never say Pulsars are faster. End off.

I have had a Pulsar, and yeah they are really quick; feels like the front end lifts in the air when you put your foot down.

I have a 1.8 DOHC, although highly modified. I have a video of me racing a Nissan Pulsar GTI-T and winning, if that man going on about the Pulsar would like to see..?

I doubt this guy has owned either car. How can a 1.6 VTEC be more torquey than any 2lt turbocharged car? The Pulsar in reverse gear would be quicker than the Civic.

Turbocharged cars naturally have less torque at the low end, being of a lower compression to NA cars, hence having to keep the revs up to keep power up.

I have had 12 Civics, 8 of them were vtecs, 7 b16a2's and a 4 door 1.8vti's, which beat STi Scoobys more than once.

Turbos have the take off, but the vtecs just keep on going. It had was a 4 branch 5zigen exhust, d-cat aem v2 induction kit, spoon fly wheel, injectors, cams, fuel rail and a h22 fuel pump. It was dynoed at 190 bhp at the wheels, and it filled the clock, and was revving on. A mate clocked it by sitting behind me on his bike doing 151mph, so all in all, a well tuned one should be well fit for a Pulsar.