now that acura officially axed the RSX, it got me thinking.

like the title suggests, why didnt we all consider the RSX as the return of the CRX that we've all been looking for? i mean, specifically comparing it to the CRX Si. its got a pretty similar body style. its "sporty" (loosely defined). compact and has a lot of power.


true that the Insight really embodies the style of the CRX, but its not what we've all wanted unless you were a fan of the stock HF.

also true that the RSX is still called the integra in other markets. but despite its name, its not the the CRX and DA integra were all that different. so really my question is more of perception than reality. did honda REALLY have to call a car "CRX" for it to really BE a CRX?


and if acura axed the RSX, what chance would honda give to making anything more compact, lightweight and sporty 2 door hatchback again?

just thinking. any thoughts from the peanut gallery?

(im gonna post this in the general forum, see what others have to say.)

 

why? because it's an integra.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tyson &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
just thinking. any thoughts from the peanut gallery?</TD></TR></TABLE>

I'll bite I like peanuts. I understand what you are coming from and agree that things are very similar but I will bring some points that I know you have already thought of just for arguing sake.

The RSX is similar in lines I agree but the dimensions are not all that similar. It is sporty but that is about where is stops.

The biggest being the weight differences. If it was truely the incarnation of the CRX I think they would have considered taking more weight out of the car and having it more true to the CRX's roots. On the counter side no car being produced today will have the lightness due to safety items and electronics. So a disagree that the RSX had anything to do with the CRX.

Next I would head to the suspension and the point of connection to the car and the type of struts used on the the cars.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tyson &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> did honda REALLY have to call a car "CRX" for it to really BE a CRX?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

YES!

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tyson &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">and if acura axed the RSX, what chance would honda give to making anything more compact, lightweight and sporty 2 door hatchback again?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

The Fit is lightweight but is not sporty nor a 2 door 2 seater. I think that is could be possible for them to come out with something again but the CRX was its own problem. It had good sales and was taking business away from other line ups in Honda.

I think is a loose term the RSX is the closest thing sporty-wise that we have to the CRX. The Insight is the closest thing we have body-wise. Which leads me to a K-series in a Insight. Now that could be a fun little car I am just unsure about the measures that would need to be used to stiffen the body for the power.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by juice91si &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">why? because it's an integra.</TD></TR></TABLE>


and i also agree, that the FIT will be the new civic/crx.

 

isnt the crx only of 3 two seater sport coupes made?ie other then the s2 and the deslow.i honestly dont think honda will ever make another 2 seater car.i cant see how u can compare bodylines from an rsx to crx.i dont even see how anyone can see they are they same.the rsx outweighs the crx but alot.

 

i dont mean to start a thread war but the fit will never be a crx in any way shap or from.it may look like a crx just a tad but its not.2 completly diff chassis.

 

I don't think it is because it's not relatively inexpensive, it's not relatively practical space-wise, and it's not relatively sporty. Other than that, they're twins.

The closest thing I see to a CRX on the market right now is either the Fit or the Mini, though neither has its nearly impossible to find Goldilocks-like just right blend of everything. If it were easy to replace the CRX, I'd think that many of us would have ditched them already for something rust-free and newer. Just think about how many "Aw, sh*t - I want to buy my CRX back now" posts have been on here from ex-owners.

 

well man i cant speak foreveryone here but my crx is rust free well yea i know a few poeple who misses there crxs.after selling for something newer.crx is the best car honda has made i think.and it sholudnt be compared to other cars.closes we got to getting new crx is the 3 gen crx (delsol)and that dont resimble a crx its dont even share the same chassis code.

 

oh come on, enough about the weight.

is an 06 Civic Si with a Curb Weight: 2877lbs not a Civic like it was in 1988???

cars weigh more because of technology and safety regulations over time, just like cars costs more.

hello, $22,000 civic!?


i must edit my original question to more of my intention:

"Why DIDNT we consider the RSX the CRX incarnate?"

 

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

cars weigh more because of technology and safety regulations over time, just like cars costs more.

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

 

this post blows... your statement makes no sense man.. the rsx is just a newer integra... it has nothing in common with the crx other than they are both FF configuration and they both have honda engines..

sorry man but your way off base. maybe the fact that the RSX has a BACK SEAT should be the main deciding factor that makes it NOTHING like a crx..

when honda comes out with another FF car with no backseat and a curb weight of less than 2100 pounds it will be another crx

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tyson &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i must edit my original question to more of my intention:

"Why DIDNT we consider the RSX the CRX incarnate?"</TD></TR></TABLE>

Because it already filled a niche we know as the Integra. Weight aside, the body is too big to be in the spirit of the CRX.

There are rumors (as there always are) that Honda might be bringing back the CRX based on the Fit platform. As long as they move the gas tank and ditch the rear suspension I think it has a chance.

 

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

There are rumors (as there always are) that Honda might be bringing back the CRX based on the Fit platform. As long as they move the gas tank and ditch the rear suspension I think it has a chance.</TD></TR></TABLE>


yea but theres nuttin like the ed chassis.even if they did SO HAPPEN to make a new crx it wouldnt be as poular as the older one.i love my crx and wouldnt trade it for nuttin! well maybe a for a very clean ek hatch.

 

you dont know how to listen and discuss intelligently do you.


<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slow91crx &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> the rsx is just a newer integra... it has nothing in common with the crx other than they are both FF configuration and they both have honda engines.. </TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tyson &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">also true that the RSX is still called the integra in other markets. but despite its name, its not the the CRX and DA integra were all that different. so really my question is more of perception than reality. did honda REALLY have to call a car "CRX" for it to really BE a CRX?</TD></TR></TABLE>

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
sorry man but your way off base. maybe the fact that the RSX has a BACK SEAT should be the main deciding factor that makes it NOTHING like a crx..</TD></TR></TABLE>

CRX SiRII had 2+2 seating.


<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">when honda comes out with another FF car with no backseat and a curb weight of less than 2100 pounds it will be another crx </TD></TR></TABLE>


<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tyson &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">oh come on, enough about the weight.

is an 06 Civic Si with a Curb Weight: 2877lbs not a Civic like it was in 1988???

cars weigh more because of technology and safety regulations over time, just like cars costs more.

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

get over the weight issue. the RSX is relatively not an overweight car.

 

yeah, i think an argument can be made that the Fit is much like the ED 3dr civic, or even 5dr wagon. it definately fits that niche were the civic simply cannot anymore due to price and market.

so are we saying that any remake of the CRX really cant come from the civic chassis anymore, because of weight and size?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by vteckillenzc &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i cant see how u can compare bodylines from an rsx to crx.</TD></TR></TABLE>

really?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tyson &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">so are we saying that any remake of the CRX really cant come from the civic chassis anymore, because of weight and size?</TD></TR></TABLE>

I'd agree with that. The current Civic is larger than the Accord from the CRX generation.

 

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


Next I would head to the suspension and the point of connection to the car and the type of struts used on the the cars.

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

1g CRX and 3g civic and 1g integra had struts.

shrug.

is the EP civic not a civic because it doesnt have front double wishbones?

european civics dont even have independent rear suspension anymore...

 

RSX:

=Integra:

not = to CRX

 

now add 12 years of automotive design.

 

yeah I never thought of it that way...in some ways I can agree with you...or at least see what you ae saying...but the RSX is just too much of an evolved integra for me to totally agree...

for me the (in a perfect world) the new crx would have to be a slightly modified version of the Inisight...w/ 3 diff option/performance packages etc... otherwise if it doesnt say micro-machines its not the real thing


(in a more perfecter world ) Honda would just re-release the 91 SiR as a brand new car...or something along those lines...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DOHC_C-REX &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
for me the (in a perfect world) the new crx would have to be a slightly modified version of the Inisight...w/ 3 diff option/performance packages etc... otherwise if it doesnt say micro-machines its not the real thing
</TD></TR></TABLE>

i would have totally liked that as well. but that chassis was over engineered for the hybrid setup. all aluminum chassis! however the rear suspension lacked. had they replaced that and sporty body and even a 1.5L NA engine, it would have been perfect.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tyson &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
now add 12 years of automotive design.</TD></TR></TABLE>

ok now if the new crx if it was made looked like that and was that size but had modren day safe **** yea i would get one.

 

RSX (base)
Exterior dimensions
Curb Weight : 2716 lbs (+699 lbs)
Weight Distribution F/R : 61/39
Overall Length : 172.3 in. (+22.9 in.)
Wheelbase : 101.2 in. (+10.6 in.)
Overall Width : 67.9 in. (+2 in.)
Track F/R : 58.3 in./58.4 in.
Height : 55.1 in. (+4.7 in.)


2g CRX
Exterior dimensions
Curb Weight : 2017 lbs
Weight Distribution F/R : 63/37
Overall Length : 149.4 in.
Wheelbase : 90.6 in.
Overall Width : 65.9 in.
Track F/R : 57.3 in./57.3 in.
Height : 50.4 in.

insight (just for kicks)
Exterior dimensions
Curb Weight : 1881 lbs (-136 lbs)
Weight Distribution F/R : 60/40
Overall Length : 155.1 in. (+5.7 in.)
Wheelbase : 94.5 in. (+3.9 in.)
Overall Width : 66.7 in. (+0.8 in.)
Track F/R : 56.5 in./52.2 in.
Height : 53.3 in. (+2.9 in.)


Modified by Tyson at 5:37 PM 5/1/2006

 

i thought the rsx had some crx line but, I think the crx is a dead concept. Light afforable sports car are a dead breed. I think the timing was right when honda was making the ef. They seemed more focus on economy and reliablilty instead of the new saftey regualtion and luxury that adds useless wieght to a growing large chassis line up. We all know the insight fell on its face (unfortuanllay) in the sports compact department. Image a rebirth of hte insight with a k20 and real rea wheel wells