Fourstroking

I wanna buy one or the other depending on a few key points.

1) The car needs to be light weight.
2) Needs to have tourque at the bottom end.
3) Needs to have good after market for track parts.
4) Needs to be able to handle a B18C or B18C5.
5) Needs good track oriented suspension ie. steering components, cornering stability.

I like the CRX for it's light weight, but I'm thinking that the mid nineties hatchbacks are more stable car all around. Is that true?

Thanks

nawoj

the rex's have 4 wheel indipendant wishbone suspension [if it dosnt its not worth it]

while the 5th gen hatchs have struts [i think]

i like the wishbones...

i likeths the oreoths cookieths

RyanR

All Civics and Integras from the 90 Integra and 88 Civic on up had double wishbone suspension front and back.
For auto X I'd go for the CRX since it has a smaller wheelbase than the 5G Civic. The CRX is also lighter and any engine you can swap into a 5G civic you can swap into a CRX.

Fourstroking

Thanks, anyone else?

By the way, did anyone see "The Stars of Speedvision World Chalenge" article in the March, 2001 issue of Sport Compact Car? The Skunk 2 Civic was faster and pulled more lateral G's than the Real Time Racing Integra.

What do y'all think about that?
My question is how popular are CRX's on the tracks?

Thanks again,
Ant

raene

CRXs are excellent AutoX cars, and are among the most competitive at the lower levels. 5th gen Civics are actually much heavier. A B18C 5th gen Civic will pull 14.5's at the track, while a B18C 4th gen Civic will pull 13.88 (in my personal experience, from what I've witnessed, with similar setups). The '88 CRX in particular is a good track choice, as it has the same rear suspension setup as the Integra Type R. Meaning, you can kick the tail out during hard turns, which is nearly impossible with the '89-'91 models. The downside is that it comes with drum brakes as opposed to the disc brakes of the '90-'91 model Si's.

jmhai

From what I heard from some IT racers the ones that did the drum to disc brakes change on their 88's didn't feel a differnce in the cars stopping power and wouldn't do it again if they had the chance. Why do you need a bigger motor there was a guy at last nights autocross in a 1gen crx running ES(stock class). He was the 6th fastest car there all he had was a K-N filter and shocks.

Fourstroking

Raeneshadow,

So what is that on 88 CRX's and Type R's then, a front and rear double wishbone?
What's the most favorable CRX (2nd generation)? I like the B16A idea, but would a later B16A model be better for the 2nd gen CRX?

raene

Both the '88-'91 CRXs and the '88-'95 Civics have a dual wishbone suspension front and rear. The first-gen CRXs had a straightaxle in the back. I don't know much about the Civics of any generation.

The 2nd gen CRX is definitely favourable in terms of looks, but the 1st gen CRXs are so much lighter that they're actually more popular for autoX. The handling difference isn't much of a detriment due to the fact that it's so light. I believe the most competitive combination is to pick up an '84 CRX, swap in an '87 CRX Si engine, and run in the stock class (you might want to post in the Competition forum for more info on this). 1st gen CRXs can also have B16As installed if you use a HASport mount kit, which would really be the ultimate in terms of B16A swaps. 1800lbs stock soaking wet, 160hp? Sounds good.

Later B16A models are, like I said, OBD I and OBD II. That means that you'd have to change over the engine harness to an OBD-style harness, which would be a serious pain in the ***, but definitely possible. I don't think the gain in hp and tq is worth it though, considering the B16A2 and B16A3 are both rated at 170hp and 113ft-lbs of tq. The main differences between the 2nd and 3rd gen B16As is in the oiling passages, plus they have compression bumped 0.2 points to 10.4:1.

The lightest 2nd gen CRXs are the HF models, but they lack the amenities of the Si, like the sunroof, rear wiper, etc. Not a big deal if you're building a cheap fast car. However, installing the B16A is a little harder in the HF, since it requires that you switch the stock spindles for Si units (junkyard units are fine) since the HF uses different styles. Buying a CRX DX is also a good swap, but again it's harder to do than the Si since it's dual-point fuel injection, and would need to have two fuel injector wires added as well as an injector resistor.

Hope that helped.

Fourstroking

Most deffinitely did, Thanks. Where can I get the information for the swap, step by step?

Monstuh4U

http://b16a.honda-perf.org/tech.html wuz somewut of some help with my swap.

ITC Racer

If you are looking into Improved Touring racing, stick with the 88-91 CRX Si. This is pretty much THE car to have in ITA. The civic will not be able to keep up due to the extra weight and longer wheelbase which will not allow the car to rotate as easily in the turns.

Also check out the 84-87 CRX Dx which runs in ITC- very competitive and pretty quick. Slightly less expensive to run also.

I believe both of these cars do well in Autocross in stock or Street Prepared classes.

Check the rules before swapping an SI engine into an 84 CRX (for stock class) since the Si engine was never offered in a non-sunroof car. This is a popular swap for Street Prepared where this is legal...

Good luck,
Devin