civic HX as opposed to Hybrid

I have a 96 Civic EX(100k miles) running in mint condition. I was going to
trade it in on the civic hybrid but I believe instead am going to try to get
one of last few remaing HX's around. I forgot how good the mileage is on the
HX. Of course losing ABS kind of worries me. Any comments from HX owners?

Of course I good just keep driving my EX.

 

I've been doing some calculation and price comparisons. When factoring GST to
the MRSP and using current exchange rate, it seems that the Civic HX Coupe (only
sold in US) cost the same as a Canadian DX Coupe...

Given that it cost 80 Cents/Litre (canadian gas prices), after driving the car
for 160,000KM, the HX would save you $1000 at the pump. If gas prices goes up,
that saving could be greater (note: the Civic DX will use up over $8000 dollar
of gas to reach 160,000KM and the HX is 12.5% more fuel efficient then the DX).

Pars

 

The HX is a slick car - I'm looking for one for my sister.

Pros are it's a basic Civic Coupe and has a detuned engine that is
what they selll in Japan - less power and more economy. It's just
a modified engine and doesn't have a turbo or require different
fuel or fancy electrnics or battery packs or much of anything.

Tons less expensive. It also comes in a manual transmission,
which is recommended as it gets 38-40 MPG. We're talking about 2-4 MPG
less than the Hybrid Civic for $4K or so less. Really a no-brainer.

The CVT is also nice - it drives like a EX with automatic - slightly
better efficiency that offsets the 10HP loss quite nicely. Even
with the CVT, peolpe report that it gets a consistend 35-37 MPG.

The $4000+ you save buys a lot of gas at 5 MPG difference.
At $2 a gallon, and a ~14% savings over the HX, that works
out to several hundred thousand miles to break even. You'll
need a new battery pack by then as well.


Cons? Not a luxury trim model with ABS. That's about it.

 

Why would you want to trade in an EX for the HX?
Your car is paid for.
You get excellent gas milage, and unless you consume a hugh amount of
gas/year (such as driving >60,000 miles/year) I don't think it would
make economic sense.

If the EX is running well it should go for another 100,000 miles.

 

Can I really go another 100k without costly repairs? The car has never had
anything replaced except the timing belt and a pair of boots.

 

you know, you only live once, if you want a new car, then get one. Just
get what you want because you want it. Get the new EX and keep the features
you currently have.

Keith

 

Compared to other makes and models, yes.

Was the boots preventative maintenance, or did they get damaged?

Pars
98 DX Hatch

 

The boots had a small crack---they said no damage had been done. I admit I
do not know too much about cars so I just take the dealers word.

 

Lucky for you that they found it. I'll probably have my changed next year as a
preventative maintenance. I'd hate to loose the stock components. I'm amazed at
the the durability of these wheel bearings on the 96 Civic model. In my car,
they had to put up with 150,000KM on performance shocks and springs and fat
tires. Not to mention the extremely radical driving. Also, two occation in which
a pot hole and curb distroyed my mags (but aligment and suspension was not
effected)... I remember my previous GM cars, I'd have to have the bearing
greased at every oil change for and extra $5.00 and they still broke on me.

Pars
98 DX Hatch

 

It can, but it is not very likely to go another 100k without
significant repairs. Most of them will not leave you by the side of
the road with no warning, and repairing the car will certainly be
cheaper than making payments every month on a new one.

If you want years of trouble-free operation, you need a new car. If
you just want something new, and can afford it, then why not...

If on the other hand, the payments would be a burden, just keep what
you've got. A Civic with 100,000 miles is probably as reliable as a
Chrysler/GM/Ford/Volkswagen/Kia with 40,000.

JM