Advice Needed: Honda City RS or Toyota Raize 1.2?

[Noobdriver]

Hey guys, I'm on a new car hunt, I'm eyeing the following:

• 1.0L Honda City RS (Turbo) - Thai made - Brand new
• 1.2L Petrol Toyota Raize (Non-Hybrid) - Japanese

I'd love some feedback and advice:

• On the durability of the cars,
• Build quality,
• Drive quality,
• Overall market sentiment.

Much appreciated.

[Hyaenidae]

Go for the Raize, The City has a dreaded wet timing belt

Edited April 20 by Hyaenidae

[matroska]

On 4/20/2025 at 6:23 AM, Noobdriver said:

Hey guys, I'm on a new car hunt, I'm eyeing the following:

• 1.0L Honda City RS (Turbo) - Thai made - Brand new
• 1.2L Petrol Toyota Raize (Non-Hybrid) - Japanese

I'd love some feedback and advice:

• On the durability of the cars,
• Build quality,
• Drive quality,
• Overall market sentiment.

Much appreciated.

I'm yet to be in a City RS. But it looks a bit roomier inside. The Raize is rather spartan in that aspect. While I have not done any analysis into it yet the City specs suggest it's  basically the FK6 civic's successor*. Different engine but it sounds like it's quite similar - not sure if it does have the wet belt though. Raize might not have the mechanical concerns related to that.  What puts me off from the Raize is it's just quite tiny  

 

*this does not mean the new city did not replace the old city. But the RS variant has a strong Civic tenth gen vibe to it just like the 3rd Gen City Sedan was screaming 'I'm related to the Civic EF YO!' 

Edited April 30 by matroska
to prevent any confusion.

[matroska]

On 4/20/2025 at 8:54 AM, Hyaenidae said:

Go for the Raize, The City has a dreaded wet timing belt

I've been searching if the P10A6 on the City also has the same... I mean I'd expect it to but I could not find a source to verify. 

[Hyaenidae]

2 hours ago, matroska said:

I've been searching if the P10A6 on the City also has the same... I mean I'd expect it to but I could not find a source to verify. 

 

I have this

 

 

Both cars use the same timing belt part #.

[Noobdriver]

Thank you guys, I bought neither, I just settled for a mint FK6 I found in the market, but I guess this thread can serve still useful for buyers who're comparing the two extremely similarly priced brand new options in the market.

[matroska]

8 hours ago, Noobdriver said:

Thank you guys, I bought neither, I just settled for a mint FK6 I found in the market, but I guess this thread can serve still useful for buyers who're comparing the two extremely similarly priced brand new options in the market.

I think you're not missing out much by going for the FK6 over the City... as Hyaenidae mentioned the drive train is quite similar. Plus, the FK6 probably has a few more bells and whistles and some creature comforts. And hopefully you got it for much less than the City RS. 

The FK6, is certainly not the best Civic to be ever made and has it's (generous) share of flaws and niggles . But once you get to know it you tend to like it. I've had one for 6 and a half years now. 

Edited April 29 by matroska

[iRage]

On 4/28/2025 at 8:44 PM, matroska said:

While I have not done any analysis into it yet the City specs suggest it's  basically the FK6 civic's successor

No...it is the successor to the previous generation City (or the Grace if it was still alive).

On 4/28/2025 at 8:44 PM, matroska said:

The Raize is rather spartan in that aspect

Both are quite minimalistic, considering they are both entry-level cars in their own segments. Granted the Honda's interior feels more refined than the Toyota and that is usually always the case with all the Toyotas and Hondas. The issue is in SL most of the Raizes that come are mid or low trim levels, so it is not the most well-equipped.

8 hours ago, matroska said:

I think you're not missing out much by going for the FK6 over the City.

@Noobdriver the better car is the Civic. It holds on to the road much better than the City. Which is to be expected as the City is smaller and has a different suspension specs; a torsion beam setup in the rear vs the Civic's multilink setup (I believe this was the same across the board, even for the budget engine version).

[matroska]

14 hours ago, iRage said:

No...it is the successor to the previous generation City (or the Grace if it was still alive).

Well  obviously the new City is the successor for the old City 😄 Technically correct.  Which is why I Mentioned - "City specs suggest it's  basically the FK6 civic's successor"

Point is the City RS gives out a very strong Civic FK/FL vibe, with the P10A6 and CVT combo quite reminiscent of the P10A2 + CVT combo - not to mention the trims etc having some similarities. This reminds me of the third gen City which gave out a very strong Civic EF vibe. ( I think the EF was the basis for the City 3rd Gen anyway) 

[iRage]

22 hours ago, matroska said:

Well  obviously the new City is the successor for the old City 😄 Technically correct.  Which is why I mentioned - "City specs suggest it's  basically the FK6 civic's successor"

Point is the City RS gives out a very strong Civic FK/FL vibe, with the P10A6 and CVT combo quite reminiscent of the P10A2 + CVT combo - not to mention the trims etc having some similarities. This reminds me of the third gen City which gave out a very strong Civic EF vibe. ( I think the EF was the basis for the City 3rd Gen anyway) 

Let's agree to disagree

I sort of get where you are coming from, same small engine/cvt trying to be in the same market segment but not in the same segment at the same time. However, I believe the factors against the City being a successor to the 1L Civic are more compelling. A successor should carry over the essence of its predecessor or improve on what the predecessor was (not just have a similar engine/transmission combo). If you buy a City expecting it to be anything close to a Civic, you will be sadly disappointed. Quite frankly, equating the Civic to a City is quite an insult to the Civic.

I am not saying the City is a bad car...it is not a Civic and cannot be a successor to a Civic because it doesn't have the core elements that make the modern Civic a Civic.

Cars of a specific period share the same design language, which gives them hues of other models (which is why the Premio crowd believed they were buying a small Crown). Characteristically (size, form and function) they are quite different too. The City is the entry-level subcompact sedan while the Civic is a mid/high-level sub-compact sedan/hatch.

If you consider the engine and transmission combinations to be the basis for succession, then that would be akin to saying that the 1.5L 2WD CR-V is the successor to a Civic wagon, a 2.0L Premio/Allion the successor to a Camry/Vista, or the Fit a successor to the Civic hatch. (**purposely left the Vezel out as it shares the platform with the Civic it doesn't offer a contrast similar to the CIty/Civic..also it is not "long" enough to be a wagon). 

The mechanical tech in the Civic is far better than that of the City. For the City to succeed the Civic in this regard it will literally have to be a Civic. 

The FK rides and handles much better than the City (previous and current). Much better refinement (not that the City is bad either). They are in totally different segments to be successors or alternatives for either unless the basis for succession or the alternative is purely a matter of downgrading based on cost.

Rather than the City being a Civic successor, the same logic should have been applied in reverse - the 1L Civic is budgeted down to be a successor/"premium alternative" to the City in some markets.  

Same with the 3rd-gen City and the Civic EF. True...it had the boxy sharp edges, and was built on the EF platform (to save on plant machinery costs, component sharing, etc...) and this was a marketing point for the local agents. However, similar to the current City, in no way did the car ride, handle (suspension was different) or even have the same refinement as the EF. This was somewhat of a disappointing factor for those expecting a continuation of the EF and/or the quirky practicality of the original City.

 

[matroska]

On 5/1/2025 at 11:04 AM, iRage said:

Quite frankly, equating the Civic to a City is quite an insult to the Civic.

I am not saying the City is a bad car...it is not a Civic and cannot be a successor to a Civic because it doesn't have the core elements that make the modern Civic a Civic.

Yup - this I agree with. Not quite in the same league of course - if it were, would not make sense for Honda's model differentiation. I do see though that Honda models over time follow in footsteps of their ancestors in a higher category at times. Anyways, OP is not missing out by not getting the City. (and well not the Raize either)

[iRage]

15 hours ago, matroska said:

I do see though that Honda models over time follow in footsteps of their ancestors in a higher category at times

Isn't that always the case though?
It's a matter of trickling down technology and also the maturing of the market. A Yaris today is much better equipped than a 141 Axio and light years ahead in terms of packaging compared to an E90 or even an e100 Corolla. A Corolla is as well-equipped as an Allion/Premio, the list goes on. This applies to tech as well as platforms.

This is a problem for both the manufacturer and the consumer. The exception to this might be Nissan. They are just simply sliding down by just rebadging and re-shelling cheap French boxes.

As tech trickles down, consumers are stuck with ever more complicated and decked-out options at higher prices. Simplicity is lost 90% of the time. 

On the other hand, manufacturers have the issue of not being able to offer that much differentiation between the products and at times between different brands. Is there really that much difference between the new Crown and the LS ? Some would even argue that the Crown is better (the turbo setup of the LS sort of killed the essence of the LS). Is there really much difference between an Aqua and a Vitz ? Does the difference between the Harrier and the RAV4 REALLY justify having two different models? Why not have one or the other but offer it in different trims? Due to all of this, manufacturers resort to all kinds of insignificant gimmicks to peddle cars to the consumer.

[Noobdriver]

19 hours ago, iRage said:

Isn't that always the case though?
It's a matter of trickling down technology and also the maturing of the market. A Yaris today is much better equipped than a 141 Axio and light years ahead in terms of packaging compared to an E90 or even an e100 Corolla. A Corolla is as well-equipped as an Allion/Premio, the list goes on. This applies to tech as well as platforms.

This is a problem for both the manufacturer and the consumer. The exception to this might be Nissan. They are just simply sliding down by just rebadging and re-shelling cheap French boxes.

As tech trickles down, consumers are stuck with ever more complicated and decked-out options at higher prices. Simplicity is lost 90% of the time. 

On the other hand, manufacturers have the issue of not being able to offer that much differentiation between the products and at times between different brands. Is there really that much difference between the new Crown and the LS ? Some would even argue that the Crown is better (the turbo setup of the LS sort of killed the essence of the LS). Is there really much difference between an Aqua and a Vitz ? Does the difference between the Harrier and the RAV4 REALLY justify having two different models? Why not have one or the other but offer it in different trims? Due to all of this, manufacturers resort to all kinds of insignificant gimmicks to peddle cars to the consumer.

Yo, the only plus I see for the Aqua is the bigger engine compared to Vitz, but I would never get an Aqua. Vitz is way more comfortable and has a clean interior. Aqua interior design is so messed up, I can't stand the instrument cluster being aligned to the center.

@matroska @iRage When I was in KL, I used to drive a Honda Grace all the time from my friend's rental business (he used to let me have a car for a day or two when there were no bookings or for a very cheap price), and those were badged as Honda City. I'm assuming, in that case, that the new Honda City is the successor to the Grace and not the Civic. However, they had an insanely better driving feel (I believe a different type of transmission and engine) than the Grace, and I hate the Grace with a passion.

Also, yes, the FK6 Civic turned out to have way more options and features than the Honda City RS, and I got it for significantly cheaper than the Honda City RS, so it was a no-brainer for me. I started thinking why I didn't consider a Civic. Most importantly, the lumbar support on the Civic is super useful for me, as I have back issues.

Given my driving style, I'm not the most happy with Civic, miss cutting and chopping in Colombo traffic as the Vitz was super compact and agile, while the Civic to me, sometimes feels like a boat (I guess I drove the Vitz a little too long, lol.).

[iRage]

5 hours ago, Noobdriver said:

Yo, the only plus I see for the Aqua is the bigger engine compared to Vitz, but I would never get an Aqua. Vitz is way more comfortable and has a clean interior. Aqua interior design is so messed up, I can't stand the instrument cluster being aligned to the center.

Not really the case and point though...If Toyota REALLY wanted to, are you telling me that the VItz and the Aqua couldn't have been the same car and in specific cases they are? You are looking at the Aqua and the cheapo Vitz in SL that are two cars based based on a period a decade ago! Yes, there was some differentiation, but if you look at the Hybrid or 1.5L or 1.3L Vitz versions of higher grades, it gets very nonsensical. 

The differentiation is even further reduced with the current models. Now granted, the 1L Yaris is nowhere near the Aqua and should, in fact, be nothing more than sacrificial lambs to ward off evil spirits. The typically most sold Yaris is the 1.5L Hybrid, which, is exactly the Aqua but in different sheet metal. They are both based on the same platform (this time we are talking about most of the frame being the same too) with just new sheet metal and somewhat reshaped interior panels. Toyota's official explanation is that the Yaris is for a youthful vibe and the Aqua for a more refined mature vibe. This has been the case all along but in reverse! Like seriously ! Interviews with the designers, etc...stated the same thing back then but in reverse. Aqua was the youthful car, so they showcased models like convertible aquas and even a luxury one. 

Going back to the Vitz and the Aqua of the times you mentioned...the difference you state is by design. The Aqua was targeted as a youthful car. Thus things like the handling and ride were made a bit sharper and harder (the Aqua has a really good frame compared to the Vitz. It is quite chuckable). The Vitz was for conservative buyer (older people, office ladies, and fleet owners). Now add in to the mix cars like the Passo..a car that existed simply because the car it replaced got bigger. Huh ?

Now...on top of that, Toyota is hinting that it will re-release a Starlet that is the size of a Passo (not the rebadged Baleno but an actual Toyota Starlet..at least as a GR car). This will be based on the same platform as the Yaris and Aqua. So...now..we are bringing back the old model to sit alongside the new model that was the successor to the old model (the Starlet) because the new model is too big and bulky and is no longer the old model it succeeded ? HUH ?

5 hours ago, Noobdriver said:

When I was in KL, I used to drive a Honda Grace all the time from my friend's rental business (he used to let me have a car for a day or two when there were no bookings or for a very cheap price), and those were badged as Honda City. I'm assuming, in that case, that the new Honda City is the successor to the Grace and not the Civic. However, they had an insanely better driving feel (I believe a different type of transmission and engine) than the Grace, and I hate the Grace with a passion.

Yes...The City is the export model name while Grace was the JDM madel name. Both are the same car and the Grace, for some time and in certain specs,  was manufactured in Thailand along side the City for the Japanese market. The Grace did come with different specs than the City. 

5 hours ago, Noobdriver said:

Given my driving style, I'm not the most happy with Civic, miss cutting and chopping in Colombo traffic as the Vitz was super compact and agile, while the Civic to me, sometimes feels like a boat (I guess I drove the Vitz a little too long, lol.).

Well..cars have grown in a segment. If you look at the City/Grace, Yaris (sedan)/hatch, Mazda 2 sedan/hatch these are what the Civic, Corolla, Mazda 3 etc..used to be. The Civic, Corolla, Mazda 3 are now what the Accord, Corona/Carina and Mazda Atenza used to be. So yeah...the non-boaty days of the Civic, Corolla are gone. But then it is also because the demographic these cars were aiming for also has grown in age. Civic, Corolla, Familia were cars intended for young families. The kind of first car you buy for your growing family as you start off in your career. Well....now a days people get married in their 30s and by that time they are somewhat at a midpoint in their careers and want more. Same applies to the other models.  

[Noobdriver]

6 hours ago, iRage said:

Not really the case and point though...If Toyota REALLY wanted to, are you telling me that the VItz and the Aqua couldn't have been the same car and in specific cases they are? You are looking at the Aqua and the cheapo Vitz in SL that are two cars based based on a period a decade ago! Yes, there was some differentiation, but if you look at the Hybrid or 1.5L or 1.3L Vitz versions of higher grades, it gets very nonsensical. 

The differentiation is even further reduced with the current models. Now granted, the 1L Yaris is nowhere near the Aqua and should, in fact, be nothing more than sacrificial lambs to ward off evil spirits. The typically most sold Yaris is the 1.5L Hybrid, which, is exactly the Aqua but in different sheet metal. They are both based on the same platform (this time we are talking about most of the frame being the same too) with just new sheet metal and somewhat reshaped interior panels. Toyota's official explanation is that the Yaris is for a youthful vibe and the Aqua for a more refined mature vibe. This has been the case all along but in reverse! Like seriously ! Interviews with the designers, etc...stated the same thing back then but in reverse. Aqua was the youthful car, so they showcased models like convertible aquas and even a luxury one. 

Going back to the Vitz and the Aqua of the times you mentioned...the difference you state is by design. The Aqua was targeted as a youthful car. Thus things like the handling and ride were made a bit sharper and harder (the Aqua has a really good frame compared to the Vitz. It is quite chuckable). The Vitz was for conservative buyer (older people, office ladies, and fleet owners). Now add in to the mix cars like the Passo..a car that existed simply because the car it replaced got bigger. Huh ?

Now...on top of that, Toyota is hinting that it will re-release a Starlet that is the size of a Passo (not the rebadged Baleno but an actual Toyota Starlet..at least as a GR car). This will be based on the same platform as the Yaris and Aqua. So...now..we are bringing back the old model to sit alongside the new model that was the successor to the old model (the Starlet) because the new model is too big and bulky and is no longer the old model it succeeded ? HUH ?

Yes...The City is the export model name while Grace was the JDM madel name. Both are the same car and the Grace, for some time and in certain specs,  was manufactured in Thailand along side the City for the Japanese market. The Grace did come with different specs than the City. 

Well..cars have grown in a segment. If you look at the City/Grace, Yaris (sedan)/hatch, Mazda 2 sedan/hatch these are what the Civic, Corolla, Mazda 3 etc..used to be. The Civic, Corolla, Mazda 3 are now what the Accord, Corona/Carina and Mazda Atenza used to be. So yeah...the non-boaty days of the Civic, Corolla are gone. But then it is also because the demographic these cars were aiming for also has grown in age. Civic, Corolla, Familia were cars intended for young families. The kind of first car you buy for your growing family as you start off in your career. Well....now a days people get married in their 30s and by that time they are somewhat at a midpoint in their careers and want more. Same applies to the other models.  

Honestly, my purchase decision on the Civic was features, youthful design, and most importantly comfort and pulling power. We only have 1 family car, which is my Civic. My parents are getting old and I wanted to get a comfortable car for them to travel on long distances without significant discomfort, plus getting the whole family on the Vitz = frustrating as hell if you go towards Kandy and Nuwara Eliya, the pulling power is just too less and petrol efficiency goes down like crap (I went alone to Kandy from Colombo and got 15 kmpl, with parents and lil bro, it was 10 kmpl, so big difference).

[iRage]

17 hours ago, Noobdriver said:

Honestly, my purchase decision on the Civic was features, youthful design, and most importantly comfort and pulling power. We only have 1 family car, which is my Civic. My parents are getting old and I wanted to get a comfortable car for them to travel on long distances without significant discomfort, plus getting the whole family on the Vitz = frustrating as hell if you go towards Kandy and Nuwara Eliya, the pulling power is just too less and petrol efficiency goes down like crap (I went alone to Kandy from Colombo and got 15 kmpl, with parents and lil bro, it was 10 kmpl, so big difference).

The 1L Vitz was never meant for heavy loads. It is primarily sold as a fleet vehicle for modest driving. They are literally used as city driven delivery vehicles or rental cars. True you do see them on the highway driven by sales reps and tourists but once it reaches 100kmph on the highway in about 1 hr 37 minutes and 46 seconds it can just stay at that speed for ages.

Also, vehicle weight and suspension setup have a lot to do with road fatigue. So yeah..the Civic is a much nicer family car for some long haul drives (okay..not as comfy as a larger car but still good).

[Noobdriver]

6 minutes ago, iRage said:

The 1L Vitz was never meant for heavy loads. It is primarily sold as a fleet vehicle for modest driving. They are literally used as city driven delivery vehicles or rental cars. True you do see them on the highway driven by sales reps and tourists but once it reaches 100kmph on the highway in about 1 hr 37 minutes and 46 seconds it can just stay at that speed for ages.

Also, vehicle weight and suspension setup have a lot to do with road fatigue. So yeah..the Civic is a much nicer family car for some long haul drives (okay..not as comfy as a larger car but still good).

I'm yet to try the Civic on a long drive, but from what I noticed so far, it is tiring in the city as opposed to the Vitz.

Also, I drove the Vitz at 140 km/h in Mexico (I got 13 kmpl if I recall right on the highway with 92 Octane). Initial acceleration requires a bit of a heavy foot, and from there in, a light rev can maintain it until you decide to brake. Vitz is very capable in the highway, most people underestimate the Vitz. It's extremely stable at that speed, slight vibrations (normal for an economy car I guess, but not too noticeable unless you're actively trying to feel it).

Edited May 5 by Noobdriver

[Hyaenidae]

2 hours ago, Noobdriver said:

 It's extremely stable at that speed, slight vibrations (normal for an economy car I guess, but not too noticeable unless you're actively trying to feel it).

You're in for a treat with the FK6 if you think a Vitz at 140kmph is stable 😁

[matroska]

2 hours ago, Noobdriver said:

but from what I noticed so far, it is tiring in the city as opposed to the Vitz

It's possibly due to the larger dimensions- you'll get used to it once you're using the car. Before the Civic I drove a Honda Fit GP1- ideal car to nip in and out of the traffic- took some time to get used to the slightly larger car but over time you get used to it.

[Noobdriver]

3 hours ago, Hyaenidae said:

You're in for a treat with the FK6 if you think a Vitz at 140kmph is stable 😁

Oh yeah, I tried the FK6 at 140 km/h in Mexico too, and I couldn't even tell I hit the number 😂
 

3 hours ago, matroska said:

It's possibly due to the larger dimensions- you'll get used to it once you're using the car. Before the Civic I drove a Honda Fit GP1- ideal car to nip in and out of the traffic- took some time to get used to the slightly larger car but over time you get used to it.

Yes, larger dimensions. Most routes I take are plagued with traffic 🥲. I'm yet to try turning at anything over 20-30 km/h, having back issues, can't let it get worse 🥲. It did handle pretty well once when I took a bend somewhere between 70-80 km/h in Galle Road (past Bentota).

Edited May 5 by Noobdriver

[Hyaenidae]

10 minutes ago, Noobdriver said:

Oh yeah, I tried the FK6 at 140 km/h in Mexico too, and I couldn't even tell I hit the number 😂

I thought Mexico is LHD - how come they have RHD FK6s there 🤔

[Noobdriver]

4 minutes ago, Hyaenidae said:

I thought Mexico is LHD - how come they have RHD FK6s there 🤔

Let's just say, you can travel to Mexico multiple times in a day from Colombo. Maybe you're travelling to Galle and decide to take a few trips to Mexico on the highway

[Hyaenidae]

3 minutes ago, Noobdriver said:

Let's just say, you can travel to Mexico multiple times in a day from Colombo. Maybe you're travelling to Galle and decide to take a few trips to Mexico on the highway

[Noobdriver]

9 hours ago, Hyaenidae said:

It was a joke