2nd Generation (GE 08-13) 2nd Generation specific talk and questions here.

Where is Honda going?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jul 11, 2012 | 05:14 PM
  #101  
sam's Avatar
sam
Super Moderator
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 531
From: Muncie/Anderson Indiana USA
Originally Posted by wetphoto
Now if only Honda read this site the way GM does the sites for their cars. They actually read, respond and are members.
This is an 'Unofficial Honda' independent site. I suppose that realistically, from their perspective not ours, limits Honda's direct participation in the site discussion.
 
Old Jul 11, 2012 | 05:24 PM
  #102  
DiamondStarMonsters's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,428
From: Chicago, Illinois
5 Year Member
I can only imagine what the reaction of the poor SOB delegate from Honda that would have perused this thread would think.

Probably something along the lines of:


Followed by copious amounts of drinking, and a change of career.
 
Old Jul 11, 2012 | 05:48 PM
  #103  
mahout's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,371
From: NC USA
Originally Posted by wetphoto
Spent the last week in San Diego. I noticed a lot of Miata's, a few FR-S's, RX-8's Mustangs, Camaros, Challengers. All fun to drive "sports cars. Honda has what to compete? Where is this company going? What is it's corporate philosophy? Used to be top tier. Still is in reliablilty, but what else?

I first associated with Honda i 1976. My dealer was a very asctive one with lots of inteeraction with Honda people because he, like them, and I, were very active performance oriented even for the original civic asand later accord. We built more than a few 'tuner' civics with engine imporovements, suspension and aero changes that made the civic a more than capable performer. A competetition book was published around 1977 and more than 1000 copies were sold at $10.
Honda people were most interested, including sohiro honda himself and is was reported he was the originator of the goal of honda was not only the best family cars but also the 'porsche of the popular priced cars'.
That vision led to the ultimate: tghe CRX and tho not available here the CRX SiR, a 180 hp CRX that embarassed many more recognizeable sports cars. /In the rain CRX was a a more than capable competitor with Co0rvettes, muchg to the chagrin of our dealer, a big Corvette guy.
With the loss of Sochiro Honda pushed thed vision of Porsche of small cars' into the bacground and with the demise of the CRX it would not return. With it the technology that drove Honda rec eded.
Enter the CRZ. Whiled there were pockedts of enthusiasts, who wsere embarassed by Mazdas miata the overall mission of Honda glued itself to the responsible small sedan. Had the CRZ been a descendent of the CRX with a 180 hp engine assisted by the 10-12 hp motor, the CRZ would have been backlogged for more than a year in sales. And Honda would return to the pinnacle with that halo car. The Crz, with a tepid 110 hp engine, was an illegitimate descendent of the CRX Recently, Honda has reorganized their product development leadership so perhaps honda will return to its vision of Sochiro. If not, perhaps Mazda will inherit the mantle.We shall see.
Is a bigger engine in works, or a forced induction version of the 1.5 liter for the CRZ, the advent of the CRZ Si. I'm surprized the tuners today have not produced such.
Honda lost its way but appears to be returning to the path of sochiro. It will be a treat to see what happens. Somewhere deep in the caverns of Okaido a small dragon has opened one eye.
 

Last edited by mahout; Jul 11, 2012 at 05:51 PM.
Old Jul 11, 2012 | 07:00 PM
  #104  
555sexydrive's Avatar
Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,317
From: ATL, Jorja
5 Year Member
Actually the CR-X never had more than 160ps (157hp). The first iteration CR-X Si with the brown top carb'd ZC had 135ps and the 2nd Si model here actually went down to 130ps with EFI. The 2nd iteration of the B16A released in 1992 in the EG6/9 came with 170ps and then the EK9 with the destroked B18 had 185ps. And the top rated CR-X Si stateside was what 108hp? So in reality the CR-Z has more balls than any CR-X released in the US. Sure it does weigh a bit more, final version in US ballooned up to 2300lbs, safety standards and consumers needing more gadgets versus just worrying about driving their damn car and the sussy was a step backwards overall, but the CR-Z is still a good little car. It's just too bad that Honda marketing is horrid and they pushed the CR-Z as a green vehicle when it is not at all one and the ignorant masses are too dumb for their own good to actually see the differences.

The CR-Z if it came with just a 140ps engine and an additional 20ps and a ton of torque (by Honda standards) from the electric motor it would have been a hot seller. It actually has sold alright, but Honda has cut back on delivering more of them to the US because of the weak a$$ $uck. Like I stated in another thread, the top model CR-Z here would cost me like $33k, not many people would purchase the CR-Z for that price even with a hotter powerplant. So until they start making them in Mexico alongside the coming Fit, you will not see many there or if by some miracle the $uck rebounds, not likely though with the FED determined to kill it off and institute a new currency like what happened in Europe.

What Honda needs to really do is dump the Hybrid moniker, leave that nonsense for Toyboat and just call it what it really is an integrated motor assist then people (giving maybe too much credit to the masses) would not try to package it into the same box with Toyboat.
 
Old Jul 11, 2012 | 07:02 PM
  #105  
wetphoto's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 395
From: Peoria, AZ
Originally Posted by sam
This is an 'Unofficial Honda' independent site. I suppose that realistically, from their perspective not ours, limits Honda's direct participation in the site discussion.
The others are independent also, but they joined as regular members. No ads, just answers and paying attention to what owners want. Sometimes they are employees, who do not hide that they are employees, with knowledge of a problem, and solutions. Very helpful. My question is, does Honda care enough to even read the site? They might learn something for free.
 
Old Jul 11, 2012 | 08:39 PM
  #106  
mike410b's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 7,618
From: .
5 Year Member
555, the top spec CRX/Civic Si from 88-91 was 106 bhp

D16A6.

Such a bad engine, still scooted along relatively well thanks to the weight
 
Old Jul 12, 2012 | 03:08 AM
  #107  
chris6801's Avatar
New Member
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 18
From: Berkeley, CA
I had a 91 CRX Si with a D16Z6 but with old intake, exhaust, ecu, etc. It was a pretty decent amount of power but the engine in my new fit feels a lot more refined than the small 4s they made back then.
 
Old Jul 12, 2012 | 09:14 AM
  #108  
flygirl's Avatar
Member
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 43
From: Scottsdale
Originally Posted by mahout
I first associated with Honda i 1976. My dealer was a very asctive one with lots of inteeraction with Honda people because he, like them, and I, were very active performance oriented even for the original civic asand later accord. We built more than a few 'tuner' civics with engine imporovements, suspension and aero changes that made the civic a more than capable performer. A competetition book was published around 1977 and more than 1000 copies were sold at $10.
Honda people were most interested, including sohiro honda himself and is was reported he was the originator of the goal of honda was not only the best family cars but also the 'porsche of the popular priced cars'.
That vision led to the ultimate: tghe CRX and tho not available here the CRX SiR, a 180 hp CRX that embarassed many more recognizeable sports cars. /In the rain CRX was a a more than capable competitor with Co0rvettes, muchg to the chagrin of our dealer, a big Corvette guy.
With the loss of Sochiro Honda pushed thed vision of Porsche of small cars' into the bacground and with the demise of the CRX it would not return. With it the technology that drove Honda rec eded.
Enter the CRZ. Whiled there were pockedts of enthusiasts, who wsere embarassed by Mazdas miata the overall mission of Honda glued itself to the responsible small sedan. Had the CRZ been a descendent of the CRX with a 180 hp engine assisted by the 10-12 hp motor, the CRZ would have been backlogged for more than a year in sales. And Honda would return to the pinnacle with that halo car. The Crz, with a tepid 110 hp engine, was an illegitimate descendent of the CRX Recently, Honda has reorganized their product development leadership so perhaps honda will return to its vision of Sochiro. If not, perhaps Mazda will inherit the mantle.We shall see.
Is a bigger engine in works, or a forced induction version of the 1.5 liter for the CRZ, the advent of the CRZ Si. I'm surprized the tuners today have not produced such.
Honda lost its way but appears to be returning to the path of sochiro. It will be a treat to see what happens. Somewhere deep in the caverns of Okaido a small dragon has opened one eye.
Sure hope so.
 
Old Jul 12, 2012 | 10:24 AM
  #109  
mahout's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,371
From: NC USA
Originally Posted by 555sexydrive
Actually the CR-X never had more than 160ps (157hp). The first iteration CR-X Si with the brown top carb'd ZC had 135ps and the 2nd Si model here actually went down to 130ps with EFI. The 2nd iteration of the B16A released in 1992 in the EG6/9 came with 170ps and then the EK9 with the destroked B18 had 185ps. And the top rated CR-X Si stateside was what 108hp? So in reality the CR-Z has more balls than any CR-X released in the US. Sure it does weigh a bit more, final version in US ballooned up to 2300lbs, safety standards and consumers needing more gadgets versus just worrying about driving their damn car and the sussy was a step backwards overall, but the CR-Z is still a good little car. It's just too bad that Honda marketing is horrid and they pushed the CR-Z as a green vehicle when it is not at all one and the ignorant masses are too dumb for their own good to actually see the differences.

The CR-Z if it came with just a 140ps engine and an additional 20ps and a ton of torque (by Honda standards) from the electric motor it would have been a hot seller. It actually has sold alright, but Honda has cut back on delivering more of them to the US because of the weak a$$ $uck. Like I stated in another thread, the top model CR-Z here would cost me like $33k, not many people would purchase the CR-Z for that price even with a hotter powerplant. So until they start making them in Mexico alongside the coming Fit, you will not see many there or if by some miracle the $uck rebounds, not likely though with the FED determined to kill it off and institute a new currency like what happened in Europe.

What Honda needs to really do is dump the Hybrid moniker, leave that nonsense for Toyboat and just call it what it really is an integrated motor assist then people (giving maybe too much credit to the masses) would not try to package it into the same box with Toyboat.

My SiR engine imported from Japan dynoed 163 hp at 8800 rpm at the wheels on a chassis dyno and according to my friends in Japan the top engine was rated at 190ps. Mine had a measured top speed of 139 mph.. I dont agree with 140hp, it needs to be at least 180ps. The natural market comparision will be the Toyboat and Sub up scale miata. And probably the Alfa miata, too. If you think a 300+ hp WRX FRS is far away you're not paying attention. cheers
Lead, follow, or get out of ghe way.
 
Old Jul 12, 2012 | 11:01 AM
  #110  
555sexydrive's Avatar
Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,317
From: ATL, Jorja
5 Year Member
Never ever 190ps in a CR-X, not from the showroom as far as numbers were given by Honda. I've had the CR-X SiR's brother in the EF9 SiR Civic, same B16A and it was factory rated at 160ps. The first CTR only came rated at 185ps and would walk all over a CR-X here. My EG9 SiR with the 2nd B16A never released stateside was rated at 170ps and my friend's CR-X wasn't a match, especially when I gutted mine out and it was still slightly heavier, be it in the winding roads or the snoozefest straightline stuff.

Whatever SiR engine you had was not stock as the stock ECU only revved to 7800 and they were not still making power in an upward sweep at that point. Not sure what your friends were passing on to you as far as information goes, but it is not correct or something was lost in translation.
 
Old Jul 12, 2012 | 06:55 PM
  #111  
fujisawa's Avatar
Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 1,671
From: Boston, MA
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by mahout
The natural market comparision will be the Toyboat and Sub up scale miata. And probably the Alfa miata
Lead, follow, or get out of ghe way.
I cannot find these cars in consumer reports. Or anywhere. I think you can blame autocorrect.
 
Old Jul 12, 2012 | 07:08 PM
  #112  
Wanderer.'s Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,363
From: Hayward, CA
Originally Posted by fujisawa
I cannot find these cars in consumer reports. Or anywhere. I think you can blame autocorrect.
Nah, he's talking about a new car that Alfa Romeo is making that's based off of a Miata chassis, and the FR-S.

Or so i've heard.

I'm kind of excited.
 
Old Jul 12, 2012 | 08:44 PM
  #113  
mahout's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,371
From: NC USA
Originally Posted by 555sexydrive
Never ever 190ps in a CR-X, not from the showroom as far as numbers were given by Honda. I've had the CR-X SiR's brother in the EF9 SiR Civic, same B16A and it was factory rated at 160ps. The first CTR only came rated at 185ps and would walk all over a CR-X here. My EG9 SiR with the 2nd B16A never released stateside was rated at 170ps and my friend's CR-X wasn't a match, especially when I gutted mine out and it was still slightly heavier, be it in the winding roads or the snoozefest straightline stuff.

Whatever SiR engine you had was not stock as the stock ECU only revved to 7800 and they were not still making power in an upward sweep at that point. Not sure what your friends were passing on to you as far as information goes, but it is not correct or something was lost in translation.

I'm not great at translation, but 160, 170 and 190ps are all stated in Japanese CRX'es sales lit. SiR listed at least 3 variants.
I let that all go with the car when I sold it but our dyno verified psmore than 170ps.
My engine came with the ECU, wiring revisions, and distributor because that was required. . Because they recommended, I bought a spare distributor and still have that. When I dynoed the car after installation it obviously had at least 180 hp at the crankshaft. It ran like it too, under 2:30 at vir in full street condition. We tried over sized tires but it didn't help; needed the extra rpm.When it rained Vettes were easy targets for entertainment. But we were buying aftermarket Japan and it is possible our engine was a variant from Mugen or other tuner.
Are you thinking of American or Japanese sales specs? IOn most cases ps is somewhat 'smaller' than hp.
 

Last edited by mahout; Jul 12, 2012 at 08:51 PM.
Old Jul 12, 2012 | 09:36 PM
  #114  
555sexydrive's Avatar
Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,317
From: ATL, Jorja
5 Year Member
I'm speaking directly of Japanese specs as I have been here since Aug '93, minus a short 20 month detour in Guam starting in Jan '08. The CR-X seriously only came from Honda at 160ps in Si-R trim, I had 5 friends down on Okinawa with them in glasstop and regular roof form. I will try to track down something here, but it will be a stab in the dark, but will go to Honda headquarters in Tokyo and see if by chance they have anything. There were SiR and SiR2 variants of the Civic EG model, but there was no difference in power, was about creature comforts inside. There was an automatic Civic and I believe CR-X SiR that only had 155ps if I am not mistaken, I know the EG and EK Civics and 3rd gen CR-X (delSol) had this and the EF Si Civic and CR-X using the ZC had an auto version making the same 130ps as the manual, but lower torque. There were actually race base models as well, power was still listed the same as the street going versions, just had no amentities, came all white (another reason I say a real Honda should only be white, haha) and were quite a few kg lighter.

Actually ps is usually about 3 more than hp. For instance the GE Fit here is listed as 120ps and there it is 117hp. The DC2R Teggy was 200ps and 197hp there.

I really believe you had some Mugen go-fast parts in your engine. It's like their old E-AT Mugen/Motul Civic, it had the brown top carb'd ZC, but it wasn't putting out 135ps like the factory motor. That Civic kicked some ass on track. Don't get me wrong at all, I'm not doubting what you had and I would seriously love a 190ps EF CR-X gutted down to just 750kg, it would wreak havoc on some circuits where its gearing wouldn't be a detriment.
 
Old Jul 12, 2012 | 09:46 PM
  #115  
cjecpa's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2,667
From: Binghamton, ny usa
Here is a website not sure if anyone has mention it shows the 0 to 60 and qtr mile time my model and manufacturer. Interesting the 91 CRX si and Civic Si close to the Fit. Even more interesting my 2012 Fit compared to my 95 Miata about the same weight. My Miata feels faster but not according to this site.

Honda 0-60 Times & Honda Quarter Mile Times | Honda Accord, Civic 0-60, Del Sol, CRZ, CRX and Honda Vtec S2000 0 to 60 stats!
 

Last edited by cjecpa; Jul 12, 2012 at 09:50 PM.
Old Jul 13, 2012 | 02:11 PM
  #116  
mahout's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,371
From: NC USA
Originally Posted by 555sexydrive
I'm speaking directly of Japanese specs as I have been here since Aug '93, minus a short 20 month detour in Guam starting in Jan '08. The CR-X seriously only came from Honda at 160ps in Si-R trim, I had 5 friends down on Okinawa with them in glasstop and regular roof form. I will try to track down something here, but it will be a stab in the dark, but will go to Honda headquarters in Tokyo and see if by chance they have anything. There were SiR and SiR2 variants of the Civic EG model, but there was no difference in power, was about creature comforts inside. There was an automatic Civic and I believe CR-X SiR that only had 155ps if I am not mistaken, I know the EG and EK Civics and 3rd gen CR-X (delSol) had this and the EF Si Civic and CR-X using the ZC had an auto version making the same 130ps as the manual, but lower torque. There were actually race base models as well, power was still listed the same as the street going versions, just had no amentities, came all white (another reason I say a real Honda should only be white, haha) and were quite a few kg lighter.

Actually ps is usually about 3 more than hp. For instance the GE Fit here is listed as 120ps and there it is 117hp. The DC2R Teggy was 200ps and 197hp there.

I really believe you had some Mugen go-fast parts in your engine. It's like their old E-AT Mugen/Motul Civic, it had the brown top carb'd ZC, but it wasn't putting out 135ps like the factory motor. That Civic kicked some ass on track. Don't get me wrong at all, I'm not doubting what you had and I would seriously love a 190ps EF CR-X gutted down to just 750kg, it would wreak havoc on some circuits where its gearing wouldn't be a detriment.
Wouldn't doubt any of that. And if you want to see numerous CRX and Civics with even 200 hp you need to visit VIR or another track.
PS my SAE manual disagrees that ps is larger than hp.
In any cased Honda needs to upgrade the CRZ as quickly as possible.
 
Old Jul 13, 2012 | 03:11 PM
  #117  
DiamondStarMonsters's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,428
From: Chicago, Illinois
5 Year Member
No ponies in this race, but wanted to clarify that:

1 Pferdestarke (PS or german for "Horse Strength") = 735.x watts

1 Horsepower (HP) = 745.x watts

735/745 = ~98.7%

One horsepower is all of ~1.3% more energy than one Pferdestarke. Till we get to the 4 digit power levels, they are all but interchangeable in offhand conversation.
 
Old Jul 13, 2012 | 04:40 PM
  #118  
cokeismetal's Avatar
Member
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 50
From: west haven, ct
@wetphoto. he's prolly not paid by honda. he just the eddie asshole of this forum and def knows everything.....
 
Old Jul 13, 2012 | 10:39 PM
  #119  
555sexydrive's Avatar
Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,317
From: ATL, Jorja
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by mahout
Wouldn't doubt any of that. And if you want to see numerous CRX and Civics with even 200 hp you need to visit VIR or another track.
PS my SAE manual disagrees that ps is larger than hp.
In any cased Honda needs to upgrade the CRZ as quickly as possible.
You are misinterpreting. 120>117 yes? So on paper ps will always be a larger number than hp when translated between the same motors.

It should happen in the near future, regarding an upgraded CR-Z.
 
Old Jul 14, 2012 | 10:19 PM
  #120  
mahout's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,371
From: NC USA
Originally Posted by DiamondStarMonsters
No ponies in this race, but wanted to clarify that:

1 Pferdestarke (PS or german for "Horse Strength") = 735.x watts

1 Horsepower (HP) = 745.x watts

735/745 = ~98.7%

One horsepower is all of ~1.3% more energy than one Pferdestarke. Till we get to the 4 digit power levels, they are all but interchangeable in offhand conversation.

I hadn't had a chance to check but thats about what I thought. ps is a lesser standard than hp; any ps rating has to be reduced to show horsepower. Thanks.
 



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:04 PM.