Hi all,

I'm new to Honda, and I've owned my 93' DX hatchback (EH2) for a few months now. I bought the car as a reliable daily driver and to see if I could enjoy driving a FWD car as much as a RWD car. I like small, light, communicative cars and so far I've been happy with my experiment. I find myself enjoying driving FWD just as much as RWD, they're just different. I was planning on modifying my 93' with Koni/GC and front and rear swaybars to get the handling a bit better, but I've been thinking for the past few weeks that I might prefer an 88'-91' Civic non-Si hatchback. I don't want to put more money into my current car, if I'm going to end up wanting something else.

Is there much difference in the driving experience between the two cars (88'-91' non-Si hatchback and 92'-95' non-Si hatchback)? I'm partial to the 4th gen styling (although I like the 5th gen styling quite a bit). It looks like there's not much difference weight-wise between the 90'-91' cars and the 92'-95' cars. I'd be more interested in a 90'-91' due to the side-impact protection (although I realize none of these cars are safe by any stretch of the imagination). The only thing I don't like about my 93' is that it feels super modern, and seems to lack a little bit of the character of a lot of vintage cars I've owned and driven. I've heard that the 4th gen hatches are more raw, go-kart like, and better driver's cars than the 5th gens. Do the 4th gen cars offer a significantly different driving experience than the 5th gen cars or are they basically the same minus the styling.

I have searched, I'm aware of the mechanical differences: cable-clutch, radius rods on the 4th gen cars. I know 92'-00' Civics are better for B-series swaps, but I don't care about engine swaps. I'm mainly concerned with driving enjoyment. Good handling, road-feel and linear controls are what I'm looking for. Despite the nauseating body-roll my 93' handles shockingly well for a 90's FWD economy car with 200,000+ miles.

TL;DR: Are there any significant driving differences between 4th and 5th gen Civic hatchbacks, and is the 4th gen more fun to drive. I'm really considering selling or trading my 93' for an earlier hatchback if I can find a decent non-riced car. Also my car is completely stock and has manual everything and no A/C - the way I prefer it. I'm not interested in the sedans or the CRX (rear seats are important for me), and would be leaning away from Si models because they come with more features than I want.

 

No difference in driving.

Egs have more option for aftermarket suspension.

 

I have driven Hondas in all variety since 1993 owning hondas for now what, 24 years…have had over 20 hondas now
Going from a 91 Si to a 94 VX, was like going from a go cart, to a shoebox as far as handling.
I think the double wishbone ind's on the EF's were far more stable than the newer stuff in stock form.
​​​​​​​ I treid to get used to the 94 style but went back to a 91 EF. Also tried the 2011 CR-Z for abit, went back to the EF also along the lines have been the 90 prelude Si, a couple acuras, and now I have an s2k to play around in but will not keep it. A past GF had a 98 hatch DX, it was a slow dog compared to the EF Si….more cushy ride but not go-kart like

 

its also when you take a good long trip that you notice the difference with the ef over the eg
the ef feels better
you can really feel the road under you and you can tell exactly how much grip you have threw the feel of the steering wheel, in a good way
the eg on the other hand does feel havier and bigger on the road even thou there basiclly the same size
that all has to do with the seating position, the ef seating is perfect in my eyes you have room to move around
so its more comfy to drive, kinda like the old American cars with the bench seats only way smaller

 

Thanks for the responses so far guys.

My first Honda I drove was an 05' RSX I owned for a few years. I owned the car before I was really "into" cars and did not like it because of the automatic transmission. A few months ago I drove my friends 98' EX coupe. I was really impressed by the gear-change and it convinced me to consider getting a Honda as a DD. I used to make fun of Hondas and FWD in general, but for the most part I've been really impressed with my Civic so far and think it's a great drive for what it is, - in many ways superior to a lot of RWD sports cars.

The main things I don't like about my Civic are the seating position (which feels SUV-like) and the aggressive torque-steer at low speeds. For those that said they like the "EF" chassis better, I take it you would also like it better stock-vs-stock? I've been wishy-washy about modifying my "EG" since it is my DD and is expected to be reliable and "easy" to drive. From what I've read I feel perhaps a STD or DX EF hatch with decent shocks and possibly Si swaybars would be a better drive. I have read that the EF hatches have less suspension travel, faster steering and a lower seating position, all contributing to a more sporting driving experience. I also quite like the styling as it's more 80's and reminds me of a hatchback DR30 Skyline.

I feel comfortable making a switch because my Civic is only in decent condition, and was pretty cheap, so I could probably pick up a comparable EF relatively easy here in CO where cars to not rust very much.

 

This right here nails it. I own a 91 and a 94 since 1999 and 2002 respectively. They are in nut shell basically the same thing just one is square and the other is round. But those differences you mentioned I feel are the key differences in why I like the 91 more. To be fair though you can upgrade everything you don't like about the 5th gen to make it more like the 4th gen in terms of performance and feel.

Essentially I agree with everything everyone has posted so far.

 

the ef civic reminds me of the ae86 of the honda world. just weld in some fender braces and redo the old suspensions with stiffer bits. and you have an amazing road gokart. also it helps if you have a si rack or (qualife quick rack i think) it turns in so crazy. and camber works wonders with the ef on high speed sweepers. i feel like the ef is very underestimated as a drivers car . but keep in mind its and old econobox. some choice welded in chassis supports makes one addicted and wanting to make the least favirote knuckle scratching chassis faster and better. im sorry i am just an ef fan boy. oh yea your going to need better pedal bushings they suck on the ef chassis. as for the other chassis it just stiffer body and front lower knuckles longer and a bit more numbed out. but keep in mind im biased.

 

why do you say there is no difference in driving im curious

 

id steer twoards the ef si because of rear dics rear sway bars. decent brakes and most importanly mostly black interiors and a faster steering rack. and dont wory about the extra tar on the si road noise on a ef is crazy.just replace the sunroof with carbon and cut and take out the ac harness and box its pretty easy and weighs alot. imagine the time and money you would have to put in the std for these items when the si already has it.

 

Both are front wheel drive independent suspension with the same rear trailing arm suspension.

The only difference you'll feel is in the manual vs power steering rack.

It's not like it's a FWD vs AWD difference. Any difference in chassis is just gonna be down to the age of the bushings and looseness of the car in general.

 

To be fair, I do actually prefer the EF hatch bodystyle over the EG. The car just seems to have more retro / old-school appeal to me. My "fun" car is an 83' RX-7, so I am biased towards the 80's.

While I'm by no means a fantastic driver or anything I do tend to appreciate little differences between cars. I drove my friends 98' EX coupe and it did feel different enough to my 93' DX hatchback. The 98' felt softer and less connected than my 93'. I also was not a fan of the power-steering in that car which seemed to self-center aggressively. The factory manual steering in my 93' is a lot nicer in my opinion.

On a side note, I feel 80's/90's Civics are grossly under-rated cars. They offer a really great driving experience, are reliable, roomy and look good.

 

x2,

There's more charismatic difference between trim specs than there is between generations.

 

some people view cars in other ways like people view paintings or art in general

 

In terms of driving differences, i don't think it's that open to interpretation. You wouldn't be able to pick a distinct characteristic that one has that the other doesn't.

 

I own an 89 CRX Si and a 94 Cviic CX. The EG front suspension has more stroke and therefore a more comfortable road feel. It's the roughness of the EF front-end that makes people say it has "go-kart-like handling". Because of it's longer front storke, the EG offers more room for suspension tuning. That means it can look lower and have the same comfort as an EF or, it can be as low as an EF and have more comfort.

As for the "feel", it's not fair to compare the steering of the EH2 (CX & VX) to the steering of the ED9 Si. While both chassis have manual racks, the CRX Si has a trick variable rate rack & pinion. This means it's much more sporty in the center section of steering than the VX. After I added a Quaife rack & pinion to my EG, the steering feel went from econo car to sports car. There are also other options for steering upgrades in EG's too (like a vented Integra rack).

I guess the point is....if you want stock, then probably EF. If you enjoy endless options for modifying your car, then I would say EG all the way.

 

There couldn't be two more similar generation of civics in terms of suspension.

Even the EK had a totally different knuckle height and rear LCA for different camber and toe curves.

It's not worth comparing. Asking what the differences are the talking about styling? Wtf.

You wanna say you like one over the other because of aesthetics? Fine. It's not related to handling.

 

Thanks for the responses so far! Seems like the consensus seems to be that there isn't much reason to pick one over the other if purely handling or suspension design is at question.

I do realize that the differences are mostly subjective, but I was curious what responses I would hear. On paper the cars are basically the same in terms of dimensions, weight, power, etc. They even have the same side profile.

I imagine there would be a lot more difference between the 3rd gen and 4th/5th gen cars. Anyways, still interested to hear what others say as I figure out if I want to switch cars or not.

 

this vide0 is a pretty good representation of 4g vs 5g
and what about 4g vs 5g lca design the 5g has three points on the lcas im sure you would feel something there

 

The 4G has 3 points also. If it didn't, the tire would crash into the fender liner as soon as you hit the gas or brakes. The 3rd point on the 4G is attached forward of the LCA (to an additional subframe) instead of rearward. Still provides the same effect, just altering the path of the forces from the tire-contact-patch into the chassis.

An interesting note though about the 5G's 3rd point (called the compliance bushing)....the braking and accelerating sides of the bushing are tuned differently, where the 4G's are not. The 4G's 3rd point (called radius rod bushings) uses identical bushings for both braking and acceleration (identical to a shock top-hat).

From what I've heard, the Integra Type R uses an extra soft braking side compliance bushing to allow an even greater increase in toe-in under braking load. Food for though. Makes me think it would be fun to try hard acceleration bushings on the 4G while keeping the soft braking bushings (less wheel hop, but still max braking stability). I imagine this would probably push the wheel back slightly and reduce caster however.

 

I have many Honda products and I have had many more. In regards to your question of "smiles per gallon", as I like to call it, I would say by far my favorite car to drive is my 1988 CRX, followed by my 1991 CRX, followed by my 1995 Honda Del Sol, followed by 1990 Civic Hatchback, followed by 1993 Civic Hatchback. BUT I DO daily drive my 1993 Civic Hatchback. Basically the CRX is the greatest car ever made and the 1988 is the best of them, and the Del Sol is also pretty damn awesome. Both of those cars get by far and beyond the most street recognition as well. Here in Chicagoland, at least, people go nuts over a clean Honda CRX

 

Yes, "smiles per gallon" was basically the gist of my question. Although I was mostly interested in hatchbacks for the functionality (4 usable seats, cargo-space) and looks.

I'd imagine a lot of the reason the CRX scores so high in terms of pure fun would be the super short 90" wheelbase, which I think was pretty short even for the late-80's when it came out.

 

so you are talking about the traction bar more or less(i dont know what they call the stock item). both cars have them but if you just isolate the front lower control arm its just a straight line as to the eg which has a triangulated mounts lca. just a question correct me if im wrong. so does an eg come with a front strut bar stock like the crx or just a complience bushing.

 

think your terminology might be mixed up. The CRX does not come with a front strut bar (that would the be the bar over the top of the engine connecting the two shock towers together). This is a strut bar:


As for the EF vs EG suspension, they are very similar setups. The major difference with lower arm triangulation is the direction the forces are applied into the chassis. Additionally the EF LCA is setup to increase caster as the lower arm moves away from being parallel to the ground, where the EG is not. The EG also has much less static caster to begin with. Interesting the EG (same as Type R) suspension favors minimal caster, where the EF favors maximum caster.

The CRX front suspension (LCA triangulation points forward):


EG/DC front suspension (LCA triangulation points rearward):

 

Thanks for the replies everyone. I finally made a decision - and decided to keep my current car ("EG" hatch). The main reason is that I already own my current car, and I've already sunk a sizable chunk of cash into fixing it thus far. Since, it seems the common consensus is that the two cars are very similar and only differ in minor traits or qualities, it didn't seem worth the effort to try finding something else. I'm still a big fan of the "EF" Civic, and if I own another Civic, hopefully it will be an "EF". For now, I'm having fun with my current car.