i got the LCA from the 00' gsr, it has the sway bar mounts, I know in DEC. 04 of honda tuning of "wrenching "on my own 2" they put 00' TYPE -R LCA's on the ef/ed hatch, just wondering if I could use my gsr ones so I can put a say in the future on my DX, thanks!

 

They should fit, im 99.9% sure. I have a 97 GS-R and i just got an 91 si Hb and im kind going threw the same ****, trying to figure out what i need to use the same brakes. See i wanna put NSX calipers on my GSR and the GSR caliper on the EF.

But then you have the problems of B series hubs vs D and witch knuckles to use, I know some of the knuckes are just plain wrong though people use umm. There is a HUB and knucke that should be used but im not exactly sure.

If some who knows For Sure what knuckles to use on an ef with a B series along with what Kuckles to use on an ef with a D/zc series and still keep proper suspension geometry yet allow us to mount are dc2 calipers, along with info for mounting them in the rear.

I know for rear disc you can you the whole DA rear trailing arm if im correct. DA and dc2 calipers and discs are the same i think.

 

I don't know of any reason why the GS-R LCAs wouldn't fit... but I don't know of any reason why they'd be an improvement over stock, either. The reason people use the Integra Type R rear LCAs on their EFs is because the ITR LCA is a different design; it's the design the '88 CRX originally came with! This was changed (for the US market for sure, and *maybe* for Canada as well) for the '89 model year because Honda was getting complaints from Stupid American Drivers™ about lift-throttle oversteer, which was exacerbated by the rear LCA's design, which allowed a bit of toe-control and thus, passive rear-wheel steering. It made the '88 CRX a little easier to rotate, a bit more neutral in corners - as long as you didn't lift out of the throttle mid-corner! - and just generally less prone to understeer.

In most (if not all) other markets, the rear LCA kept the toe-control design throughout the model run, and Honda must have known they were right: they decided to put the same design on the Integra Type R! This time around, it was a car squarely aimed at enthusiasts, with no marketing wonks trying to pass it off as a "commuter car" like they did the CRX. As a result, there were no complaints about the ITR's handling.

I'm told (but can't verify it; surely others here can if they've used them on their own CRXs) that the ITR rear LCAs are a direct replacement for the '88 CRX Si's.

If you just want the GS-R rear LCAs for the swaybar mounting points (I take it you've got a CRX DX? I feel ya - no rear bar is teh suck), then never mind what I just said about not being a reason to change them out, and carry on. How do you plan to mount the swaybar to the chassis? I'm not trying to be a smartass or anything - I really wanna know! See, I too am blessed with a DX ('91 CRX DX, Torino Red Pearl, Si engine, hybrid ZC/HF/Si transmission), and I'd love to have the rear swaybar - and have all the parts: bar, linkages, mounting hardware, rear LCAs from an '89 Civic Si (too bad they aren't '88s...) - but the DX didn't get the brackets to mount the swaybar to the chassis. I know, I sound like an idiot saying that, because someone will say, "Just bolt on the f**king BRACKETS!" Would that it were so easy. Honda also saw fit not to leave the tapped bungs in the chassis frame rails for the brackets to bolt to. And it's a hollow frame section that's "blind" (sealed off from the rest of the car), so I either have to weld something on, or drill a 3/4" or so hole through the spare tire well on either side of the chassis to get access to the inside of the frame rails to weld the nuts to the chassis where they were supposed to be in the first place! Neither option is really sparking my interest; I'm *trying* to keep any and all mods 100% reversible, and drilling, cutting, torching, and welding on the chassis isn't exactly my idea off reversible...

Maybe I'm just thinking it through too hard, and making it more of a problem than it is. Wouldn't be the first time!

I think I'm just going to need to look into a Suspension Techniques rear bar...

I'm also working out in my head what exactly I'm going to need to do to get the rear setup I want: rear disks from a '90 CRX Si (I have the entire rear suspension one that was totalled) and rear LCAs from an '88 CRX, along with the rear swaybar from an Si, with Mugen trailing arm bushings for good measure. The upside is '88-like handling and the sexier-looking rear disks. The downside is missing out on a lot of strut choices. Not many people offer struts to fit the '88 CRX, and most of the ones who do don't know any better - they offer "'88-'91 all" applications.

Okay, enough rambling.

Mike

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Kwicko &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> which was exacerbated by the rear LCA's design, which allowed a bit of toe-control and thus, passive rear-wheel steering. It made the '88 CRX a little easier to rotate,</TD></TR></TABLE>


In all honesty, I think if 88's switch the rear LCA's to 89-91 they will still keep the "rear passive steering." All cars have it to some degree but 88's more than others. I believe it has to do with the mounting points of the trailing arms.........Just heresay though.....Maybe those LCA's help to display that passive rear steering effect, but I'm pretty sure there more to it than just LCA's.


<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Kwicko &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I'm told (but can't verify it; surely others here can if they've used them on their own CRXs) that the ITR rear LCAs are a direct replacement for the '88 CRX Si's.

I

Mike</TD></TR></TABLE>


Yes

 

another "?" I am into the 1/4 mile.. I ran a 13.3 at 108 this weekend on street tires(hehe bald and weather rotted!) anyways I just picked up gsr brakes all around.. I was atleastt hinking about putting the rears on till I get the right knuckles for the front... but I was wondering how much heavier are the disc than the drums?? thanks!

 

I would think close to the same if not less.