Carfax, Buying Used, & Craigslist.org

Don't be such arrogant!
I know exactly how ABS works and what are its effects on driving/breaking.

In my opinion the car with ABS in general is safer than the one without one.
Buying older cars you loose this feature and some others, too.
It is buyer choice, of course, but I considered it worth mentioning
together with your coment about missing sway bars in newer model.

Don't forget you are not talking about the car for yourself but for Elle.
She might be somebody's grandmother Or - just a driver little
more educated in benefits of modern car safety systems than you...

This just tells me how uneducated/ignorant driver you are.

Also, again I have to remind you that the choice is not yours but hers.
It is her car we are talking about. It is her decision if she wants car
with air bags or a death trap without one

I am not talking about cosmetic rust but undercariage rust, ball joints, etc.
Once again, I have to remind you that your advices are addressed to Elle.
Do you know where is she located? I do not recall her mentioning this.

 

Not to contradict you, but to get out my puny view: I have
been restricting my search to older cars partly (very small
part) because I do not want ABS. ABS is harder to maintain;
has more that can go wrong; and I do not see significant
advantage from a safety standpoint.

I have always had a car without ABS.

I would prefer airbags but I am not requiring them.

I think JBeam is recalling, correctly, that I am in the
southwest. No rust in general, though a few of the cars I
have seen are from up north and show rust.

I finally read the fine print on carfax.com's connection to
dealers: Every time a dealer looks up a vehicle history on
carfax, the lookup goes into their system as a car that
/might/ be traded in or just got sold. I think it would be
luck to run across a Honda through this approach. I really
do not trust the salespeople there to call me as soon as
another 92-95 Civic comes in. They deal in the here and now.
A phone call does not seem to be worth it to them.

 

Not to contradict you, but to get out my puny view: I have
been restricting my search to older cars partly (very small
part) because I do not want ABS. ABS is harder to maintain;
has more that can go wrong; and I do not see significant
advantage from a safety standpoint.

I have always had a car without ABS.

I would prefer airbags but I am not requiring them.

I think JBeam is recalling, correctly, that I am in the
southwest. No rust in general, though a few of the cars I
have seen are from up north and show rust.

I finally read the fine print on carfax.com's connection to
dealers: Every time a dealer looks up a vehicle history on
carfax, the lookup goes into their system as a car that
/might/ be traded in or just got sold. I think it would be
luck to run across a Honda through this approach. I really
do not trust the salespeople there to call me as soon as
another 92-95 Civic comes in. They deal in the here and now.
A phone call does not seem to be worth it to them.

 

Archival point: The 1990 Civic hatchback compared to a 91
Civic LX Sedan (my car) is lighter by around 150 lbs, and is
10-inches shorter. Ten inches is not small potatoes to me.
Can't find the height from the ground for the hatchback, but
it has seemed lower on the three or so hatches I have looked
at. Interior dimensions on the hatchback are mostly a bit
smaller than the sedan. I think the lack of power steering
on the hatch means one feels the road more. It is not as
responsive in feel.

I have also driven a few used sedans besides my own and
consistently felt much better in them compared to the
hatches.

No more, no less, just my opinion.

 

Archival point: The 1990 Civic hatchback compared to a 91
Civic LX Sedan (my car) is lighter by around 150 lbs, and is
10-inches shorter. Ten inches is not small potatoes to me.
Can't find the height from the ground for the hatchback, but
it has seemed lower on the three or so hatches I have looked
at. Interior dimensions on the hatchback are mostly a bit
smaller than the sedan. I think the lack of power steering
on the hatch means one feels the road more. It is not as
responsive in feel.

I have also driven a few used sedans besides my own and
consistently felt much better in them compared to the
hatches.

No more, no less, just my opinion.

 

what's a "such arrogant"?

you know how it works??? i'd love to read your explanation!

btw, if you learned how to spell "b-r-a-k-i-n-g", you might be more
convincing.

what is your opinion based on exactly? it's not facts about braking
distances because abs is not necessarily better in that regard. you
/do/ know about abs systems, right?

buddy, helmets beat air bags every single time.

keep drinking the kool-aid.

i'm not talking cosmetic either - that's why i take the trouble to
specify "s-t-r-u-c-t-u-r-a-l" in the part you so carefully snipped but
didn't annotate.

then you've not been here very long. or you don't know how to use
google. or you're stupid and lazy.

 

what's a "such arrogant"?

you know how it works??? i'd love to read your explanation!

btw, if you learned how to spell "b-r-a-k-i-n-g", you might be more
convincing.

what is your opinion based on exactly? it's not facts about braking
distances because abs is not necessarily better in that regard. you
/do/ know about abs systems, right?

buddy, helmets beat air bags every single time.

keep drinking the kool-aid.

i'm not talking cosmetic either - that's why i take the trouble to
specify "s-t-r-u-c-t-u-r-a-l" in the part you so carefully snipped but
didn't annotate.

then you've not been here very long. or you don't know how to use
google. or you're stupid and lazy.

 

those 88-91 hatches must have had something wrong if they actually rode
lower. i know my hatch gets some heavy moving duties simply because i
can fit a lot of stuff in it, but the honda ride height spec for both is
the same at 150mm. wheel base for both is 2500mm, wheel track for both
is 1456mm.

all the other differences are simply cosmetic, i.e. length of the sedan
is 4232mm vs 3964mm for the hatch. width is 1674mm vs 1665 for the
hatch, and roof height is 1360mm vs 1333mm for the hatch. dx manual
sedan weighs 2147lbs vs 2088lbs for the hatch.

i think if you're feeling a difference it's simply the fact that you've
done the rear bushings on your car, and the others you've tried haven't
been so lucky. it does make a big change to the way these cars handle.

 

those 88-91 hatches must have had something wrong if they actually rode
lower. i know my hatch gets some heavy moving duties simply because i
can fit a lot of stuff in it, but the honda ride height spec for both is
the same at 150mm. wheel base for both is 2500mm, wheel track for both
is 1456mm.

all the other differences are simply cosmetic, i.e. length of the sedan
is 4232mm vs 3964mm for the hatch. width is 1674mm vs 1665 for the
hatch, and roof height is 1360mm vs 1333mm for the hatch. dx manual
sedan weighs 2147lbs vs 2088lbs for the hatch.

i think if you're feeling a difference it's simply the fact that you've
done the rear bushings on your car, and the others you've tried haven't
been so lucky. it does make a big change to the way these cars handle.

 

I actually have a Honda shop manual for this vehicle. It was recently
purchased ($40 on eBay, including shipping) with funds donated for the
www.tegger.com/hondafaq Web site. Thanks very much to all those who have
contributed. Big or small, it all helps.

'88-'91 Civic dimensions are as follows...

Hatchback:
Width 66.3"
Track 57.1" front, 57.3" rear
Wheelbase 98.4"
Overall length 157.1"
Overall height 52.5"

Sedan:
Width 66.7"
Track 57.1" front, 57.3" rear
Wheelbase 98.4"
Overall length 168.8"
Overall height 53.5"

No curb weights are given in Honda shop manuals, just gross weights.

Assuming the diagrams are correctly scaled (not relative to each other,
just within each diagram), all of the 11.7" difference in overall length is
in the rear overhang. The fronts of both body styles appear to be
identical.

What I find interesting here is that the Integra of those same years (which
is Civic-based) has a 2" longer wheelbase in addition to 3.6" increased
length, sedan versus hatchback.

 

I actually have a Honda shop manual for this vehicle. It was recently
purchased ($40 on eBay, including shipping) with funds donated for the
www.tegger.com/hondafaq Web site. Thanks very much to all those who have
contributed. Big or small, it all helps.

'88-'91 Civic dimensions are as follows...

Hatchback:
Width 66.3"
Track 57.1" front, 57.3" rear
Wheelbase 98.4"
Overall length 157.1"
Overall height 52.5"

Sedan:
Width 66.7"
Track 57.1" front, 57.3" rear
Wheelbase 98.4"
Overall length 168.8"
Overall height 53.5"

No curb weights are given in Honda shop manuals, just gross weights.

Assuming the diagrams are correctly scaled (not relative to each other,
just within each diagram), all of the 11.7" difference in overall length is
in the rear overhang. The fronts of both body styles appear to be
identical.

What I find interesting here is that the Integra of those same years (which
is Civic-based) has a 2" longer wheelbase in addition to 3.6" increased
length, sedan versus hatchback.

 

I agree this is quite possible. (I know you think it's fact;
I am just expressing my own opinion.) For the record, on my
91 Civic, every single front lower arm bushing and all rear
arm bushings have been changed out. The front has almost new
OEM coils, too.

I am considering a 95 Civic DX with only 120k miles (two
owners, with much documentation of dealer maintenance) on it
that has a really good feel. It has no power steering but
the bushings may be better than the old hatches I have
tried. So my PS theory could be off. Also, I won't rule out
the ball joints (and more suspension) being older and less
well maintained on the hatchbacks I tried. IOW, overall worn
suspension, for one as you and I seem to agree, may be what
I am feeling.

Maybe the old hatches are also molested more than the
sedans. The younger crowd seems to prefer the hatches. The
sedans look like an old lady's car. The hatches, more like a
kid's. Not to deride those driving hatches and paying a
fraction of what the average driver pays for gas, though.

 

I agree this is quite possible. (I know you think it's fact;
I am just expressing my own opinion.) For the record, on my
91 Civic, every single front lower arm bushing and all rear
arm bushings have been changed out. The front has almost new
OEM coils, too.

I am considering a 95 Civic DX with only 120k miles (two
owners, with much documentation of dealer maintenance) on it
that has a really good feel. It has no power steering but
the bushings may be better than the old hatches I have
tried. So my PS theory could be off. Also, I won't rule out
the ball joints (and more suspension) being older and less
well maintained on the hatchbacks I tried. IOW, overall worn
suspension, for one as you and I seem to agree, may be what
I am feeling.

Maybe the old hatches are also molested more than the
sedans. The younger crowd seems to prefer the hatches. The
sedans look like an old lady's car. The hatches, more like a
kid's. Not to deride those driving hatches and paying a
fraction of what the average driver pays for gas, though.

 

Edmunds.com has curb weights. Not saying they are right.
Just saying that's where I got my figures from. IIRC, at
least for my 91 Civic, the Edmunds curb weight and that on
my car's label match.

 

Edmunds.com has curb weights. Not saying they are right.
Just saying that's where I got my figures from. IIRC, at
least for my 91 Civic, the Edmunds curb weight and that on
my car's label match.

 

I've often wondered why curb weight isn't reported by Honda in its shop
manuals.

 

I've often wondered why curb weight isn't reported by Honda in its shop
manuals.

 

I see curb weight in at least one of the UK site's FS
manuals:
http://media.honda.co.uk/car/owner/media/manuals/ConcertoManual/62sk301/3-14.pdf

 

I see curb weight in at least one of the UK site's FS
manuals:
http://media.honda.co.uk/car/owner/media/manuals/ConcertoManual/62sk301/3-14.pdf

 

You are out of luck because you are not nice enough and you seem
to me to prefer staying with your ignorant point of view...

Is English your native language and you think everybody is the same as you?
Or that if somebody who makes some language mistakes
it is some indication of his lack of technical knowledge?
Don't be such an arrogant American who thinks that if somebody
does not speak or write perfect English his must be dumb in
everything else...

Braking distance is not all what is important in car safety.
Do some reading and maybe you will learn what you are missing.

I am not your buddy.

There will be no structural rust on 8 years old car but it is a good
chance that 20 years old civic will not be strong enough to crash safely.

I am here long enough to learn very well how arrogant and impolite you are.