Leaked photos show the pricing for the upcoming 2022 Honda Civic.
Oh, and the on-sale date, too.
You’ll be able to get your hands on the next Civic in just a bit over a month, as the car is slated to go on sale on June 16th.
This pricing is for the sedan only, and there are four trims listed as of now. There are no performance trims — think Si — listed, but Honda has reassured us the Si will return in some form, likely including sedan, and we expect the Type R to be back in some form or another, as well.
Anyway, the trims are LX, Sport, EX, and Touring, with prices listed at $21,700, $23,100, $24,700, and $28,300, respectively. It’s unclear if those numbers include destination fees.
The leaked photo also appears to show that the LX and Sport will get a 2.0-liter four-cylinder (158 hp/138 lb-ft) and the EX and Touring will get a 1.5-liter turbo-four that makes 180 horsepower and 177 lb-ft of torque.
Base cars will get Honda Sensing and adaptive cruise control with low-speed following along with lane-keep assist and traffic-jam assist, push-button start, Apple CarPlay, and Android Auto. Sports add keyless entry, 18-inch alloy wheels, more speakers, chrome exhaust, paddle shifters, and sport pedals. They also add a remote start — and the way the chart is written, it seems to imply that the remote start is only available with a CVT, which made us briefly wonder if the Sport will offer a manual. Only briefly, though, as a Honda source we reached out to says wonder not — with the exception of the Si, the sedan will be CVT only.
EX adds moonroof, blind-spot information without rear cross-traffic alert, heated seats and mirrors, dual-zone climate control, and split-fold rear seat. Touring adds leather seats, nav, rear cross-traffic alert, LED fog lamps, front and rear parking sensors, rear automatic emergency braking, larger interior/infotainment screens, Bose audio, power front seats, wireless charging, wireless Apple CarPlay, wireless Android Auto, satellite radio, rain-sensing wipers, paddle shifters, sunglass holder, and 2 rear USB ports.
The leaks keep coming in drips and drabs. But now we know a lot about the Civic sedan — keep an eye out for the performance versions to follow.
[Images: Honda]
Had an 01, it was so slow it was dangerous. Got me thinking though, this car has its work cut out to stay put as an EV in the future. Needs to be cheap, reliable (even for the 6th owner) and have a very good range.
I also had a 2001 Civic until recently. It was not dangerous in the least, and the power/weight ratio was just fine – even fun.
geo,
That Civic was so connected to the road it felt way faster vs what speedo was showing
Clearly. CLEARLY, you did not learn to drive during the malaise era. Not even a Prius C could be called dangerous for a 0-60 sprint.
Unfun?
Yes.
Dangerous.
No.
The Mercedes 200D, part of the legendary W123 generation had a 0 to 100 kmh (62 mph) time of 31 seconds and a top speed of 130 kmh (81 mph).
And we have people commenting that current cars are ‘too slow to be safe’?
I seem to recall a review of that or maybe it was the G240d. Anyway, they said it had the acceleration of a road grader.
Perhaps a bit of exaggeration. A quick googling says a road graded can accelerate to its top speed of 10kmh in 5.2 seconds.
I learned to drive in an 82′ Civic with an automatic in Worcester, Massachusetts.
They made us drive through Kelly Square.
In an automatic ’82 Civic.
Nothing scares me when it comes to slow acceleration.
The final and most powerful Citroën 2CV6, sold throughout the 1980s, had a top speed of 71 mph and took over a minute to accelerate to 60 mph. I’d willingly take one onto an American freeway if someone let me.
Earlier versions with top speeds between 50 and 60 mph would be a bridge too far.
This feels a bit like “I drank out of a garden hose and I turned out fine!” from the graying temples set.
What would you consider “dangerous”?
When I had my Diplomat I definitely felt like I was at the mercy of the traffic around me because it didn’t have much ability to accelerate once you were already moving.
I never felt like I was going to die with it but it is definitely more comfortable to be driving something considerably quicker.
And the worst part about those cars was not just that it was slow. Hammering the gas would either result in forward motion or a full out stall. Just when you need to move out of danger…
The survivors are the only ones who can claim that the hazards were survivable.
Ask your parents about when every traffic accident was a horrible tragedy.
I wouldn’t go so far as dangerous but traffic now is nothing like it was in the POS era either. I drove cars with double digit horsepower but I didn’t drive them on uphill merges into heavy traffic going 70 mph.
Is there anyone in online car world who deserves mockery more than the person who describes any 21st-century car as “so slow it’s dangerous?”
Hint: Go drive a fully loaded semi around for a while.
Blacked-out rims and an iPad sticking up out the dash apparently aren’t going to be a passing fad.
In other news, we live in a world where a base Civic tickles $22K and you go, “wow, that’s really reasonable.”
Last thought, given the history of the 1.5 turbo 4 and Honda’s “meh” response to the issues, I’ll pass.
Seriously, if they are hell bend on the stupid ipad, it should be removable so you can use it weather at work or at home. It is just lazy design.
The “tablet sticking up from the dashboard” is not a random fad. That kind of design is so prominent because it’s useful. It’s placed high up to be close to your line of sight. I have driven cars with that style of screen and cars with the screen down low. I greatly prefer the former because I don’t have to look down and away from the road.
If you don’t want the “tablet” look, you are forced to either raise the dashboard and deal with all the compromises that come with that, or you can lower the screen into the dashboard and screw up the clean design of the vents and HVAC controls.
I generally agree with this, plus my Accord’s panel is a little better integrated than in the new Civic.
Both of these aren’t as bad as some of the others I’ve seen. (Looking at you Nissan Altima, Benz CLA!)
My Charger had an integrated screen while my current Stinger has a tablet and I *vehemently* disagree that there is a practical benefit to the tablet design. If anything the tablet is inferior in a practical sense because it makes the reach a little longer.
What car were you driving where the intergrated screen forced you to take your eyes off the road because of its installation location?
Volkswagens and Hondas, MY2017-2018.
The screen on those cars was mounted below the center vents. The motion to look at the screen was noticeably different from that of my 2017 Mazda, which has the screen sticking up from the dash. On my car it’s a glance over whereas on cars with the screen mounted lower its a glance down.
To your point about reach, Mazda and some others lock out the touch screen above 5mph at which point you use the control knob and buttons placed below the shifter. I wonder why more manufacturers don’t do this.
“I wonder why more manufacturers don’t do this.”
Personally, control knob systems (including Mazda’s) cause me to take my eyes off the road more than any touchscreen I’ve used.
My conclusion is that there are trade-offs with every screen design and there is no definitive superiority with a tablet set up versus an intergrated one.
FCA/Stellantis does a good job of placing the screen high in the dash and in easy reach of the driver.
We rented a Pacifia and had the Garmin on the dash above the screen and the difference in those few inches for taking your eyes off the road was nil.
There are many of these screens tacked on below the dash line as well which looks even worse.
We now have a Pacifica and it isn’t a big deal for the few things you need to touch it for as most is voice activated and you seldom have to look at it.
This.
Also allows for a lower dash height (increases forward view and makes for a more airy cabin) and the more pleasing horizontal dash layout.
Think the dash design for the new Civic is actually more upscale than what Acura has been doing.
Show me the hybrid! Not buying a CVT, not even from Honda.
Especially not from Honda. They’re not exactly known for solid transmissions.
Si? Type-R?
I learned to drive in 1994 in “IZh Kombi” (instructor’s car). To say that it was slow and dangerous is understatement. You have no idea. I wanted the new “bug-eye” Civic but all I could afford was 8 years old car.
Has Honda sorted out its GDI/Turbo issues?