After struggling for 3 years with a 1999 Saab 9-3 that was unreliable even by Saab’s low standards, I traded in for a new 2002 Honda Civic LX. Three hours of research and 15 minutes of negotiation got me a 3-year lease for $1300 down and $153 a month, with prepaid extra mileage (15,000 per year instead of 12,000 for $25 per month extra) and a CD player ($7 a month extra) for a total of $185 a month. This was, needless to say, substantially less than what my unreliable but entertaining Saab cost me.

I also own a 1996 Honda Civic DX, a terrific car that convinced me to check out the 02 Civic. The contrast between my 1996 Civic and my 2002 Civic is striking, but not always for the better.

First the good news. The 02 Civic is a far roomier and more refined carԻ/10ths of an Accord, really. Headroom is fantastic. Leg room front and rear is very good. Fit and finish are good, but not great (interior plastic trim is a mess of textures). And the powertrain is exceptionally smooth and noticeably quieter than in my 96 Civic. Honda continues to build cars that speak to their attention to detail.

Something has been lost in the transition, however. The 96 Civic – even my base model – really had the soul of a sports car. Don’t laugh. That car sported a remarkable double-wishbone suspension at all 4 corners and, weighing in at 500 pounds less than a comparable 02 Civic, was surprisingly fleet of foot. Car and Driver published a 0-60 time of 8.4 seconds for the 96 DX, remarkable for a 2-door sedan with 106 horsepower.

Fast-forward 6 years, and the Civic has grown by a stunning quarter-ton -- that's like stuffing Oprah Winfrey and Rosie O'Donnell into the 96's back seat. Power is up by about 10 hp, not nearly enough to compensate for the additional weight. The relatively porky LX struggles to beat 10 seconds 0-60. Passing maneuvers require careful planning.

Honda revised the current generation’s suspension by implementing MacPherson struts at the front, greatly watering down the sporty flavor imparted by the previous generation’s more sophisticated double-wishbone setup.

In so doing, Honda increased interior space but sacrificed the soul of the Civic. The suspension mostly does its job well – but with far less enthusiasm. Aside from feeling less precise, the only real complaint is the irritating clomping sound the car makes over expansion joints, potholes, and speed bumps.

Steering is nicely weighted, but it’s a strange sort of artificial weighting that’s difficult to describe. My 96 Civic didn’t even have power steering, which was fine because the car was light. The 02's steering feels, at first, to be barely powered, imparting greater road feel and confidence. However, let go of the wheel when you exit the corner and you’ll be surprised to see that the steering wheel does not automatically straighten out -- it stays turned at first, straightening out slowly, as if it’s overpowered. The Acura RSX - a sort of cousin to the Civic - suffers the same problem.

Interior design is good, as always. The seats are bigger and grippier, thereby keeping pace with America’s increasingly flabby arses. The climate controls are perfect – three beautiful, simple knobs that turn with precision, like they’re lubed with baby oil. Honda sticks with knobs for the radio’s volume and tuner buttons. God bless them for that.

The only serious problem with this car is the brakes, which are simply awful and almost disqualify this car from consideration. Mashing the tiny brake pedal feels like stepping on a dead cat. There's almost no brake feel, and you have to push your foot through what feels like 3 inches of dead cat before you begin to sense the car slowing down. Published braking distances are quite poor, and therefore dangerous. ABS is not offered on the LX.

On balance, this is a reasonably well-executed car, and would probably be best in its class were it not for the miserable brakes, lousy steering, and gross tonnage.

Manufacturers and consumers alike often overlook the safety benefits of good brakes, but the simple truth is that brakes are at least as important to your family’s safety as government or Insurance Institute crash ratings. Wouldn’t you rather avoid an accident than merely survive one? Honda evidently put great effort into making the Civic a safe car to crash – it has a 5-star rating. If only it had bothered to put similar effort into its brakes, this would be a very good car in every respect.

Now, sadly, it is not. My 1996 Civic is far more entertaining to drive, and was certainly less safe in an accident – but better able to avoid accidents in the first place. The 2002 Civic –- portlier, tippier around corners, louder over bumps, and incompetent in braking – is a much better car to crash, but not as good a car to drive. I’d recommend an EX with ABS, or a Toyota Corolla, which is blessed with far better brakes. The Mazda Protege also deserves a close look.

That said, if you do decide to go with the Civic (or any Honda or Toyota, for that matter), you’ll be blessed with the best residual values in the business. Hondas and Toyotas both depreciate far less quickly than their peers, especially cars built by American manufacturers (this is not a knock against US factor workers; the Civic is built in Ohio and is screwed together well).

However, overall I confess to feeling suckered. I leased this car based on Honda's reputation and on my experiences with my beloved 1996 Civic DX. Now I regret it. Driving should be a joy. Somehow Honda - a company that has always seemed to regard driving as something more than a chore - has sucked the joy out of this car. I still recommend the car because of the high build quality, reliability, and good resale values, but if driving pleasure is important to you, you might want to look elsewhere.


Recommended: Yes

Amount Paid (US$): 12250
Condition: New
Model Year: 2002
Model and Options: LX