Honda Civic Es 2001 - 2005

[Nusry Nasrudeen]

There's a fact that it's better to avoid civic 2001, 2002, 2003 manufactured cars (specially CVT) and go for 2004, 2005 due to transmission and some sporadic electrical issues. I just wanted to know the reality of this fact. Since   I am currently looking to buy a car Ek or Es or 121. Please advice..

[iRage]

Well...the Civic of the time had the typical Honda issues typical for that time. So yes...it would have had little problems like electrical niggles, etc... people say go for the 2004 because in September 2003 the ES got a facelift. Typically, when a facelift happens, manufacturers also do technical upgrades (this is why when c completely new-platform based car is released one should wait a bit before jumping in and buying one). So Honda would have updated some of the car's original design and resolved some issues in the process.

As for the CVT (i.e. HMMS) concerns...there are two sides to its truth. On one hand this is the first time the CVT was introduced in the Civic and has Honda's early designs of a CVT transmission. So, the CVTs in Hondas of the period were not as robust or as nice as the current-day ones (the same can be said of all the other manufacturers). Secondly, people were new to CVTs, so people used them like traditional ATs and messed them up through really bad maintenance.

The pre-facelift, i.e., the ones you are looking at, had the 1.5L variant, which came with the 5MT, 4AT, and CVT options, while the 1.7 came in 5MT and CVT variants. With the facelift (2004 September onwards), they dropped the 1.5L CVT variant. Personally, I felt that the CVT and the 1.5L engine were not a good match. The car was droney and a bit elastic when accelerating compared to the 5MT and the 4AT, so it was a good move to drop it.

Now....compared to the Corolla 121 the Civic ES. You probably cant find two more different cars within the same segment. The Civic is a far nicer car to drive. It even feels more refined. However, there are some people who would not like the ES' sportier ride feel and prefer the cloudy numbness of the 121.

With the 121, it was a no-nonsense A to B car. 99% of the cars found in SL are the standard boring models (i.e. 1.5L or 1.3L econo boxes). To make things worse, owners over the years have done all kinds of "upgrades" just to try to up-sell their cars. So, you will find a low-trim model (i.e. X) that has been fitted with parts/accessories locally to look like a high-trim (i.e. G grade or Limited Edition) model. So, you cannot trust 99% of the cars to be genuine. Also, since most of these were bought at some point in their life by cheap owners looking for a cheap ride, they have not had proper maintenance (service or repairs). You might have a better chance of finding an honest and cleaner ES. Civics are popular with ricers and wanna-be racers trying to live out their Fast the Furious fantasies. But most ESs seem to have managed to escape from these types of owners. 

You might want to look into the other Japanese options in this segment as well. Namely the Sunny, Lancer and Familia/323 (and Axela/3).

 

[iRage]

9 hours ago, Nusry Nasrudeen said:

This is the first time I am hearing that facelift versions doesn't come with CVT + 1.5L.

The JDM versions did not come with a 1.5L+CVT after the facelift. Not sure about other markets but it is highly unlikely...especially when most of the ESs in the country were either brand new imports or used cars from Japan.

It could be that people put 1.5 instead of 1.6 (i.e. ES3) just to get people to come look at it. Sellers (especially brokers) do this a lot because Sri Lankans think anything above 1500cc is fuel inefficient. 

Yes the Civic's suspension is a bit firmer than a Corolla 120 series'. But not uncomfortable.

As for fuel efficiency. Look...you are looking at a 20 year old car. It doesn't matter how fuel efficient or not it was when new. It all depends on the condition of the vehicle. Most of these cars, especially the Corolla, would have gone through the hands of people who wanted a cheap to run car, so the repairs, preemptive maintenance, etc...would not have been the best nor the most comprehensive.

Edited Tuesday at 05:46 AM by iRage

[matroska]

1 hour ago, iRage said:

You might want to look into the other Japanese options in this segment as well. Namely the Sunny, Lancer and Familia/323 (and Axela/3).

Compared to the Civics and the Corolla's in the same age, the above mentioned cars are more reasonably priced. 

For some reason Lancers are not being sold too much these days but you will be able to get the same aged Sunny (B15/N16) or a Famila/323 for much much less than the ES or the 121. These are not bad cars at all. 

[Nusry Nasrudeen]

On 5/7/2024 at 8:16 AM, iRage said:

Well...the Civic of the time had the typical Honda issues typical for that time. So yes...it would have had little problems like electrical niggles, etc... people say go for the 2004 because in September 2003 the ES got a facelift. Typically, when a facelift happens, manufacturers also do technical upgrades (this is why when c completely new-platform based car is released one should wait a bit before jumping in and buying one). So Honda would have updated some of the car's original design and resolved some issues in the process.

As for the CVT (i.e. HMMS) concerns...there are two sides to its truth. On one hand this is the first time the CVT was introduced in the Civic and has Honda's early designs of a CVT transmission. So, the CVTs in Hondas of the period were not as robust or as nice as the current-day ones (the same can be said of all the other manufacturers). Secondly, people were new to CVTs, so people used them like traditional ATs and messed them up through really bad maintenance.

The pre-facelift, i.e., the ones you are looking at, had the 1.5L variant, which came with the 5MT, 4AT, and CVT options, while the 1.7 came in 5MT and CVT variants. With the facelift (2004 September onwards), they dropped the 1.5L CVT variant. Personally, I felt that the CVT and the 1.5L engine were not a good match. The car was droney and a bit elastic when accelerating compared to the 5MT and the 4AT, so it was a good move to drop it.

Now....compared to the Corolla 121 the Civic ES. You probably cant find two more different cars within the same segment. The Civic is a far nicer car to drive. It even feels more refined. However, there are some people who would not like the ES' sportier ride feel and prefer the cloudy numbness of the 121.

With the 121, it was a no-nonsense A to B car. 99% of the cars found in SL are the standard boring models (i.e. 1.5L or 1.3L econo boxes). To make things worse, owners over the years have done all kinds of "upgrades" just to try to up-sell their cars. So, you will find a low-trim model (i.e. X) that has been fitted with parts/accessories locally to look like a high-trim (i.e. G grade or Limited Edition) model. So, you cannot trust 99% of the cars to be genuine. Also, since most of these were bought at some point in their life by cheap owners looking for a cheap ride, they have not had proper maintenance (service or repairs). You might have a better chance of finding an honest and cleaner ES. Civics are popular with ricers and wanna-be racers trying to live out their Fast the Furious fantasies. But most ESs seem to have managed to escape from these types of owners. 

You might want to look into the other Japanese options in this segment as well. Namely the Sunny, Lancer and Familia/323 (and Axela/3).

 

This is the first time I am hearing that facelift versions doesn't come with CVT + 1.5L. But I saw some ads in Marketplace and Riyasewana listed as 1.5L, V-tec, CVT for facelift versions. I believe that fuel consumption also better relative to the 121's VVT engine. Does the Honda's have some kind of a stiffness for overall driving feedback compared to the Toyota's smoothness ?