Does anybody have any thoughts concerning the handling potential of a 3rd Gen -vs- a 4th Gen Civic? I’m thinking of building an SM auto-x car and can’t decide on which generation to go with. The basic quandary is that if given similar power levels, would the supposedly superior chassis design of the 4th Gen Civic (4GC) outweigh (heh, pun) the lightweight chassis of the 3rd Gen Civic (3GC) on a typical auto-x course?

I know there are a lot of variables such as course surface characteristics (especially bumpy ones) but given a typical relatively smooth parking lot-type course, would the 200lb+ (???) advantage of the torsion bar and rear axle laden 3GC be enough to overcome the double wishbone setup of the 4GC? This of course also assumes that each chassis has been relatively well developed and is a suitable match for auto-x’ing.

In the case of the 3GC, it would be “upgraded” with 27 or 29mm torsion bars and matching rear coilovers in the 400-700lb range. For the 4GC, it would feature perhaps a ground control setup with 450/500lb springs and suitable revalved struts. These #’s are just for the sake of this exercise and may be changed upon final implementation.

Would the outcome depend mostly on surface characteristics? If the surface is relatively smooth, it seems the 4GC would have a hard time overcoming the weight advantage of the 3GC. On the other hand, if the surface is bumpy, it would seem that the 3GC couldn’t cope as well and might be a victim of its suspension design. Maybe not? Any thoughts?

Thanks,

AHDC

 

Dont forget that SM has a weight limit of 1800lbs for N/A cars and 1900 for boosted cars. So assuming one can get a G4 EF down to 1800lbs in SM legal trim then the advantage is obviously in it's favor.

 

Thanks for the info. I am aware of the weight limits. I am assuming that I can't get the EF down to the minimum weight in SM trim, though. It may be possible but I think it would be very hard (and more importantly, possibly very expensive) from what I've seen.

Forgetting the weight limits for a moment, does anybody have any experience with both chassis and their overall handling potential versus one another? I guess I'm looking more for stuff like roll centers and such that would make the 3rd Gen not as worthy as the 4th Gen given similar setups.

 

If you're worried about expensive, then forget you ever heard the words "street mod" and proceed directly to STS with a EF Si hatch

 

Well, I drive a 3rd gen in SM, and have been eating Dave Hardy's (4th gen) dust all year. I have not developed my car much at all though. I am running on 4 year old, too-tall tires, heavy wheels, no camber plates, 27mm fronts instead of 29's, only 450 lb/in rears instead of 600's, and a non-adjustable panhard rod. I also do not have a limited slip diff, and a 4.2 FD instead of a 4.4 or 7. Basically, the 1.4-1.9 seconds I have been trailing Hardy all year would be pared down significantly with any two of the above listed mods. You will never get the roll center of a strut car to be below the ground, but you can get it to within an inch or so above ground with the adjustable panhard bar and the right spring/ride height combo.
The weight advantage will always be there. Hardy's car is still about 300 pounds overweight and he has taken everything out that he can. I have to ballast up to 1800.
I also am on a shoestring budget. 2000 bucks and I would be a contender in SM on a regional basis. Please note the REGIONAL in that statement. Hardy went to Topeka and could finish mid-pack. Either chasis is bringing a knife to a gun fight without forced induction.

 

3rd gen has a shorter and narrower wheelbase. This helps a lot on autox. You do sacrafice suspension design and you're limited on engines, but it would be easy to get at the 1800lb minimum.

4th gen has much better suspension, but it is also longer and wider. It is possible to get this car at 1800lbs and you have more motors to choose from. Getting the car to 1800lbs would be the main thing I'd try to accomplish with this chassis.

Personally, I'd choose a 4th gen just because there are more items available for that chassis (and more of them to choose from on the used car lots). Both would work well though.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by madhatter &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Well, I drive a 3rd gen in SM, and have been eating Dave Hardy's (4th gen) dust all year. I have not developed my car much at all though. I am running on 4 year old, too-tall tires, heavy wheels, no camber plates, 27mm fronts instead of 29's, only 450 lb/in rears instead of 600's, and a non-adjustable panhard rod. I also do not have a limited slip diff, and a 4.2 FD instead of a 4.4 or 7. Basically, the 1.4-1.9 seconds I have been trailing Hardy all year would be pared down significantly with any two of the above listed mods. You will never get the roll center of a strut car to be below the ground, but you can get it to within an inch or so above ground with the adjustable panhard bar and the right spring/ride height combo.
The weight advantage will always be there. Hardy's car is still about 300 pounds overweight and he has taken everything out that he can. I have to ballast up to 1800.
I also am on a shoestring budget. 2000 bucks and I would be a contender in SM on a regional basis. Please note the REGIONAL in that statement. Hardy went to Topeka and could finish mid-pack. Either chasis is bringing a knife to a gun fight without forced induction.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Not to take anything away from anybody, but Hardy got beaten last year at nats by a few STX cars, and SM and STX ran the same heat. Hardy has a true Si as well, which is heavier than a Standard by 100lbs or so.

Point is, no one has a really developed 4th gen car yet for SM.

And why do you need forced induction to be competitive? CSP Hondas still outrun SM consistantly. It's not about raw HP like folks seem to think.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If you're worried about expensive, then forget you ever heard the words "street mod" and proceed directly to STS with a EF Si hatch </TD></TR></TABLE>

I'm not worried about expense regarding the drivetrain as I have access to resources to help me in that regard. On the other hand, to compete locally and even perhaps regionally, I would like to avoid the expense of replacing body panels (and, yes, I am aware of which ones are legal to replace) and such. Besides, the car may be used for other purposes which precludes the use of some of the weight saving mods allowed in SM.

You know, it really doesn't matter. We would be here all day if everybody had to fully qualify their question even if it is a little complex. Can we just focus on the topic at hand as stated?

So, given the 2 chassis with similar suspension "trims" but with one weighing ~200lbs less, how do they compare? Is the 4th Gen's suspension superior enough to overcome the weight disadvantage? Does anybody have experience with both chassis?

Anybody?



Modified by AHDC at 11:04 AM 9/3/2003

 

Thanks guys, that's the type of input I was looking for.

The weight thing is the part that has me stumbling over the decision. Without extreme weight saving measures, I'm just not sure you can get a 4th Gen down to the limit. I guess the big question for me is how close can you get it in basic trim? It seems that the only way would be to build a D-series monster and then start replacing body panels. I just haven't seen enough empirical weight data to convince me it is possible.

I do have a set of scales that run on batteries. Maybe I should run around to a few used car dealers and ask them if I can weigh their cars...

 

In STS trim, a 88 Civic Standard with Si powertrain is right around 2000lbs with a half tank of gas.

So IMO, yes--a 4th gen could come close to 1800lbs. Certainly under 1900 would not be too much of a stretch given the items that SM allows you to replace/take out.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Todd00 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">And why do you need forced induction to be competitive? CSP Hondas still outrun SM consistantly. It's not about raw HP like folks seem to think.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Well, when I asked Hardy what was next on his list after his pimpy Panasports, he told me he was looking for a turbo for it cuz he needed more power. His words. Personally, as I am a competitor of his, I think his car needs more power too. His chasis setup is way more developed than mine and it shows in his times, but his motor is really built (at least 11.1:1) and his results at Nationals (and crossed with STX) don't really convince me that he's got enough motor.

 

If you can find a nice clean 3G 87 Civic DX, I say go for it. What motor are you planning to put in there?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by madhatter &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Well, when I asked Hardy what was next on his list after his pimpy Panasports, he told me he was looking for a turbo for it cuz he needed more power. His words. Personally, as I am a competitor of his, I think his car needs more power too. His chasis setup is way more developed than mine and it shows in his times, but his motor is really built (at least 11.1:1) and his results at Nationals (and crossed with STX) don't really convince me that he's got enough motor.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Heyward Wagner was also 9 tenths faster than hardy at the SEDiv in atlanta. Thats on street tires too. Its not only power that matters. He was telling me a couple months ago he still had very mild spring rates. Well at least compared to what I'm planning to run on my 89 STS si. That could possibly making him slower for now as well.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ryan12321 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Heyward Wagner was also 9 tenths faster than hardy at the SEDiv in atlanta. Thats on street tires too. Its not only power that matters. He was telling me a couple months ago he still had very mild spring rates. Well at least compared to what I'm planning to run on my 89 STS si. That could possibly making him slower for now as well.</TD></TR></TABLE>

For those that don't know, Heyward drives a 91 Civic Si that's prepped for STS.

Hardy's problem is not power.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Todd00 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
For those that don't know, Heyward drives a 91 Civic Si that's prepped for STS.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Also, Heyward is going to be in strong contention to win STS at nationals this year. The d00d is really fast. If I'm not mistaken, he bested Chris S. (last year's champ) once this year at a national tour event.

 

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

Also, Heyward is going to be in strong contention to win STS at nationals this year. The d00d is really fast. If I'm not mistaken, he bested Chris S. (last year's champ) once this year at a national tour event.</TD></TR></TABLE>

The point is, a SM Civic even at mild prep and fresh Hoosiers should be smoking any STS Civic.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Neo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
If I'm not mistaken, he bested Chris S. (last year's champ) once this year at a
national tour event.</TD></TR></TABLE>

By over a second.

Must be the shoes.

 

In this class i think weight is the most important thing. But a 4th gen can probably get down to the at least the FI min weight. My car in it very early stages has already run within 1.5(45sec course) of a National Midpack 78 VW. I have a 90 Si with only stock LS motor and trans,ground controls F550 R500, 235/45r13 kumbos and about 80 pounds of weight reduction. Once i get down closer to minimum weight and some hoosier i should be regoinally competitive.

 

I've been racing a 3rd gen since 93, and in SM for the last two years. I'm fairly competitive nationally, and even won a Nat Tour and got a 3rd place this year . If I were starting from scratch and building another Honda for SM, it would definately be a 4th gen. The handling is well worth the weight difference if there is any. I don't think it would be hard at all to get a 4th gen down to 1900lbs, and even if you don't it' not like you have to be at min weight to be competitive. So far this year, I've had the only SM car at any of the big events I've attended that was even close to the min weight. My car weighs less than 1900lbs with no gas, so I can adjust the weight to be 10-20 lbs over min with the amount of gas I run. I had to add weight to get to that level, so I have an 80lb welded in roll cage, and 35lbs of ice water intercooler and tank in the car to get it up to weight.

The 3rd gen front suspension is travel limited and the roll center is underground. You can fix the travel, but it costs a lot for shortened koni's. The rear beam axle works well, but can get a little bumpy. The front is more of a problem.

The 4th gen is so much easier to get parts for, they're cheaper, swaps and turbos/superchargers are easier/cheaper, the suspension is much better, easier to tune (coilovers) and the parts are again cheaper. You can actually get LSDs for the 4th gen without selling your left nut. If you're going FI, then the weight difference really doesn't exist, so why not go 4th gen?

All that said, I love my 3rd gen. It's very reliable, fun and inexpensive. And it's all cleaned up and ready for the long tow to Topeka Friday.


-Chris (#11 SM)

 

Just for those of us not as familiat with what 3rd/4th gen are, what are the years?

I'm guessing 4th gen = 88-91?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Just for those of us not as familiat with what 3rd/4th gen are, what are the years?

I'm guessing 4th gen = 88-91?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Correct. 3rd gen is 84-87...