Hey gang, have a question for some of you have have either driven or owned both of these cars.

I currently have a stock Civic CX. Thing runs like a top, rust on the quarters, but solid underneath. I was thinking of just driving it and not doing any more maintenence on it, BUT, it only uses a 1/3'rd quart of oil in 4K using mobile 5w-30 synthetic, runs, drives, PERFECT with 240K on the clock. Needs very little mechanically. I'm thinking of doing a mild restoration and keeping it.

If so, I'm debating of either doing a Z6 swap (fun), or a cheaper and more effeciant Z1 (VX swap), cheap and more useful for what I use it for, driving it EVERY DAY. I can get something else for a toy.

Question for you guys. How much different does the VX drive (in regards to power) and how much better fuel economy does it get in regards to the CX. The CX is unbarebly slow. It's like driving a low horsepower diesel. But as reliable as a clock.

So stock VX owners, let me know what you think.

 

From what I remember both of them are pretty slow, my friend used to have a vx and my cousin has a cx.

The vx just has a e-vtec motor I think, which makes it more efficient not faster. And a vx is lighter witch helps with fuel economy, so the vx motor in a cx hatch probably wont be any better.

But swapping in a z6 wont be any less reliable. I had a 93si with about 315,000 km on it and it ran perfect. And a z6 in a cx hatch would be a bit faster since the car is so light.

 

The VX and CX are the same weight except for the wheels, which I have the VX wheels already. The VX, on paper has 20 more HP. Both geared the same.

I'm with ya on the SI motor, I'd really like to do that, but also the idea of scoring an average of 40mpg or so has me thinking VX, and it's cheaper to do. Thanks man.

 

i have a cx but its swapped. dont they have like 70bhp? haha

 

Yes lol, they only have 70 hp

 

When I had my Z6 in my EJ1 I scored 40MPG on the AVERAGE and that was in my quite a bit heavier coupe. I will say 38-40MPG..and as I just said above that was on the AVERAGE. I did 4 very long freeway trips with it and got 44-45MPG everytime and that was without my Cruise Control.

I had your basic bolt-ons and a lightweight flywheel. My engine was in very good condition mechanically though. With a Z6 that's in great condition, put into a lightweight CX Hatch chassis should put you at 40MPG or so easily.

Or maybe my Z6 was just a factory freak....

 

I'd like to drive a stock CX with that 70HP for awhile. Then maybe when I got back into my car it would feel quicker for a little while..haha.

 

It may have been a factory freak. I personally think my bottom end is such (no oil usage as stated above), but the 8v and just so inefficiant and slow. I have a Z6 head that is MOSTLY complete at home, I may just start to rebuild that and throw it on with some minor port work. I need a few clips and retainers and little pieces parts, hhhmmmmmmm.

haha, it'd get old quick, just about anything feels stronger after driving this car. But I can't complain of the reliability and inexpensiveness of it. Thing is beast.

 

The Z6 so looked down on for MPG, but in good mechanical shape and a tune up, gets good MPG. My 92 Si, when it was in oem shape, with Z6 got 36-40 mpg. Granted, most people don't keep their foot out of it. When I used it to commute 76 miles one way daily, 65-70 mph for 30 miles, than 55-60 mph for 46 miles, I averaged 36-40 mpg on a regular basis. But I tend to get better mileage on all my vehicles living at 6900ft above sea level.

My B18B1 engine trans swap, I get almost the same, with much more power...

 

I've learned over the years that keeping your foot out of it is the biggest factor, and that's with any car.

Dunno about CX's and VX's, but my bone-stock Civic LX sedan gets about 35mpg in town, 42 on the highway. And that's the sedan. That highway mileage is right at 65 mph, cruise-control, no A/C running. With A/C and averaging just over 70 mph, I get 38-39. The hatchback would presumably be a little better yet.

In college I had a '91 Civic hatchback (the 4-speed manual base model) that got 35-36 mpg city...and 46 mpg highway! Yes, the 4-speed regularly got 46 on the highway, at 65 mph. If it hadn't gotten totaled in a accident in '94, I'd probably still have it today. Again, bone-stock, except for a stereo.

I love Honda Civics. They're about the best little cars I've ever driven, and I've driven a lot of cars.

 

wow 70hp????? i would never drive a car thats seriously low on hp due to the fact i hate slow drivers and people that cant drive and im one of those sickos that you see all day everyday cutting people off because they annoy me going super slow sonic speeds... and i really hate it when a person is driving 35 in a 45 speed zone. but if you want that gas mileage then get what you want but honestly i have a b18 non vtec in my dx civic and the gas is great on it not really sure how many miles i can get out of it but i do know that 10 dollars gets me a good 100 miles with cutting people off and a few little races in it too lol

 

Yeah, I just sold my chipped 2001 GTI and bought a 97 cx. It actually startled me that people buy cars with so little power, but....that is what I have done. I am looking forward to not having to use premium and getting more than 25mpg.

 

i drive a stock cx and it is horribly slow. at the time i didn't care what model it was i just wanted a clean stock 92-95 civic hatch. and it just happened to be a cx owned day 1 by a grandma.

i enjoy filling it up once maybe twice a month. but its just plain gutless. i do plan to do a swap. it will become my toy and i'll get another sedan for daily. its really sad when i'm at the front of a pack at a light and even gunning it people are passing me and flipping me off and revving their engines, not knowing i'm giving ole girl all the has.

but on a flat stretch of of highway is where she shines. i owned a vx also, i remember it was slow as ***** also. but i can't remember which one was slower. i feel retarded trying to think in my head which one was slower. the vx had ac which gave it a slight advantage, except it would make the engine over heat.

 

I've got a more or less stock vx. It's zippy enough for daily use. It has a surprisingly wide powerband set pretty low in the rpm range. The only problems i have with it are some irritating driveability characteristics when it goes in and out of lean burn and the odd gearing that it comes with. Solved the gearing issue by putting my countershaft and final drive gear in an si trans. If i could ever get the engine to run right i would have no real problem with it at all.

 

I hated the CX's 8 valve D15B8, 70 tire melting horsepowers.

It's fuel economy wasn't much/any better than my Y7, which has over 30 more hp and moves a 4-door chassis.


EDIT: Didn't read all the posts

.

 

And if you can find a good Z6 and tranny get it. A D15B is another good one.

I love D series motors, cheap to fix and reliable as can be. My DD motor of choice.


.

 

^^^ This guy has it right. The Vx gets insane milage, only if you can put up with drivability issues and making sure it is running 100%. Before I swapped mine, it needed an O2 sensor (5 wire=expensive) and a distributor (also, expensive.) That was why I swapped it, lol. Before I tore it up, the best I ever got was around 65 mpg on a trip, 9/10 highway. The A/C was on as well.

 

both are slow and both are fuel efficient. but go z6 if you have future plans. I would just stick with the original motor untill it goes.