Hal9000

I'm about to buy a CRX in order to park my truck and have something that gets a little better gas mileage. While I've always liked CRX's of every generation, this will be my first experience owning a Honda. I'm hoping that I can get a little advice right off the bat.

The car I'm looking at is an '88 DX with automatic trans. It has about 180K miles on it and for all intents and purposes seems to be in pretty decent condition considering the age and price ($800), but it's not perfect by any means. My big concern right now is the transmission. The car drives fine, but the downshifts are rather abrupt and clunky.

Does anybody know the reputation about the automatic trans in these cars (I think its a ML4A) in terms of reliability and serviceability? If the trans is just overdue for a fluid change, filter, etc. then I can handle that. But if the harsh shifts are a sign that it's on its last legs then I'll probably stay away unless I decide that it's worthwhile to do a manual swap.

Also, is there anything in particular that I should look at? Any weak points or common problem areas that I should be aware of?

And finally (for now), I really had my heart set on an HF but haven't found one. The three biggest differenced I can find between the DX and HF (aside from the auto trans) are the cylinder head, final drive ratio, and weight of the car. Has anybody out there ever considered trying to up the economy of a DX by adding HF parts? This is counter to what I'd normally do since I'm normally chasing performance, but like I said, I want a fuel sipper and not a tire burner this time out.

Thanks everybody.

JustAnotherRex

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hal9000 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I'm about to buy a CRX in order to park my truck and have something that gets a little better gas mileage. While I've always liked CRX's of every generation, this will be my first experience owning a Honda. I'm hoping that I can get a little advice right off the bat.

The car I'm looking at is an '88 DX with automatic trans. It has about 180K miles on it and for all intents and purposes seems to be in pretty decent condition considering the age and price ($800), but it's not perfect by any means. My big concern right now is the transmission. The car drives fine, but the downshifts are rather abrupt and clunky.

Does anybody know the reputation about the automatic trans in these cars (I think its a ML4A) in terms of reliability and serviceability? If the trans is just overdue for a fluid change, filter, etc. then I can handle that. But if the harsh shifts are a sign that it's on its last legs then I'll probably stay away unless I decide that it's worthwhile to do a manual swap.

Also, is there anything in particular that I should look at? Any weak points or common problem areas that I should be aware of?

And finally (for now), I really had my heart set on an HF but haven't found one. The three biggest differenced I can find between the DX and HF (aside from the auto trans) are the cylinder head, final drive ratio, and weight of the car. Has anybody out there ever considered trying to up the economy of a DX by adding HF parts? This is counter to what I'd normally do since I'm normally chasing performance, but like I said, I want a fuel sipper and not a tire burner this time out.

Thanks everybody.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I'm not going to flame you because you can actually construct a sentence, which is more than I can say for many of the people around these parts.

For starters, Honda has never been known for great automatic transmissions and I don't think the CRX is any exception to the rule. I'm not all that knowledgable on them myself but I'd steer clear if there's a lot of hesitation / issue with it shifting.

You should check for rust / bondo on the rear wheel wells, both sides, right above where the bumper meets with the body. That's the most common cancer, next up, I'd want to look at the bushings - rubber's probably pretty shot on a car of its age.

You might want to check to see what if any gaskets / things of that nature have been replaced on the engine. The seat probably has a nice tear in the bolster...

As far as swapping, yes, people have put frankenstein HF combo trannies and the straight HF transmission in their car. I wouldn't do the head swap, but I'd think they would be interchangable - a great deal of D series parts are.

Top right is search, you want to search the archives especially, and the fewer terms the better (more results).

Good luck, and happy hunting.

Hal9000

Thanks for the advice. Living in AZ, I don't expect rust to be too much of an issue, but I'll take a close look anyway. I've owned one rustbucket in my life and that's one too many!

I know that a manual trans swap is a relatively easy thing to do in these cars, and that would kill two birds with one stone as far as getting rid of the auto and maybe making a franken-HF. My only concern would be with the mis-matched gear ratios. Based on the info that I already have, it looks like the 8V HF engine is a much lower revving engine. On the surface it looks like it would be better suited to the higher final drive ratio of the HF trans (2.95:1 final drive vs 3.89:1 for the standard DX trans) than the 16V engine.

Can anybody comment on how well the DX 16V engine will match up with the HF manual trans? I don't know enough about the low rpm personality of the engine to know if it has enough torque to deal with a long legged transmission. I used to be a VW guy and I've seen people actually lose fuel economy by having a severely mis-matched engine/trans combo like that and I'd rather avoid that situation if possible.


Modified by Hal9000 at 2:28 PM 6/26/2008

Ass$nyper

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hal9000 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Thanks for the advice. Living in AZ, I don't expect rust to be too much of an issue, but I'll take a close look anyway. I've owned one rustbucket in my life and that's one too many!

I know that a manual trans swap is a relatively easy thing to do in these cars, and that would kill two birds with one stone as far as getting rid of the auto and maybe making a franken-HF. My only concern would be with the mis-matched gear ratios. Based on the info that I already have, it looks like the 8V HF engine is a much lower revving engine. On the surface it looks like it would be better suited to the higher final drive ratio of the HF trans (2.95:1 final drive vs 3.89:1 for the standard DX trans) than the 16V engine.

Can anybody comment on how well the DX 16V engine will match up with the HF manual trans? I don't know enough about the low rpm personality of the engine to know if it has enough torque to deal with a long legged transmission. I used to be a VW guy and I've seen people actually lose fuel economy by having a severely mis-matched engine/trans combo like that and I'd rather avoid that situation if possible.</TD></TR></TABLE> It will be sad, like ugh.

The HF trans is the same as a STD trans with no 5th. Honestly don't even goof with it stick with a dx trans.

Some people say the STD or HF trans will do better milage wise but some say it wont. Either way you'll have good milage with any of those 3 trans and the no hassle + bit shorter ratio makes the car not borderline dangerously slow.

Patty

This isn't a technical comment but why not just take the leap on the HF tranny? You 're probaly not going to lose or gain significantly either way. It could be a sick combo! Performance isn't all about q.t.'s and dyno pulls so don't short change great gas mileage. In fact a CRX can achieve a respectable level of both. As a long time owner and admirer I had a modest plan too when I got my CRX but after two girlfriends, $20,000, and a couple of court appearances **** is not going as planned. Good luck!

AK_CRX

m/t swap is easy, and cheap.. Much easier and cheaper than repairing/replaicing an auto. HF and STD. gearing is unbearable... It would work fine on the dx engine no problem, it would just be awefully slow. Dx will still get fine gas mileage but it's tolerable gearing

zrickety

iTrader: (1)

expect 40+ mpg for the DX...i had a manual and my best (not trying mind you) was 47 mpg in an 89. either way, these are great cars and good luck

Hal9000

Hmm, 40+ is higher than I've beel led to expect from a DX, but if it's true then that's a good thing. EPA fuel economy numbers for the HF are 49/52, and for the DX manual are 32/36. That's a substantial difference, but if the DX really gets over 40 then that would be more tolerable in my opinion. Does anybody feel like confirming what gas mileage they get?

JustAnotherRex

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hal9000 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Hmm, 40+ is higher than I've beel led to expect from a DX, but if it's true then that's a good thing. EPA fuel economy numbers for the HF are 49/52, and for the DX manual are 32/36. That's a substantial difference, but if the DX really gets over 40 then that would be more tolerable in my opinion. Does anybody feel like confirming what gas mileage they get?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Back when I had it DPFI and the DX tranny I was shooting for about 35 or so average in mostly city miles (stop and go DC traffic).

I'm MPFI'd with an Si tranny right now and I get around 33 mpg, mostly city.

40+ is more than I would expect too, but it isn't beyond the realm of possibility. Plus I like to rag on my car occasionally.

1990CRX_Si

I'm getting 35 MPG in the city with my 234K stock D16a6. I had a DX with an auto and the trans was solid. At first it felt a little vague, but you get used to it. 180K it's just getting broke in And $800 is a good price depending on condition. My Si is an AZ car and NO RUST!!!

What city are you in Hal?




Modified by 1990CRX_Si at 3:17 PM 6/29/2008

bagpipe goatee

From my experience, the autos in these cars are stouter than most people think. Honda's autos started sucking around 2000.

There is a problem with them, though. In order to not waste heat through slipping, they shift rather rough even when they're fine. Also, if the kick-down has been touched, it's a pain to get it right. Don't be scared off by rough shifting, unless it's really bad. Not that I like the automatics by any means.

Hal9000

1990, I live in Flagstaff... Nice weather, but the place is a trap. The longer you live here the harder it is to live anywhere else! I originally moved here for college and tried to move back to Phx after graduating but couldn't hack it down in the valley anymore. I've been here ever since.

Thanks for all your advice guys. I pick the car up tomorrow and I think it will suit my purposes nicely. Like I said, It's not perfect by any means (the seats are rough and the doors all need adjustment. There are a few dimples here and there as well, but the paint is decent, tires are good and it runs nicely) but it's rust free, never been wrecked that I can tell (and I'm good at spotting that kind of thing) and appears to be mechanically sound. Besides I'm a car guy and old cars tend to get nicer the longer I own them

Anyway I've got another question. In my search for a manual transmission, I came across a 40K mile D17/manual trans out of an '01 accord with an asking price of $325. It's got the wiring harness but not the ECU. I'm thinking since it's still a D series combo that I should be able to just bolt the engine/trans in together and have a low mile engine trans rather than trying to find an older DX trans and hoping that it's good. If memory serves me correctly, the D17 accords got around 36mpg, so the same combo in a crx should do better than that just due to the weight of the car....

I know it's not any kind of performance gain, so maybe nobody has done it. But If anybody knows if the D17 engine/trans will just drop in, it would be great to know.

AK_CRX

D17's were in 01-05 civic coupes/sedans There's never been an accord with a "D" engine code. There's not much information on these as a swap, I saw a thread on here where a guy put the d17 engine into a hatchback, but there was a lot of sceptisism about how much of the actual d17 was used. The tranny from a d17 may bolt up to an older d-series block, but even if it does the mounts will not line up in your chassis. and it's a hydro tranny so probably not the most worthwhile endeavor...

Zaakro

I've heard that the D series in 01-07 are totally different D series engines all together. But I don't know if that is true and like what AK_CRX said it is Hydro tranny and it would be better to stick with a cable tranny

Hal9000

Thanks guys. That's what I needed to know. So what's the cutoff date for the cable to hydro transmissions? (Hopefully it's the same year for all the various models).

And FWIW, the civic/accord thing was my booboo. I was going from memory and just got it wrong.

The other likely donor at the moment is an '86 integra that's getting parted, but I think that's a B series engine isn't it? Even if it is a D series, I'll need to find out the mileage before I gamble on the transmission.

Hal9000

As an aside; AK_CRX, what can you tell me about your avatar photo? I'm an old school VW guy, so seeing a turbo bug on a honda forum kinda got my attention....

96civic909

90 crx dx all stock with dpfi right now getting about 40 mpg + but i do drive mostly highway and at about 80-90 mph.......yes i know if i lower my speeds i will get better but damn man kinda hard where the car has......no a/c....primer'd ....no radio.....hot as hell right now in the I.E .....and when u just get out of work and you just wanna get home as fast as possible......................

and to make matters worse gas prices seem to not do us any much good.....and as well as the economy

doctorgonzo69

88-91 CRX Si

1st 3.250
2nd 1.894
3rd 1.259
4th 0.937
5th 0.771
Final Drive 4.250

88-91 CRX DX

1st 3.250
2nd 1.894
3rd 1.259
4th 0.937
5th 0.771
Final Drive 3.888 (88 DX: 3.722)

88-91 CRX HF

1st 3.250
2nd 1.650
3rd 1.033
4th 0.823
5th 0.694
Final Drive 2.954 (3.250 in California)

I own an '89 HF, being in the same mindset as you in terms of having just sold a GSR-swapped '92 Si, and am now more concerned with fuel economy as opposed to Mustang sniping. I love the HF transmission's relaxed gear ratios. I tach 2100 rpm @ 70mph, compared to say 3600 rpm for the aforementioned Si. Furthermore, I averaged 45.5 mpg for my first tankful. Sure, the HF is shy on horsepower, but that is partially offset by the lightness of the CRX, the good off idle performance of the B15B6, and if you'll notice, first gear ratios are common to all three models, so it will at least get away from a stoplight at a halfway decent rate. If I were you, I'd do my damnedest to find an HF power train, though the much-easier-to-find 5 speed DX is capable of pretty good EPA fuel economy numbers, and you won't incur the hassle of tweaking your DPFI to MPFI.

Slebidia

Just FYI Hal, My girlfriends 89 CRX DX auto easily gets 40+ mpg without AC. With AC 35-37mpg.

Hal9000

Well, call me brave or crazy... whichever you like.

But two days after buying the crx, I took it on about an 800 mile round trip excursion to Albequerque over the holiday weekend (yes I did have the chance to do all the normal fluid changes and inspections prior to leaving, but that's about it). Luckily the car ran like a top. I'm very pleased.

On the way out I ran around 75-80 and averaged 39 mpg. On the way home, I ran about 70-75 and got 46 mpg in spite of gaining about 2000 ft of altitude on the drive. The fuel economy was a pleasant surprise. The only complaints I had were the lack of cruise control, and the fact that this speed is right where the auto trans appears to want to go into full lock so any change in driving conditions or speed caused the transmission to lock/unlock

I'm not really happy with the way the auto trans feels in general, so the manual swap will still be on once I find a transmission. I'm hoping I can squeeze another couple mpg out of it once I do the swap.

Hal9000

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by doctorgonzo69 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> If I were you, I'd do my damnedest to find an HF power train, though the much-easier-to-find 5 speed DX is capable of pretty good EPA fuel economy numbers, and you won't incur the hassle of tweaking your DPFI to MPFI. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Doc,
Can you go into a little more detail about why I'd need to fiddle with the fuel injection when changing the trans? I didn't realize that they interacted.... especially with a manual trans car. I figured that I might need to find a new ecu when swapping the auto out, but was hoping that the car is old enough that it didn't have any trans related controls in the computer. I'm a good enough hand in the garage that I'm not too intimidated by changing things around, but I honestly don't want to create a monster here. I want to drive the car, not make love to it in the garage every evening if you know what I mean.......

Also, what's the difference between the dual port and multi port injection?