Sedan vs. Hatch, 1.8 vs. 1.4 = Automatic ONLY
- Thread starter dante
- Start date
ChrisJ
Active member
I think it all comes down to this.
You're going to find 1.8 owners here who refuse to let their engine be insulted and they will defend it saying its just as good.
You're going to find 1.4 owners that say the 1.4 is better.
You're going to find guys like me who previously owned a 1.8 but ended up with a 1.4 that will usually tell you the 1.4 is better.
I doubt you will find ANYONE who owns both or has owned both that will say they are equal.
The 1.8 is a fine engine but its low end power does not equal the 1.4 nor does its gas mileage. Personally I feel its worth upgrading to the 1.4.
If you buy a 1.8 you will be happy with it. Just keep in mind, all of the Advanced auto parts Sonics you see driving around, have a 1.8 so you'll be on par with them.
You're going to find 1.8 owners here who refuse to let their engine be insulted and they will defend it saying its just as good.
You're going to find 1.4 owners that say the 1.4 is better.
You're going to find guys like me who previously owned a 1.8 but ended up with a 1.4 that will usually tell you the 1.4 is better.
I doubt you will find ANYONE who owns both or has owned both that will say they are equal.
The 1.8 is a fine engine but its low end power does not equal the 1.4 nor does its gas mileage. Personally I feel its worth upgrading to the 1.4.
If you buy a 1.8 you will be happy with it. Just keep in mind, all of the Advanced auto parts Sonics you see driving around, have a 1.8 so you'll be on par with them.
Last edited:
mitdr774
also a dinner prick
comparing auto to manual with different engines is not a very good comparison. I have yet to come across an auto and manual version of the same engine/vehicle combination where the auto had better actual economy than the manual.
In stock form my car would average high 30s on a 60 mile work commute with about half of it city. Pure highway runs would be in the low 40s/ Could I do better with a 1.4? sure, and most of that is due to the smaller displacement (almost 25% smaller) and the extra gear in the transmission resulting in a lower RPM at cruise speed.
In stock form my car would average high 30s on a 60 mile work commute with about half of it city. Pure highway runs would be in the low 40s/ Could I do better with a 1.4? sure, and most of that is due to the smaller displacement (almost 25% smaller) and the extra gear in the transmission resulting in a lower RPM at cruise speed.
13TurboLTZ
New member
I didnt even consider a 1.8
Love my 1.4T auto sedan
Love my 1.4T auto sedan
ChrisJ
Active member
Practically every car on the market except the Sonic has a higher MPG rating with an auto than with a manual.
The 6 speed auto is a damn fine transmission and I can assure you does not hurt the 1.8 by 9MPG. I could maybe give you 1 or 2 MPG but not more than that. In fact, I believe the 1.8 gets a 6T35 and the 1.4 gets a 6T45 so with a 1.4T you automatically get a beefier trans, and yet it still gets better gas mileage than a 1.8.
The 1.4, SO close to a 1.8 it even gets a stronger transmission.
I totally agree. The rental sonic I had I was very impressed with the auto.
ChrisJ
Active member
1.8 - 77hp per liter
1.4 - 99hp per liter.
Both on 87 octane in stock form.
In my book neither is "gutless".
a 1970s Chevy 350 producing 28hp per liter would fall into that category. Lets go more modern, 1980s Mustang with a 302 producing a whopping 45hp per liter.
Last edited:
At 1364cc, the 1.4 is actually above that magical 100 hp per liter barrier.
Last edited:
ChrisJ
Active member
Lets see some names of engines in mass produced cars that produce more than the 1.4T on 87 octane leaving gas mileage out of it.
You have a point. It is not magical (I may have been a little facetious from the start). But it is over 100. And its not trying very hard to get there. I'm not an "all motor" purist, so I can take some solace in this.
Al Marino
New member
If your not a car guy, and want a cheap well built car that gets you to point a to point b, by all means get the stripped down auto sedan with the 1.8. But just for curiosity's sake, give the turbo engine a drive. In stock form ( my rs isn't) the turbo engine is adequate. I can't imagine this car without the turbo.
The RS version will feel sronger because of shorter gearing. Years ago I owned a Mazda Protege LX sedan with a 1.8 liter DOHC non turbo engine, very similar to one in my Sonic. The output of this engine was a bit less HP (125 vs 138), but the gearing was drastically different. Mazda was taching 4k RPMs in 5th gear (manual transmission) at 80 MPH. 1.8 liter Sonic does about 3200 RPMs at 80 MPH in 5th gear. Despite slightly less HP, that Mazda would easily outperform Sonic in all aspects. What suffered was fuel economy. I only got 25 to 27 MPG. Sonic easily exceeds 30MPG even in city driving due to much taller gearing.
I dont know where all the 1.8 hate comes from, if youre going to mod id say go for the 1.4 since theres much more you can do with it, but for just a DD the 1.8 is just great.
I bought a 2012 LS 1.8 5spd Hatch brand new from the dealer in march '13, the dealer wanted it gone and they had it going for $11,500, instead of $16,999. I wanted the 1.4 but this deal was too good to give up. Ive had it for a year now, it has 13***kms on it, not a single issue with the car. It still drives great. Its a great DD, pretty much all of my driving is in the city, and i get around 33mpg, and i dont drive like a grandpa either. Its a basic model, just has keyless entry thats it, but thats all i need. I love this car, my wife does too. Theres tons of room, and is quite roomy and comfortable. Its actually not as slow as you think either, its quite snappy and im actually quite impressed, this is also coming from a guy whos second car is an 02 z28 camaro with 325hp lol.
I bought a 2012 LS 1.8 5spd Hatch brand new from the dealer in march '13, the dealer wanted it gone and they had it going for $11,500, instead of $16,999. I wanted the 1.4 but this deal was too good to give up. Ive had it for a year now, it has 13***kms on it, not a single issue with the car. It still drives great. Its a great DD, pretty much all of my driving is in the city, and i get around 33mpg, and i dont drive like a grandpa either. Its a basic model, just has keyless entry thats it, but thats all i need. I love this car, my wife does too. Theres tons of room, and is quite roomy and comfortable. Its actually not as slow as you think either, its quite snappy and im actually quite impressed, this is also coming from a guy whos second car is an 02 z28 camaro with 325hp lol.
Last edited:
Darthgoon
New member
Heh I have a 1.8 auto Sedan LT, some people have said it is a boomy gutless engine, having driven my 1.8 for a little under a year now I can say it is a boomy gutless engine UNTIL the engine has been running for a good long while or in warmer weather. The engine for some reason does not run well at all in cooler temperatures and I mean it runs terrible in cold temps even after running several minutes. Now in warmer weather after the engine warms up the 1.8 acts like a totally different engine altogether. It is MUCH smoother and more responsive in warm weather.
Last edited:
