Looks like prices on the 1992-'95 Civic Si have gotten to the point where I can afford one. (And to think, I almost bought one new in 1992.) That got me thinking: Anyone really set one up for Street Touring? Or if not, is there interest in seeing what the car can do in the class? I don't expect it to outrun the 1989 Civic Si, but we do a lot of bench racing at the office debating what would be the next best car for the class.

I know Nathan Whipple did well with an EX, but the hatch could be cool--plus it would be a little more practical. Could it be the best of the rest or just an exercise in frustration? Or is there some real hidden potential in there that hasn't been found?

David

 

I think a 92 wouldn't suck. (a little lighter because of fewer power options? Can't remember) I don't think you'd be beating your head against the wall any more than the guys with 3G Integras and other such heavier, more powerful cars.

 

If motor and suspension are equal, which they could be (motor might be a tad better actually), it all comes down to the fact it weighs more.

It's like my 94 hatch in E Prepared, I just have to accept it won't weigh as little as those 1986 hatches.
It might actually, but those last 80 pounds are NOT going to be easy.

 

There's a point in a class like STS where extra power (like in the VTEC Integras) gains you very little because its lost via the open diff and trying to put it down through non-R compound rubber.

I think the '92 Si could be very good. Lighter than the Integras and should put the power down better just like the EF cars do. If I had the money I'd give it a shot.

Or you could buy this '98 Neon ACR sitting in the driveway David. I'll make you a sweet deal. You just have to come get it when Renee isn't home. For some reason she's attached to the damned thing.

Scott, who wants to replace the Neon, even though I really do like it, with a 92 or 93 Si.

 

The two "older" Hondas I'd look at for doing well in STS would be as follows:

1) 92-93 Integra RS
2) 92-93 Civic Si

I rank the 92-93 Integra RS above the Si because the RS is a stripper integra (no sunroof) and has the 1.8L and puts out decent torque--something the Civic (all) is lacking.

The 92-93 Civic Si (get those years because they don't have the passenger airbag) would make a quality car too. Yeah, you're fighting a bit more weight than the older cars, but all of the other stuff is there to make it quick (gearing, motor, chassis, etc).

There is no reason why a properly setup 92-93 Civic Si could not trophy high at nats. Good luck finding a nice one though. That's the problem I ran into. Cheap ones have 150+K miles on them, and lower mileage ones are still bringing a mint.

Oh, I want to see one do well so the non-Honda STS drivers have another car to b!tch about other than the 89-91 Si

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Todd00 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Oh, I want to see one do well so the non-Honda STS drivers have another car to b!tch about other than the 89-91 Si </TD></TR></TABLE>

me too

 

Definitely get a '92 or '93. The 94/95s are somewhat porky.

&lt;- '92 Si

 

all i'm going to say is that i'm very confident that if i drive as well as i can and the car works as well as it has been, the EF's could very well be unseated this year.

nate

 

Hmm. Take Nate's suspension setup (assuming you want the loosest Civic on the planet ), subtract a good amount of weight and it sounds like you'd have a dominant car.

Sounds like a no-brainer to me

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by solo-x &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">all i'm going to say is that i'm very confident that if i drive as well as i can and the car works as well as it has been, the EF's could very well be unseated this year.

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

By you and your EX? I guess that shows some promise for the Si. Here are the weights I have found on these cars, by the way. (I'm not saying they're correct, but they're what I found online--I'll see what info I have at the office.):

1989 Civic Si 2161
1990 Civic Si 2291
1991 Civic Si 2291
1992 Civic Si 2326
1993 Civic Si 2326
1993 Civic EX 2390
1994 Civic Si 2390
1994 Civic EX 2443
1995 Civic Si 2390

With regard to EX vs. Si, is the Si faster because it's lighter or is the EX easier to drive because it has a longer wheelbase?

And keep the comments coming. This may help justify another Honda.

 

The shorter wheelbase on the Si is an asset in auto-x because of better rotation. I'd thind that would be much more of a factor than the weight difference. Sure, lighter is better, but rotation is WAY better IMHO

Nate's driving skills throw the whole equation off, though.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by gamby &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Sure, lighter is better, but rotation is WAY better IMHO </TD></TR></TABLE>

True, until you get to a point. My CRX rotated too much at times and the same could be said for my Miata, although suspension tuning could dial out a lot of that. (Going back to the stock rear bar made the Miata easier to drive, however.) Just thinking about Nationals and Tours, as the big courses may favor stability over rotation. Personally, I'd go for a hatch mainly because we already have a Civic coupe in the garage. (And they're way JDM; JDM is still cool, right?)

And yeah, skill matters a lot. I'd have to find a good co-driver.

 

Meh, if it's dropped on a competent suspension, has a good sway setup and some sticky rubber, I wouldn't worry about stability.

Even my daily beater CX on a soft suspension (Neuspeed Sports/KYB GR-2) is plenty stable.

Considering the number of ludicrously fast swapped roadrace hatches on H-T, I don't think stability is a concern.

 

(forgot to add) I'd also like to see an EG buildup in GRM.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by gamby &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">(forgot to add) I'd also like to see an EG buildup in GRM. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Never know what could happen. (Although there are no promising cars within 200 miles at autotrader.com right now.)

 

You'll either have to a) drive far or b) wait. Virgin EG Si's are ludicrously desirable and fetch a premium. They're out there, but it might take some time.

Good luck

 

I think I missed a good one as it was sold when I called today: white 1995 Si, looked clean in the photo, mileage seemed reasonable, 10 miles from here, recent timing belt, $3400 obo. I know the 1995 is heavier, but I at least wanted to take a test drive. Ideally I need a clean car that needs tires, brake pads and shocks. (A boy can dream, right?)

 

It's out there. You must be patient, my son.

My fluke of a CX fell into my lap for a grand. Un-modded, meticulously maintained, adult owned, 112k miles at the time. They can be found, it just takes a ton of patience.

You probably have a bit better resources than the average Joe

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The shorter wheelbase on the Si is an asset in auto-x because of better rotation</TD></TR></TABLE>

92-95 Civics all have the same wheelbase IIRC. The 88-91 Civic hatches are 4" shorter. (101" vs. 97")

Also, the 92-95 Civics share the same wheelbase as the 94-01 Integra.

FWIW, I have never been on a autox course and said, "I wish I had a car with a longer wheelbase." Look no further than CSP for short wheelbase FWD domination. Not that a longer wheelbase will kill you (or so I think), but I don't see it being enough of a benefit to worry about.

 

Yes, I really do have a specification spreadsheet for STS. (Nerd alert.) Here are my wheelbase numbers, but use at your own risk. I can call a friend at Honda and get their numbers; I found these online and figured they'd get me going.

1989 Civic Si 98.4
1990 Civic Si 98.4
1991 Civic Si 98.4
1992 Civic Si 101.3
1993 Civic Si 101.3
1993 Civic EX 103.2
1994 Civic Si 101.3
1994 Civic EX 103.2
1995 Civic Si 101.3
1995 Civic EX 103.2

And I get what you guys are saying about wheelbase. I was just thinking about my '84 Rabbit GTI. We ran offset lower control arm bushings to lengthen the wheelbase in an effort to stabilize it, although it was more of a track car. Now, it's possible the VW had other ills that we were trying to cure, as the car did have plenty.

 

Holy crap, the wheelbase on the 92-95 Civic coupe/sedan is 103" (three websites said the same thing). Did not know that.

 

Yeah. My car too. Made the guys in tech go "huh?" when I weighed in at last year's Peru tour.

 

I wouldn't worry too much about getting the car to rotate enough - put enough spring, bar, and/or toe out back there and it'll do just fine ;-&gt;

Anyone with experience with the D-series motors know if enough power can be had from the VTEC variant to overcome an EG's weight deficit compared to an EF, within the confines of the STS rules? I'm pretty sure ECU work is available in STS so you could change your VTEC changeover, fuel mapping, all that business.

I'm not a national autocrosser type David but I think it could certainly be a front-running car. Around here we get a pretty diverse group of light-ish 4cyl Japanese cars in STS that are all well driven and within several tenths of one another. An EG Si would fit right in therre with them IMO.

BTW, whatever happened to the 02 Si you guys were running in STS? I haven't seen it in a while.

 

You could do a Hondata legally in STS for a 92-95, I believe. That's my take on it anyway. I can't do it since I'd have to switch to an OBD1 computer which isn't factory and my factory ECU is a PITA to hack.

 

I think it would be a close competition. I would also go with the 1992, isn't that the year before they have the VTEC SOHC engine? I would think power delivery would be smoother and power down lower.