Sign In Join 



Honda Civic: Future Models

185 messages,  Last post on Aug 19, 2008 at 7:02 PM

You are in the Honda Civic Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Honda Civic CRX, Honda Civic, Honda Civic del Sol, Concept Cars, Hybrid Cars, Coupe, Hatchback, Sedan


Messages Page 16 of 19
1
...
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#146 of 185
2-Door Civic Hybrid by aliceb
Apr 05, 2007 (5:57 pm)
Reply
Has anyone heard if a 2-door Civic Hybrid is in the works?
#147 of 185
Re: 2-Door Civic Hybrid [aliceb] by johnrz2007
Jun 01, 2008 (1:31 am)
Reply

Replying to: aliceb (Apr 05, 2007 5:57 pm)

VTEC.NET has tons of info on new Hybrid models that Honda is planning to come out with in the near future
#148 of 185
Re: need to bring back the CRX [pkomma] by aspesisteve
Jun 02, 2008 (10:07 am)
Reply

Replying to: pkomma (Dec 30, 2003 7:12 am)

is the CRX the one that got over 40 mpg?
 
why hasn't honda brought this car back?
 
I have a friend who thinks there is some conspiracy by big oil as to the reason Honda killed the high milege CRX.
 
any thoughts?
#149 of 185
Who Killed the CRX? by 1stpik
Jun 03, 2008 (2:11 pm)
Reply
It wasn't OPEC. Congress killed the CRX, and every other lightweight, fuel efficient car, by legislating airbags, ABS, side impact beams, and every other safety device they could think of.
 
This coincided with an explosion in consumer buying power during the 1990s, which created a demand for more luxury features (meaning more weight), even on traditional economy cars. Honda Civics and Ford Escorts suddenly offered power windows, power seats, cruise control, etc.
 
Now cars weigh 50% more than they used to, and get worse fuel economy as a result. But on the bright side, they are safer, and more comfortable to drive.
.
#150 of 185
Re: Who Killed the CRX? [1stpik] by aspesisteve
Jul 14, 2008 (9:04 am)
Reply

Replying to: 1stpik (Jun 03, 2008 2:11 pm)

I pulled out an old news paper add from the 80's where a used CRX is advertised.
 
The owner claims to get 60 mpg!
 
You're telling me that this 1.3 litre engine couldn't get say 40 mpg with today's safety standards? There have been trade offs with using Aluminum in the frame, so I'm not sure I buy your argument that it's merely safety standards killing us in fuel effeciency. I mean, how much does an airbag weigh? or a side beam in the door? It all doesn't add up to me.
 
An electric window doesn't weigh much more than one you have to manually crank.
 
It doesn't take carbon fibre to reduce the weight of a vehicle that was built in the 80's.
#151 of 185
Re: Who Killed the CRX? [aspesisteve] by 1stpik
Jul 14, 2008 (8:15 pm)
Reply

Replying to: aspesisteve (Jul 14, 2008 9:04 am)

The 60 mpg claim is bogus. The old CRX (the super-efficient model HF) got 37/47 mpg. That's from the EPA website fueleconomy.gov which lists all makes and models back to the early 80s.
 
37/47 is certainly good, but as you said, that was from a 1.3 litre engine propelling a 1700 lb. car. Today's Honda Civic has a 1.8 litre engine propelling a 2600 lb. car. It gets 26/34 mpg, which is not bad for 50% more engine displacement and 50% more weight.
 
So you're correct, it's not just safety equipment weight, it's also bigger engines contributing to lower fuel economy.
#152 of 185
Re: Who Killed the CRX? [1stpik] by aspesisteve
Jul 15, 2008 (8:27 am)
Reply

Replying to: 1stpik (Jul 14, 2008 8:15 pm)

I wonder how much of the 900 lbs weight gain is in the engine?
 
and I also wonder how today's civic would perform with a 1.3 ltre engine?
 
17 years have gone by and all I've seen is a race for greater horsepower.
- yes cars are safer and more plush
 
Honda and Toyota have always offered a great 4 cyl option with the option of upgrading to the ample if not excessive 6 cyl because everyone wanted to go 0-60 in under 10 seconds. Now I wonder if they might offer the lower powered higher fuel economy model?
#153 of 185
- by dudleyr
Jul 15, 2008 (10:53 am)
Reply
60 mpg was doable. The EPA took 22% off of their hwy numbers back then. To get the measured hwy mileage multiply 47 x 1.28 and Guess what - 60 mpg.
#154 of 185
Re: - [dudleyr] by aspesisteve
Jul 15, 2008 (12:42 pm)
Reply

Replying to: dudleyr (Jul 15, 2008 10:53 am)

ahh thanks for the input.
 
actually the EPA estimates were 41 city and 50 hwy
 
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/5263.shtml
 
So, what's your guess as to why Honda doesn''t replicate this car with an airbag, abs and side impact beams?
 
It would be alot more appealing to me over the Smart car.
#155 of 185
Re: Who Killed the CRX? [aspesisteve] by 1stpik
Jul 16, 2008 (3:49 am)
Reply

Replying to: aspesisteve (Jul 15, 2008 8:27 am)

"I also wonder how today's civic would perform with a 1.3 ltre engine?"
 
I can answer that. It performs a little slow, but okay.
 
I have a Civic Hybrid, which uses a 1.3 litre gasoline engine along with a 20 hp electric motor. The engine shuts off automatically when the car stops, and the hybrid battery keeps the electric system going while the engine is off.
 
On a hot summer day, waiting at a railroad crossing for a train to pass, the A/C can run down that battery in about 4 minutes. When that happens, the electric motor assist ceases, and the car is powered only by the 1.3 litre engine until the battery recharges itself.
 
It runs fine in that condition, but it's a bit slow -- kind of like a compact car from the early 80s.

Messages Page 16 of 19
1
...
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement