CRX vs Del Sol vs...

Hi, Honda guys and girls

I need some insight. I'm playing with an idea of a cheap small project car that would be used, at least as I'm planning at the moment, for driving on ice tracks in winter. Something small and light like the CRX seems like a logical choice this side of AWD, but it's not that straightforward.

I cannot find a VTEC CRX for sale but there's a reasonably good one with a D16(?) engine available, for which I might contemplate a B16* swap at some point. On the other hand, for slightly more there's a 118kW Del Sol for sale. At the moment I'm thinking CRX just because of its weight and simplicity but what are your suggestions? How different is the suspension system between the two cars, etc? The car might see some track day driving in summer as well.

Thanks for the help.

Dude!

:bananasmi:ylsuper::ylsuper::ylsuper::ylsuper:

Yes, Moppie, yes. I am looking at other platforms too, though ;)

Now tell me which is a better choice.

CRX.

The Del Sol is also called the Del Slow for a very good reason.

Despite have less seats, it actually weighs more than the Civic it shares the chassis and drive train with.

:wave: welcome back!

crx requires axles, mounts, & linkage to drop in b series swaps....del sol doesn't. However, as moppie noted it's heavy. I've owned a del sol. It is heavy so will require more HP to make it move....but, when lowered I was surprised at the handle of it. Very nimble & fun to drive.

this is the classic choice of preference....dont ask me, I drive a wagon :icon16:

Hey noobs! Thanks for that.

How more advanced is the suspension setup on the Del Sol? The CRX I was looking at just sold so I am even more limited in options.

Actually I'd probably prefer a 6th gen 3-door Civic as a base car (sorry, too many chassis designations for a simple Nissan guy to tell which one) but there are just none for sale here other than a single base model (this one (http://www.auto24.ee/used/888143)). I've heard rust is a major problem with these.

Edit: actually, might as well show you the other CRX (http://www.auto24.ee/used/882873)and the Del Sol (http://www.auto24.ee/used/893028) I'm thinking about. The DS already has a B16A in it...

suspensions are nearly identical on them. the only difference is the CRX has a front subframe with two tension rods running to the lower control arms, and the del sol doesnt have the front subframe but has an arm bolted on to the otherwise identical lower control arm that triangulates it like an actual wishbone.

CRX (that "strut rod" is the tension rod that attaches to the front subframe)
http://www.suspension.com/civic.JPG


del sol (see how the lower control arm has that bolted on part? it mounts to a small bushing that bolts to the same subframe as the rest of the control arm, triangulates it)
http://www.strongflex.vot.pl/images/diagrams/honda/civic/91-95/strongflex_eu_honda_civic_delsol_civic_uk_rover_40 0_front_suspension_diagram.png

Actually I'd probably prefer a 6th gen 3-door Civic as a base car (sorry, too many chassis designations for a simple Nissan guy to tell which one) but there are just none for sale here other than a single base model (this one (http://www.auto24.ee/used/888143)). I've heard rust is a major problem with these.




Starting in 1989 and running through until 2000, Honda used the same basic design on most of its cars, with a wide range of suspension and engine parts being interchangeable between them.

They are all variations of the 2nd generation CRX/4Th Generation Civic, with small changes made when a new generation of cars came out in 92, and again in 96.

The CRX, Civic, Integra, Prelude and Accord from this period all used double wishbone suspension on all 4 wheels, and picked from D, B, H and F series engines.

To give you an idea of how inter changeable the parts were, my old EF9, SiR Civic used, from the factory, a Civic body shell and suspension, with an Integra engine and gearbox and a mixture of Prelude and Accord brakes.

This means it's very easy to swap a lot of parts around between models in the same generation and get things like bigger brakes with out needing to use aftermarket parts.

It also means that underneath all the cars share a very agile chassis design with lots of potential for performance.



In 2000 a totally new platform was released, and under pins the current Civic, Accord etc. It uses totally new series of engines and McPherson struts of front, with a combination of different axle types at the back. Nothing is shared with the previous generation cars.

...and here I thought you were a toyota guy :screwy:

If weight is a concern, no one has mentioned it yet, but 1st gen Crx or 3rd gen Civic. The 1g CRX HF is the lightest base model you can get, weighing in at like 1600lbs(guessing here, i know its quite a bit lighter than the Si, which is 1900lbs). Drawback to them is there aren't that many cars you can grab parts from, but there are parts you can get from a 1g Integra. I have seen several of these used for SCCA road racing.

The Si was the only model that came Fuel Injected, while the rest were carbs. You are able to swap in a d16a1 from a 1g Teg which will give you a DOHC non vtec(In honesty, if your planning on spending most of the time in high rpms, just get a cam because your not taking advantage of VTEC anyway)

I actually had a 87 Si that I built for dirt, with a 6point roll cage and full tank of gas it weighed 1550lbs that I swapped in a d16z6(1.6 SOHC vtec) and was chasing down turbo eclipses that had more money in their turbo than I had in the whole car. It is possible to swap in newer engines in it, but you have to make your own brackets for it, which I had to do.

Next best thing would be a 88-91 Crx, insane amount of swapability and light still. My 91 Civic hatch has full 90 Teg engine/trans/brakes/suspension on it and I love it.

Hey all

Old thread but I do have an update. First of all, thank you for all the information. Based on that I went ahead and bought this car: :D:D

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v68/ales12911/Misc/24685661r.jpg

Serisouly, though, a colleague of mine managed to convince me that while an FWD car could be quite quick on an ice track, the fun factor is not quite the same as with AWD, so let's see how I fare.

Thanks again,
Alex

nice scoobie snack! woke up this morning to snow on the ground....i love my 1989 awd wagon. some say we have too much of an age difference, i say how could you not be attracted to manual tranny action?? they don't see the beauty in our love affair......

Hey all

Old thread but I do have an update. First of all, thank you for all the information. Based on that I went ahead and bought this car: :D:D

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v68/ales12911/Misc/24685661r.jpg

Serisouly, though, a colleague of mine managed to convince me that while an FWD car could be quite quick on an ice track, the fun factor is not quite the same as with AWD, so let's see how I fare.

Thanks again,
Alex




Very nice mate, not quite a Honda though :shakehead

:licka::licka:


But, lots of room for modifications, bit of extra boost, some coil overs, front mount............ :evillol::evillol:

I know, I will have to wait a bit now before I own my first Honda.

The Scooby isn't stock ;)

The Scooby isn't stock ;)

I don't know any that are :runaround:


I do know a lot that thanks to bad mods are slower than when they left the factory though. :shakehead

Fair enough, and it is a bit of a concern that I don't really know what's been done to the car but it's very quick that's for sure. I'll get it on the lift soon and will start figuring things out.