Best Civic year/model/performance/design/engineered

Discussion in 'Civic' started by mopa, Jun 10, 2005.

  1. mopa

    mopa Guest

    I am just curious as to what make people think was the best. I
    personally think the 92/95 models were designed better, but like the
    newer engines.

    It would be nice if they would not of changed the headlights in the
    civics, the older style seems much cooler I think. These new civics
    they make the head lights look way to big for such a small/midsized
    car.

    cheers!
    mopa
     
    mopa, Jun 10, 2005
    #1
  2. mopa

    jim beam Guest

    the newer engines are great, particularly when mated to an automatic.
    in the 99 on, ignition retards while up-shifting under power. this
    effectively "throttles back" the motor so the automatic shift is /much/
    smoother.

    the 5th generations, the ones you describe, are indeed good cars, but my
    favorites are the 4th gen. in that vein, i think you have a long way to
    go to beat the 88-91 crx. light, fast, comfortable, fantastic handling
    [if you are lucky enough to have one with a straight frame]. with up to
    160bhp for the crx sir [iirc], a great power to weight ratio.
     
    jim beam, Jun 10, 2005
    #2
  3. mopa

    mopa Guest

    yah, CRX's are nice. I seen a very nice modifed one a few months ago.
    It was a CRX, but had an 97 Integra Back, if you looked at the back of
    the car you would swear it was an Integra, until you walked to the
    front.

    I wonder why they stopped making them?
     
    mopa, Jun 11, 2005
    #3
  4. mopa

    jim beam Guest

    because honda hired some idiot with an m.b.a. that told them it was too
    much car for too little money. the del sol was the reaction & it was
    too expensive for too little. so they dropped it altogether for the 6th
    generation! unbelievable. the crx really put the "hot hatch" on the
    map and did wonders for honda's identity.

    toyota played the same game with the mr2, but [arguably] the mr2 did not
    have the broader appeal of the more utilitarian crx hatchback. to their
    credit however, what toyota /did/ appear to figure out was the
    down-selling loyalty these cars create. i mean, you love your first
    mr2, right? you'll buy another toyota, right? i was being driven
    around by a client in an avalon one time and got his whole car-life
    history - he's been die-hard toyota ever since his first [used] mr2. so
    sensible toyota take the trouble even now to keep the fun little
    sportster cars in their line-up, even though sales figures are nothing
    to write home about. when the honda m.b.a's axed the crx, they cut off
    a whole generation of potential buyers & just /gave/ the business to
    toyota. as if toyota weren't competitors in the first place! not a
    smart move.
     
    jim beam, Jun 11, 2005
    #4
  5. mopa

    mopa Guest

    yeah, very true. Well, damn that sucks. I sure wish they made CRXs, if
    you ask anyone who owns one, they will tell you how much they love it,
    and how great it handles.

    It's such a great car, designed perfectly, small, but very fast and
    it's easily to say why they are good. Look? they are from the 80's, and
    still running strong.

    You won't see no 2005 Honda Element in 20 years from now, and why? it's
    a cheap ass P.O.S, made of all plastic. What is wrong with car
    companies today? when you make a product good, why change it?

    " Don't change the light, unless the bulb is broken! "
     
    mopa, Jun 18, 2005
    #5
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.