Wierd Civic...any1 seen it before?
Civic1200 Discussion Board: : Wierd Civic...any1 seen it before?
Heh, I bought a "new" car last week (since we've shifted gears to our daily drivers). 1995 Eclipse GSX, turbo, AWD, 5spd. Car has 88K and motor has about 1200 miles on performance rebuild. Should be a kick, gets way better mileage than my truck (yeah... I bought it for mileage... right).
My Porsche is a 1986 944 Turbo (951) with racing chips that bring it up to around 290HP. It has a lot of power but it's real strength is it's handling, front engine with rear transmission puts all the weight on both axles. Just Amazing!
I want to race it in autocross but I don't think I could afford to fix what I know I would break. That is why I am building a 1st gen Civic for that.
Been awhile since I was last here... But I have owned a XR4Ti and loved it. Comfortable, fast,the problem when something goes wrong it a pain to get it fixed (not alot of knowledge out there). Heck the battery is even differant, post are backwards and cables not long enough to cross over, cheap replacemnet cost $90.00. If you have the cash thier alot of fun. But I have also had a SVO Mustang and it was much faster but not as comfortable.
Kurt
What kinda porsche?
I raced a 2003 Mach 1 the other day. At 120MPH I was floored in 5th gear and still climbing quickly. We where side by side. Out of the corner of my eye I saw his front end raise a little then I saw his back end. Nobody has done that to me in my Porsche before.
I don't care how little engineering went into that thing, it kicks ass.
Don, I think there's a difference of opinions on what is meant by engineering here. Good engineering is not just performance, it's long term reliability, fuel economy, lower cost of manufacturing, better use of materials, AND performance. If we're comparing mid '70's Civics with mid '70's Mustangs, I think much more time went into R&D for the Civics. The American car companies at the time were building the same car that they've been building for 15 years at that point, there wasn't much in the way of any new stuff that came along. They didn't want to change unless they had to, and I really can't blame them. Small, light, and good fuel economy wasn't what the majority of people wanted at the time. People wanted long, low, wide, and fast. Sure, there was a new casting of a motor here and there, but no wholesale changes of what came before. Very little use of aluminum heads, blocks, or overhead cams. Sure there were a few, but they were the exception, not the rule. The Japanese auto manufacturers were forced to do more with less because of less resources that were available at the time. American car designers could always make a component bigger and stronger to avoid failures, but not so with the limited availability of steel or other materials in Japan.
It doesn't really matter that the suspension wasn't designed for optimal performance, that's not what it was engineered to do. The engineering DID go into the other aspects, like fuel economy, as you mentioned, and emissions. Just take a look at the CVCC heads, intakes, and carburetors, there's a phenominal amount of time that went into the development of them.
Don't get me wrong, I don't have anything against Mustangs (other than just being a Chevy guy 
), but it's not fair to compare engineering just in one (performance) area, and make an overall judgement for the whole vehicle.
Ya for GAS mileage it was one of the best... see post below.
Check this page out. http://www.autocluster.com/id53.htm
Somebody thought civics were new and innovative.
Wrong despite what you would like to believe. Suspension...Mac struts, single A arms are designed for econo boxes just designed to hold the car up with no real suspension angle control... even 50s /60s fords like falcons and ugly Torinos had dual A arm front suspension. The Honda engines are decent OHC but it most likely because of Hondas Motorcycle roots.
Engineered to be cheap and get good gas mileage maybe(during the gas crunch) but NOT enginered to be much of a performance car. A Civic requires lots of redoing to hang in that department. For a modern day comparison to a gen 1 think GEO Metro or Suzuki Swift.
Maybe 1st gen Civics are less engineered than a new Mustang, but I think there was more engineering that went into the Civics than a contemporary Mustang. The mid 70's cars werent' all that much more advanced than the 60's versions, if at all. The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) voted the 1st Gen Civic the best engineered car of the '70's.
Jacob, there is one engine that does sound better than a SBC, and that's a BBC I always have had a thing for the sound of a big V8
Don, I agree that our 1G's are far less engineered than a Mustang. But, none of us are disillusioned about that fact, we love our cars in spite of that. But, people always glorify Mustangs for something they are not, that's what I hate about them.
Yes, nothing sounds better than a SBC breathing through a set of Flowmasters. My buddy with a Mustang ('66.5 with a 302 and flowmasters) alway tells me he wished his car sounded like my truck (Vortec SBC w/3" flowmaster).
It was car of the year too.
Light body + beefy engine = big grins
Ya I really like the late 80s early 90s Mustang coupe and you cannot beat the sound with a nice set of Flowmasters.
Dont go slamming Mustangs... our gen 1s have far less engineering and are far slower, but we still love them now dont we Truth is any car has faults but can be improved just pick your posion.
Are you kidding me? The new Mustangs are a joke. "completely restyled" my butt, stick round headlights on the previous design and you've got the new one. I hate 'stangs, economy cars built for secretary's. Ho-hum styling, poor suspension geometry and little focus on power, otherwise 90% of the ones you see wouldn't have a V6 and an automatic.
If it weren't for Carol Shelby (whome I actually have some respect for), we'd see the Ford Escort now-a-days and it would say Mustang on the back.
I don't particularly mind the SSR, at least the base motor has 390hp, and the PT's a joke, what a lame car.
The UK Ford Escort in this post is a classic boofhead car in England. Visit any council estate over there and you're bound to see at least one driving around with Doof Doof pounding out the windows and a crew of retards on board. That's provided that it hasn't completely rusted out from all the salt on the roads.
I loved England so when I was there.
Definitely mixed feelings for me. At that price, they're gonna be crawlin' all over the road within the year I imagine. It's a much better-executed tribute to the older style than say the PT Cruiser or Chevy SSR...
All this mention of Mustang makes me drool for a new 05. You guys like?
If you inflated that spoiler and added a second tier, I think it would look very reminiscient of the merkur.
Makes sense w/ the stang I suppose, the mustang sho's have the turbo motor and even the same spoiler, but the merkur's tail hatch is slightly more bulged and has a 3rd window added on each side. cool, but I still like the xr4ti and that escort better for some reason. I think it's the awkward tail of the mustang where that window should be, and the horizontally lined taillights(an 80s trend that the merkur didn't share).
Ha Ha! You guys crack me up!
Whats a matter no body to rip on e-bay this weekend or curse at?
there is something weird strange and unusual about you Don
http://www.rsownersclub.co.uk/car_info/menu.htm
Its an RS Escort nothing weird, strange or unusual..
The angles on the windows are reminiscent of the Escort my step-mom used to have which makes sence since y'all said it was a ford...but I woulda guessed something wierd...kinda looks like some one smashed a BMW into an Escort to me.
(The rear end and line along the door remind me of a BMW for some reason)
Not the same body as an escort at all.
Its a Mustang suspension and drive train, nothing unusual about that.
has anyone ever owned/driven an xr4ti? I like their styling, even though I hate most fords(merkur) They're also turbocharged and rear-drive little hatches, which sounds appealing too. THey look like these(are they the same body?) so that's why I was thinking. I've never driven one, but once raced a guy that kicked my a$$ w/ it.
Ford, Escort LX?
Yea that's what I thought when I looked at it.. :-P
Its not a Civic its an Ford!
Hey guys...I was looking for pics of civics in the web recently and found this as an " 87-91 RS CIVIC" Any one? :-$