nstymax93

Anyone know what a stock 95' civic EX runs on the 1/4 mile? Or even one with a CAI, Muffler, Pully (just 1), and Venom? Thats what my friend has. He said he ran it in around 11 sec.

VE30DE POWER

iTrader: (3)

well my friend has a 2000 ex single cam vtec ... with aem cold intake and greddy exhaust.. and thats it and he runs like 16.8 or so.. i very highly doubt your friends civic runs 11's.. cause the fastest all motor civic's run 11's "mid to low" and with the mods he has i doubt it.. if the venom thing you said is nitirous then he must have a 800 shot of it to get to 11's..

nstymax93

I agree and the venom isnt nitrous, he has nitrous but didnt use it because his bottle isnt in right now.

mykizism

11 secs to where? down his driveway?

hahah modded civics are still slow..

DA-MAX

iTrader: (10)

oh so true, God forbid if its an auto civic! but hey no way he's running 11's with those mmods!

Matt93SE

iTrader: (44)

I can start down the 1/4 mile, stop, take a dump, get back in my car, skip 2nd gear, and STILL beat a stock civic in a 1/4 mile.

WTF is this guy thinking with 11 sec?
maybe 11 sec 1/8th mile...

mykizism

i just had to reply again... god civics are pathetic.. even the SI's are even slow

DA-MAX

iTrader: (10)

welllllll........not unless theres a certain object attached to it.... 4 letter word that ends in URBO...

mykizism

DA-MAX

iTrader: (10)

why the hell are there som any models....
DX, LX, EX, CX, HX, VX...I mean really WHY??? I know the EX is the fastest of those 6, but why make 5 more 105hp or less models, is a 105hp LX that much better than a 90hp DX

mykizism

yah i know whats up with that.. i forgot the difference between those models too, because they all have all kinds of options the other one doesnt.. like it matters the car sux and its slow.. so why even buy a civic.. thats all i see around here.. civic civic civic.. it just angers me that they think its fast.. when their car is lucky to even break high 17 1/4s

Bman

LMAO!!!!

Bman

Well lessee... DX and CX are the bottom of the line models, HX was a short-lived midline hatchback model (I think), VX was the fuel-economy VTEC model, LX is midline or base (depending on body/year I think) and EX has always been top of the heap, sharing the Si engine in recent years.....






.... don't ask why I know this cuz I don't know either

noleafclover

friends don't let friends drive civics

mykizism

where do you live? here in the US civic Ex's are sohc engines and the SI are the dohc ones

CoolMax

iTrader: (7)

Remind me to never shake hands with you.

male

I helped a friend build a 95 civic DX. Swapped in a 94 inegra GSR motor, Gen II Drag Turbo/intercooler kit, 3in exhaust. Make no mistake, this car put any mustang, modded maxima, porche boxster,vette, camaro in it's place. At 12 psi, a bone stock GSR inegra made 295 wheel hp wiht this kit. He was running 15 psi. We didn't even get to tune it. I only hope my Maxima is this fast with a turbo. It got stolen before we could do any power tuning though..

Otherwise yes, if this guy thinks he can run 11's, he has never taken a trip down the 1/4 mile in a car that even runs 14's!! I'll race him!!

mykizism

15 psi of boost on a stock gsr motor.. are you sure? 15 psi would kill any high compression engine.. especially honda motors.. because they are really high comp engines like 9.5 almost 10 to 1

Aaron92SE

iTrader: (128)

I have raced a Civic hatchback with the GSR motor in it. I believe that's all he had. He had intake, catback, and carbon fiber hood. he was running consistant 15.70's. He beat me.

I also raced a 97 Integra with 6 lbs of boost. He could only run 15.50's. He said he could raise the boost to 15 and could run in the 13's. I didn't believe him, I think he would blow his motor.

There was a Civic Si, or atleast it had an Si logo...she ran a 16.70. Maybe she couldn't shift. There was another Civic Si that looked modded and he ran a 15.60.

At the drag strip in Vegas, most of the Civics racing are actually modded out with real mods. All the ones I see on the road, just have a loud catback and intake; running mid 17's.

male

I'm positive..I was ther to set it up. No doubt, a few months of this and it probably would have croaked, but that was the plan. Run it til it pukes then do the bottom right. Keep in mind that stock honda cranks have been reliable well OVER 400hp. Honda buids a hell of a motor. And all those 12 sec hondas use STOCK trannies with hardcore clutches. In fact, once I get my daily driver Max done, my next project will likely be a Civic hatchback, 2.2 prelude motor with turbo. ( DOn't hate me, I still am a diehard nissan fan, but this honda plan is a lot cheaper) A formula for 12's no problem!

mykizism

hay i dont blame you, hondas are the easiet and cheapest way to go fast.. besides domestics

jim90gxe

My freinds has a '96 dx (?) bubble 5spd, HAI, catback. He ran a 16.5 at engligh town back in october. 16.5 is enough to take out most stock VG autos...

Shadow1198

iTrader: (1)

Well, the fact still stands.....They are still JUST Civics and they still just have a 4cyl! So what you can make them fast. There are only a select few ACTUAL 4cyl sports cars out there such as:

Porsche 914 (lacks any power though but I'm droppin a 350 in mine!)
Porsche 924
Porsche 944
Porsche 968
BMW's (can't remember the 4cyl models)
Lotus Esprit (their 4cyl version is pretty fast)
Subaru Impreza (not a true sports car like Porsche's but they're good)
Mitsubishi Lancer Evo (not a sports car either but they're also good)
and probably a few others

Porsche has manufactured a great example of an actual 4cyl sports car. Did you guys know that the stock Porsche 968 Turbo S makes 305hp and 369 lb torque at 3,000rpm!!!! Thats serious power for a 4cyl. I mean, you barely have to press the gas and you can unleash 369lb torque!

I just thought I should tell you guys this for some laughs. A guy I know has a 2001 Civic SI ('00 or '01, not sure). He only has the AEM cai and he said he gained 20hp and 20lb torque. He thinks he has about 180-190hp now. Also, he said he beat a stock '98 trans am!!!! The stupidity of the Honda crowd (not all of them but just the ricers) never ceases to amaze me. I don't want to generalize and say its all of them but, I will never figure out why these people think that hatchbacks are cool and bees in a can sounds awesome. After all, they have to spend $20,000+ to get a high performance engine that puts out 300+ hp. We can just do a Vg30t conversion, 300zx Turbo upgrade parts, and get a ton more power for under $10,000 easy. Even my planned mods for my GXE are going to only cost $15,000+ (I know, everyone else tells me to get another car but I love my max!) and that includes the tranny, torque converter, wheels, body kit and everything else plus I'll be putting out a crap load of HP. Damnit I need some money so I can do these mods and post my car + dyno sheets so someone will believe some of the stuff I have claimed. Let me just say this, out of a stock N/A Vg30e or Vg30de, internal work is the ticket to some serious HP increases. Finding a good place to do the custom work is tricky but its all worth it. Polished, ported heads, performance cams, pistons, etc can gain you quite a significant amount of HP. I know one guy that can make a n/a vg30e (performance parts like I just mentioned) with 300hp! There are many possibilities out there.

DA-MAX

iTrader: (10)

ummmmmm not entirely true.....you'll spend less money making a 12 secnond Honda than you will a 12 second Maxima, theres no getting around that! full rebuild by Crower will run $4k and a bolt-on turbo or SC setup will run $2-3k....so far you've spent $7k and you're car is in the 12's/13's, but then again you don't even need to reubuild mnay HOnda engines to run turbos so you're still spending less than you would on the Max, unless of course you're Czar...Mr. $1,000 turbo VE, THAT WORKS! thats the one advantage of Civics, EVERYTHING bolts on...even the kitchen sink!!

Jeff92se

iTrader: (82)

You don't know much do ya?

The 924 sucked unless it was turbo. And even then it wasn't very strong. Same w/ the 944. Slow unless it was the turbo version.

The 968 wasn't 4 cylinder.

You left out sr20det, fj20-t, ca18-t, mr2-t engine, Celica All-trac turbo engine, Cosworth 4 cylinder Ford turbos. Hell even the iron block XR4TI turbo is faster than those you mention. There is also the Chrysler little GLH and Shelby turbos that can get deep into the 12's.

You should be more informed. Some here know more than you tend to think.

Shadow1198

iTrader: (1)

Sorry. I was thinking more along the lines of a Spoon engine but I didn't even consider a turbo. The fact still stands that they are dumb Japanese econo boxes that people make fast. I mean, you could also make a Geo Metro go fast if you strapped a turbo or s/c on but, they still wouldn't look anywhere as good as our 3rd gen max's! I just have a general dislike of Honda for their failures to actually fully utilize some of their cars potentials. One car in particular is the Prelude. Have any of you seen the inside of an engine bay on a newer prelude? The engine bay is HUGE! There is absolutely no excuse for it to be a 4cyl. I mean, they could easily put a 6cyl in there and if they wanted to go all the way, they could probably jam a compact v8 in there. There is just no excuse for them using a 4cyl for everything. Though, I have to respect them for the new Accord v6's. Those are nice cars and quite fast too. I still hate hatchbacks though!

DA-MAX

iTrader: (10)

WHAT.....IMO that car is not fast at all! I'll admit it does look nice(especially with some HKS dual Hipers ), but its not fast.....16.4-.5's and POS troublesome auto tranny with LAAAAAAAAGGing shifts...plus its got a ****ty torque curve...I think 200ft but the problem is it doesn't hit till 4700rpm, thats NOT good, classic crappy HOnda Vtec! if I have to repect any HOnda its the SI, although played out, 160hp and capable of high 15's stock with good driver is pretty damn good..but screw it HOndas suck!

Shadow1198

iTrader: (1)

Jeff, why are you attacking me today? I've never talked any crap to anyone on this board or anything and you're jumping all over me. First:

I agree completely, the 924 does suck but I throw it on the list more for pity! :

In no way do ANY 944's suck! Yeah, the non-turbo ones are somewhat slow (The S version was pretty fast) but did you know these were called the BEST handling cars on the planet at one time, due to the perfect balance from the front engine RWD layout?

The 968 is in fact an inline 4cyl 3.0l. Here's the link to the only 3 types Porsche made http://www.supercars.net/cars/1993@$Porsche@$968%20Turbo%20Sb.html http://www.supercars.net/cars/1993@$Porsche@$968%20CS%20Coupec.html http://www.supercars.net/cars/1992@$Porsche@$968%20Cabrioletb.html

As to the other engines, of course I know they are great engines. Mr2's, 240sx's, celicas, for cosworths (I forgot about those little rockets!). Though, I am not really talking in terms of performance numbers as much as overall quality. You can't compare a Ford or Toyota to a Porsche in terms of being sports cars.

I just have a serious question, why are you getting all over everything I'm saying? I'm not some ignorant newbie that is just talking crap and doesn't even know what they're saying.

ghostmax

iTrader: (4)

I don't like the new accords that much at all. For some reason, the body is too thick for me. Kinda like the Solara. Man, after I park my car, I am forced by something to keep looking back at it until it's clear out of sight. It really is a beautiful car!!! As for Civics....

Jeff92se

iTrader: (82)

I don't like people posting the same thing 2-3 times. The board is slow enough as it is. I stand corrected about the 968.
As far as comparing a Ford/Toyota with Porsche, why not? You should specify WHICH Porsche. 914(not the 914-6), 944, 944-T, 912s, some older 911s, and even the 944 turbos are not impressive. You mean to say, a 500hp Cosworth Sierra AWD is not gonna completely destroy these Porsches? How about a FJ20-T'd Datsun 510? 2300lbs and 330hp on 26psi?? How about a stock blocked Supra TT single turbo and 700hp? Not a real sports car? Open you mind a little.

I think you know some but just not as much as you think.

Shadow1198

iTrader: (1)

Sorry Jeff, I didn't mean to post so many times. But, the forums kept saying it was busy and I didn't know it already posted.

Well, I mentioned the 914 because it has great potential for its balance and handling. At the moment, I am rebuilding my '76 Porsche 914 w/ Ferrari 246 Dino body kit. I am planning on dropping a Chevy 350 in there but am not sure how soon I will pursue that. The figures have already been timed and a 914 with stock 350 will do 0-60 in 4.0-4.2 sec! Stock, 914's suck for power but with potential like that I had to mention it.

I don't think I really got my meaning across right. I'm not saying those Porsches will beat every car in the world or anything. I just happen to be a Porsche enthusiast and am saying, for example, a Porsche 944 is not the same as a Ford Cosworth. Now, I don't mean the Cosworth is slow. Hell, no! I have seen videos of those Cosworths and read about them and I know they are extremely fast! In fact, check out this vid of a supra and a cosworth tearing it up through Stockholm http://downloads.albertacars.net/vid...2-Xstreem.mpeg Though, its 235mb!!! Lets not fight anymore. I agree with what you are saying. Its just like with ferrari's and chevy's. Yeah you can build a camaro that will destroy a ferrari. Though, it is just not the same and doesn't have some of the fine craftsmanship that goes into most Ferrari's. You understand what I am saying?

I know what you mean. The older 911's, especially, aren't as fast as most people think. Though, most Porsche's have great potential to be extremely powerful sports cars. And all for the price of a new house!

Why do you think I don't know that much?

Did I say those cars weren't sports cars???!?!?!? That is not what I meant to say at all. Ford Cosworths, Supras, etc are all great sportscars. I apologize if that's how I came across. That is not what I was trying to say. All I was saying basically is that most Porsches are sports cars and they're made to be sports cars, plus they do the job well. Civics are not made to be sportscars. You understand what I'm saying. I was kind of going a roundabout way in saying that Civics aren't true sports cars but some people seem to think so and treat them as such, even though they will never be true sports cars.

Shadow1198

iTrader: (1)

BTW, do any of you want to see pics of my Porsche Ferrari Dino kit car?

OptimusPrime

lets not miss the point about why the honda prelude has the 4 in it despite the engine bay being big enough to take a 6, maybe an 8. its about weight balance. sixes weigh a good deal more than a 4, and if you have a bigger chunk of metal up ahead of the front wheels you definitely arent helping responsiveness or balance in terms of handling. plus weight is just bad in the first place. the fact is they can get 200 horses out of it, which is pretty much as good as most sixes. a good example of what i mean is the supras that run in the japanese grand touring champ. the supras actually run a 4 cyl. (same engine as the celica pikes peak car) because it makes enough power to be competitive and its lighter than the normal six anyway. frankly, i don't really like hondas either, but i respect the engineering that goes into them. as far as im concerned nissans are way better though! oh yeah, don't leave out the audi/volkswagen 1.8t motor... one of the most tunable 4 cyl. around

Bman

This thread is getting ridiculous! Like it's turning into some kind of weird contest or something...

Anyway, there are several reasons Honda might still go for 4 cylinders more instead of 6. Among them are fuel economy, size, cost, and weight. V6's are heavier and larger, which is worse for handling and takes a bite out of fuel economy (more so if the engine is bigger). They also cost more. Besides, how fast do you need the car to be anyway? I think Honda just has different priorities and market targets than Nissan does.

I'm not afraid to say I admire Honda's engineering and quality, and wouldn't have any problem with owning one. Hondas and Nissans aren't "better" or "worse", just different. For what it's intended to be (a fast, economical sporty car) I think the Civic Si's are sucessful. For what the Maximas are supposed to be (a comfortable, powerful premium car) they are sucessful as well.

They're like apples and oranges.... Think of me as the guy who admires the other guy's girlfriend, but doesn't want to sleep with her

mykizism

what are you talking about civics come in two doors.. two doors = sports car.!!!!!!!

Aaron92SE

iTrader: (128)

The new Accord V6's run very low 16's. About 16.20's stock. It depends heavily on which track you're racing it at. But, they are plenty fast enough to beat any stock VG and VE Auto's. But, I can beat em.

noleafclover

hence our car being a four door sports car!

Shadow1198

iTrader: (1)

I have to agree. I do respect what Honda has done with most of their cars. I never meant that they were all complete crap. The NSX certainly isn't! I guess my view of Hondas has been soured by everything I have seen from ricers. I love Preludes though. They are great cars (fast too) even though they have a 4cyl. I think they should have had a v6 option for the Prelude though. After all, wouldn't that be cool if they had an option for a Prelude 3.0L or 3.2L w/ 240+ hp easily?

Optimusprime, I know exactly what you're talking about. I remember reading in Sport Compact Car about some Supra that joined the select few legendary cars in japan that have broken some record. I could have sworn it had somewhere within 800-1200hp and it could get up to 200mph. Though, just like you said, they dropped in a 4cyl since it had much better balance for higher speeds.

I almost forgot the S2000! Thats another great 4cyl.

Have you guys ever heard of the Renault Sport Clio 3.0? You should check the car out if you can find info on it. I was reading an issue of Car & Driver and this little hatchback has a 3.0L v6 w/ 225hp! Now that can literally be called a hatchback sports car. Its only about the size of a CRX too.

noleafclover

hence our cars being called four door sports cars!

male

I believe that this is how body style nomenclature goes..A car can have four doors or two (or three in a hatchback) and two or four seats. A coupe is a car with two seats, a sedan is one with four(two front and a back seat). So there can be two door coupes AND two door sedans (civics and such). Obviously if a car has four doors, it has a back seat and is a sedan. The old CRX Si is a two door coupe. A civic DX can be a two door sedan or a four door sedan, no coupe. Am I making sense?? many people feel that if it has a back seat at all, two door or not, it is not a true sports car. British cars are a perfect example.