Discussion
I would base your decision on the condition and service history of the car rather than the engine. I owned a CRX 1.6i-16 for three years and replaced it with a Civic VTI. If you can get a good one, go for a CRX with the VTEC engine as its more powerfull (150 v 128 bhp iirc) and sounds a lot more aggressive. The VTEC version also come with leather as standard, has a slightly different front and rear light treatment, and different alloys.
The performance of the 1.6i-16 version is just fine, and the handling is identical.
The performance of the 1.6i-16 version is just fine, and the handling is identical.
Having owned/driven numerous CRX's of various guises I always end up being drawn to the 88/89 1.6i 16V (non-VTEC) cars and I currently own a less than pretty but highly reliable 130K miler at the moment ! They are lighter, more responsive and handle far better than the VTEC. The VTEC feels more solid than the 16/16 and has the "benefit" of leather and a slighty higher top speed, but in reality there's not a lot between them and the 16/16 will always "feel" quicker.
The only killer is rust now.. almost all of them will have rust in the rear wheel arches and the sunroof. Best bet is to look out for a Si JDM import
Andy
BookaTrack.com
The only killer is rust now.. almost all of them will have rust in the rear wheel arches and the sunroof. Best bet is to look out for a Si JDM import
Andy
BookaTrack.com
shinyandy said: ...The only killer is rust now.. almost all of them will have rust in the rear wheel arches and the sunroof. Best bet is to look out for a Si JDM import ...
We had two 1989 CRXs and the wife's Jap import Si has much worse rust on the rear arches than my UK spec 16i16. Places to look for rust are rear arches, sunroof, sills under the skirts (hard to inspect I know) and front arches - in that order. We still have the Si and the extra weight of the aircon and pas combined with the lighter steering make it less fun to drive than a UK car. But then I do have an irrational hatred of pas so maybe that's just me.
Also think twice before getting something that's been lowered as the front camber can't be adjusted to suit and you end up with something that tramlines all over the place on bumpy roads (but great on a track
). My CRX had a full supersprint exhaust and K&N filter. A couple of technicians from my local dealer took it out for a "test drive" back to back with a VTec and said there was no difference in performance. Obviously I don't go there any more.
Also look out for seized calipers (replaced all calipers on our two cars), hot starting problems (fuel pump relay problem I think), water filled boot floor and knackered side bolsters on the drivers seat. Track days will kill the brakes unless you stick to very short sessions.
Fantastic car, I only sold mine to fund my bike habbit.
I did have a test drive of a Mugen tuned Jap import VTec and that was sooooo fast it was scary. Mad engine and very, very loud.
I’ve had Twink for almost exactly three years, and I’m still sure if I had anything faster I wouldn’t be driving at all.
She is a 1.6i-16 and will happily run up to 140 where safety allows. I’ve only done it a couple of times, but once you’ve got there you know and then there’s no need to prove it to anyone else.
Like the captain said, rust appears around wheel arches and sills. The front wheel arches aren’t a problem in theory as the wings are bolt-on items, but in reality 1.6i-16 ones are rear and 1.6i-vt ones are like rocking horse poo.
Watch out for rust between the front of the rear wheel arches and the back of the doors. This is where Twink is suffering “tin-can-cancer” and this is common. Problem is, by the time you can see it it’s quite serious.
Logically a 1.6i-16 makes more sense. The vt commands a £500 to £1000 premium for the name and the standard extra goodies like a/c and pas. But all these do is weigh the beast down. The -16 comes with es/r, e/m, so there are few toys, but the crx is about driving, and the 16 is just as good. It revs to 7200 rpm or more like 7500, so it’s not far shy of the vtec and the extra 15bhp can be easily found more cheaply than opting for the vt (see muppet’s post above).
On the lowering side there camber adjustment kit available but they are pricey.
For my money the prettiest is the ‘88/’89 1. 6i-16 (like Muppets two and mine). The vt’s engine is taller, and needed a full width bonnet bulge that made the carlook nose heavy. The 1.6i-16 has the aggressive concave nose with the power bulge to one side, subtle but sexy.
I say find a sound 1.6i-16 (d16a9 engine code) tweak it, and enjoy, I do.
That’s my 2p’s worth….
Mouse
ps. Take spin around www.hondacrx.co.uk/forum
She is a 1.6i-16 and will happily run up to 140 where safety allows. I’ve only done it a couple of times, but once you’ve got there you know and then there’s no need to prove it to anyone else.
Like the captain said, rust appears around wheel arches and sills. The front wheel arches aren’t a problem in theory as the wings are bolt-on items, but in reality 1.6i-16 ones are rear and 1.6i-vt ones are like rocking horse poo.
Watch out for rust between the front of the rear wheel arches and the back of the doors. This is where Twink is suffering “tin-can-cancer” and this is common. Problem is, by the time you can see it it’s quite serious.
Logically a 1.6i-16 makes more sense. The vt commands a £500 to £1000 premium for the name and the standard extra goodies like a/c and pas. But all these do is weigh the beast down. The -16 comes with es/r, e/m, so there are few toys, but the crx is about driving, and the 16 is just as good. It revs to 7200 rpm or more like 7500, so it’s not far shy of the vtec and the extra 15bhp can be easily found more cheaply than opting for the vt (see muppet’s post above).
On the lowering side there camber adjustment kit available but they are pricey.
For my money the prettiest is the ‘88/’89 1. 6i-16 (like Muppets two and mine). The vt’s engine is taller, and needed a full width bonnet bulge that made the carlook nose heavy. The 1.6i-16 has the aggressive concave nose with the power bulge to one side, subtle but sexy.
I say find a sound 1.6i-16 (d16a9 engine code) tweak it, and enjoy, I do.
That’s my 2p’s worth….
Mouse
ps. Take spin around www.hondacrx.co.uk/forum
Hi
I've had both and IMO I would always go for the VTi version. They were both nice cars and the handling seemed very similar although the later car did have leather and ABS.
The reason I would recommend the later car is simply that the VTEC engine is a work of art. It was designed before Honda figured out a way to smooth out the transition between shopping/headbanger modes which means that it felt just so exciting to drive hard. Everyday driving then yeah I don't think there was much performance advantage but on the right road, max rev upshifts would put you right in the sweet spot for the next gear.
It was a top experience that even with a Griff 500 I still miss now.
Eitherway - they're both great so let us know how you get on. If I could find an unmolested VTi today then I'd buy it my winter car.
Marco
I've had both and IMO I would always go for the VTi version. They were both nice cars and the handling seemed very similar although the later car did have leather and ABS.
The reason I would recommend the later car is simply that the VTEC engine is a work of art. It was designed before Honda figured out a way to smooth out the transition between shopping/headbanger modes which means that it felt just so exciting to drive hard. Everyday driving then yeah I don't think there was much performance advantage but on the right road, max rev upshifts would put you right in the sweet spot for the next gear.
It was a top experience that even with a Griff 500 I still miss now.
Eitherway - they're both great so let us know how you get on. If I could find an unmolested VTi today then I'd buy it my winter car.
Marco
danger mouse said: Thinking about it a little more...
I have one word of advice: Gearbox.
Any noises, growls, whines, crunches or jumping out of second...
...walk away. Believe me
Dunno - only cost me 200 quid to get mine rebuilt.
Later 16i16 had ABS (1990 model with the fake air scoops on the bumper - nasty)
Agreed, that's why I like the early ones. 
The later ones also have a shallower rear valence that gives the car a nasty weedy arse.
>> Edited by danger mouse to say: £200! Exactly, and a load of hassle I'll bet. Did they charge extra for the Hammerite?
>> Edited by danger mouse on Thursday 13th March 23:50
The later ones also have a shallower rear valence that gives the car a nasty weedy arse.
>> Edited by danger mouse to say: £200! Exactly, and a load of hassle I'll bet. Did they charge extra for the Hammerite?
>> Edited by danger mouse on Thursday 13th March 23:50
danger mouse said: Agreed, that's why I like the early ones.
The later ones also have a shallower rear valence that gives the car a nasty weedy arse.
>> Edited by danger mouse to say: £200! Exactly, and a load of hassle I'll bet. Did they charge extra for the Hammerite?
>> Edited by danger mouse on Thursday 13th March 23:50
Not too much hassle - they saw me pull up and told me what had failed before I'd given them any details of the nasty clattering noises. It's good too have shiny new bits - even if they are only painted recon bits
Captainmuppet said" Later 16i16 had ABS (1990 model with the fake air scoops on the bumper - nasty)" But so has the VTEC model.
Anyway thanks for all your help!
The other day I saw A nice MR2 and was woundering which is better mk2 MR2 nonturbo Vs CRX
or should I stick to my plan and just buy a CRX ?
>> Edited by DROID on Monday 17th March 17:19
>> Edited by DROID on Monday 17th March 17:20
Anyway thanks for all your help!
The other day I saw A nice MR2 and was woundering which is better mk2 MR2 nonturbo Vs CRX
or should I stick to my plan and just buy a CRX ?
>> Edited by DROID on Monday 17th March 17:19
>> Edited by DROID on Monday 17th March 17:20
DROID said: ...The other day I saw A nice MR2 and was woundering which is better mk2 MR2 nonturbo Vs CRX
or should I stick to my plan and just buy a CRX ?
...
It depends on your driving experience and what you need the car for. Until a month ago I had both a CRX16i16 and a mk1 MR2. The CRX was faster, more economical, less scary in the wet/snow/ice, had more luggage room and could carry a couple of people in the back if they didn't have feet.
I sold my CRX and kept my mk1 MR2. This was because:
1) I'd get more money for the CRX.
2) I love power oversteer.
3) I didn't need the extra luggage space as Mrs Muppet still has a CRX.
I've heard that mk2 MR2s aren't as forgiving as mk1s so I'd be wary of getting one as your first rear drive car.
Gassing Station | Japanese Chat | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff