Pars wrote:
>
> Yep, I wouldn't belittle the 88-91. In my opinion, the best looking of the
> bunch and it shared the same suspension design as my 98 Hatch. That model
> has been around for 16 years and there's still a lot of them on the road.
> But mechanically speaking, I think the last iteration of the front double
> wishbone Civic was the best.

if something were to happen to my 98, id definately consider getting a
91 Si.

 

In article <elmop-69B404.22083114082005@nntp3.usenetserver.com>,
Elmo P. Shagnasty <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>Ummm....79 ended the first gen. 80-83 saw the second gen, a beast all
>to itself. 84-87 was a new platform, but 88-91 was the same platform
>with refreshed sheetmetal. Then 92-95 was an all-new platform,
>unrelated to the 84-91 platform. 96-00 (when they changed to a 5 year
>model changeover, up from 4 years) was the same with fresh sheetmetal.

The 1988 and 1996 changes were more than just fresh sheetmetal.

The 1988 model replaced all of the carburator engines with fuel injected
engines. The famed double wishbone suspension on all four wheels
was also included in the 1988 models. Wheelbase was also increased
compared to the 1984 model.

The 1996 model came with engine changes, and a longer wheelbase for
the hatchbacks. Most notable was that the HX replaced the VX, with
more power, but worse fuel economy (the HX was not that much better
than the regular Civics).

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

 

In article <IqednZpfzcY13WDfRVn-3Q@rogers.com>,
Pars <sdaro(remove)@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Also, GM's Automatic tranny, from a decade ago, has a better reputation then
>Honda's Automatics from the same generation. When shopping for a $2000
>Automatic, the durability of the transmission
>should be the most important qualifier. It doesn't make sense to spend $1500
>on a rebuilt tranny for a car that's worthless.

Didn't the original poster indicate looking for a car with a manual
transmission? In that case, reliability and durability of the automatic
transmission would not be an issue.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

 

Timothy J. Lee wrote:

> The 1988 model replaced all of the carburator engines with fuel injected
> engines.

Are you sure about this? I thought that you still get a carbureted engine
in a 4th-gen Civic, and that '92 was the first year that all Civics got fuel
injection.

 

Since I'm alway going off topic:

Did ya know that the 05 Civic can do over a 1000Km per Tank? I think the
Reverb's body
kit might have helped...

http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/pw/50-litre.htm

Pars

"SoCalMike" <mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gpidnYxwdM_XuZ3eRVn-qg@comcast.com...
> Pars wrote:
> >
> > Yep, I wouldn't belittle the 88-91. In my opinion, the best looking of
the
> > bunch and it shared the same suspension design as my 98 Hatch. That
model
> > has been around for 16 years and there's still a lot of them on the
road.
> > But mechanically speaking, I think the last iteration of the front
double
> > wishbone Civic was the best.
>
> if something were to happen to my 98, id definately consider getting a
> 91 Si.

 

In article <k2xn6do6bzsk.dlg@hightech.misfit>,
High Tech Misfit <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>Timothy J. Lee wrote:
>
>> The 1988 model replaced all of the carburator engines with fuel injected
>> engines.
>
>Are you sure about this? I thought that you still get a carbureted engine
>in a 4th-gen Civic,

If true in the US, that would only be for the base model 70hp engine
with 4-speed manual transmission; the DX/LX/Wagovan 1.5L 92hp engine
and the Si/4WD-wagon 1.6L 106?hp engines were fuel injected.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

 

High Tech Misfit wrote:
> Timothy J. Lee wrote:
>
>
>>The 1988 model replaced all of the carburator engines with fuel injected
>>engines.
>
>
> Are you sure about this? I thought that you still get a carbureted engine
> in a 4th-gen Civic, and that '92 was the first year that all Civics got fuel
> injection.

in the u.s., 88-on are all fuel injected. the 1.5l 88-91 models has a
dual point throttle body injection unit that /looks/ like a carburettor,
but isn't! the 1.6l has 4-point injection.

 

> Pars <sdaro(remove)@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Also, GM's Automatic tranny, from a decade ago, has a better reputation
then
> >Honda's Automatics from the same generation. When shopping for a $2000
> >Automatic, the durability of the transmission
> >should be the most important qualifier. It doesn't make sense to spend
$1500
> >on a rebuilt tranny for a car that's worthless.
>
> Didn't the original poster indicate looking for a car with a manual
> transmission? In that case, reliability and durability of the automatic
> transmission would not be an issue.
>

True, but original post specified Automatic transmission.

> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Timothy J. Lee
> Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
> No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

 

High Tech Misfit wrote:
> Timothy J. Lee wrote:
>
>
>>The 1988 model replaced all of the carburator engines with fuel injected
>>engines.
>
>
> Are you sure about this? I thought that you still get a carbureted engine
> in a 4th-gen Civic, and that '92 was the first year that all Civics got fuel
> injection.

I owned a base model '91 Civic, and it was fuel injected. Fuel injection
from that era came in two flavors: Dual-Point Throttle Body Injection,
which was on the D15B1 and D15B2 motors, and a port-injection system
that was on the D15B6 motor in the HF (High gas mileage) model, and on
the Si. The HF motor had only 8 valves, while the rest were all 16 valve
engines.

I saw three of these motors when I did a swap at 225,000 miles. The
D15B1 motor was original, the yard gave me an HF (D15B6) motor by
mistake, and I traded it back to them for a D15B2 motor, which was a
direct bolt-in and plug-in replacement. I got over 40 MPG with the
setup, and drove it another 40,000 miles before buying my Accord 5 years
ago, and sold the civic to a friend. He still has it, and it has nearly
300,000 miles on it. With gas prices what they are, I might offer to buy
it back :-)