84-87 Honda CRX mileage
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
84-87 Honda CRX mileage
I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX that
got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to get mileage
info of other cars would be good too.
Reply to Redgreen202 at yahoo.
--
To reply, remove _
got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to get mileage
info of other cars would be good too.
Reply to Redgreen202 at yahoo.
--
To reply, remove _
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>
> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
Eric
>
> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
Eric
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>
> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
Eric
>
> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
Eric
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>
> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
Eric
>
> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
Eric
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:09:46 -0800, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:
>xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>>
>> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
>> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
>> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
>
>The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
>injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
>model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
>
>Eric
Why those years?
>xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>>
>> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
>> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
>> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
>
>The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
>injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
>model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
>
>Eric
Why those years?
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:09:46 -0800, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:
>xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>>
>> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
>> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
>> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
>
>The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
>injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
>model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
>
>Eric
Why those years?
>xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>>
>> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
>> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
>> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
>
>The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
>injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
>model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
>
>Eric
Why those years?
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:09:46 -0800, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:
>xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>>
>> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
>> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
>> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
>
>The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
>injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
>model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
>
>Eric
Why those years?
>xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>>
>> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
>> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
>> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
>
>The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
>injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
>model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
>
>Eric
Why those years?
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:09:46 -0800, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:
>xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>>
>> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
>> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
>> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
>
>The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
>injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
>model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
>
>Eric
Why those years?
>xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>>
>> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the CRX
>> that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a place to
>> get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
>
>The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
>injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
>model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
>
>Eric
Why those years?
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>
> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:09:46 -0800, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:
>
> >xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
> >>
> >> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the
> >> CRX that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a
> >> place to get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
> >
> >The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
> >injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
> >model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
> >
>
> Why those years?
I drive an '88 Civic 4 Dr. I prefer the fuel injected system to the
feedback carburetors on the '84-7 Civics. It seems more reliable and
easier to work on (I've done extensive work on both systems). I would
recommend the later years from the '88-91 series since Honda had a few
problems with the early years which were solved with design changes in
the later years. A few examples off the top of my head include the
distributor which was redesigned with better and more reliable pick-up
coils, the head lights which were redesigned with air vents so that they
don't accumulate condensation inside, the spot welds on the pedal clusters
of the early years also have a tendency to break apart, and the rear
suspension lower control arms which were redesigned to be solid steel
instead of pressed and formed sheet metal (however the latter point might be
argued by some folks since the solid arms have a large lower strut bushing
which tends to be problematic and the strut bushing is included with the
struts on the early years).
Eric
>
> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:09:46 -0800, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:
>
> >xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
> >>
> >> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the
> >> CRX that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a
> >> place to get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
> >
> >The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
> >injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
> >model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
> >
>
> Why those years?
I drive an '88 Civic 4 Dr. I prefer the fuel injected system to the
feedback carburetors on the '84-7 Civics. It seems more reliable and
easier to work on (I've done extensive work on both systems). I would
recommend the later years from the '88-91 series since Honda had a few
problems with the early years which were solved with design changes in
the later years. A few examples off the top of my head include the
distributor which was redesigned with better and more reliable pick-up
coils, the head lights which were redesigned with air vents so that they
don't accumulate condensation inside, the spot welds on the pedal clusters
of the early years also have a tendency to break apart, and the rear
suspension lower control arms which were redesigned to be solid steel
instead of pressed and formed sheet metal (however the latter point might be
argued by some folks since the solid arms have a large lower strut bushing
which tends to be problematic and the strut bushing is included with the
struts on the early years).
Eric
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>
> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:09:46 -0800, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:
>
> >xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
> >>
> >> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the
> >> CRX that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a
> >> place to get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
> >
> >The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
> >injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
> >model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
> >
>
> Why those years?
I drive an '88 Civic 4 Dr. I prefer the fuel injected system to the
feedback carburetors on the '84-7 Civics. It seems more reliable and
easier to work on (I've done extensive work on both systems). I would
recommend the later years from the '88-91 series since Honda had a few
problems with the early years which were solved with design changes in
the later years. A few examples off the top of my head include the
distributor which was redesigned with better and more reliable pick-up
coils, the head lights which were redesigned with air vents so that they
don't accumulate condensation inside, the spot welds on the pedal clusters
of the early years also have a tendency to break apart, and the rear
suspension lower control arms which were redesigned to be solid steel
instead of pressed and formed sheet metal (however the latter point might be
argued by some folks since the solid arms have a large lower strut bushing
which tends to be problematic and the strut bushing is included with the
struts on the early years).
Eric
>
> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:09:46 -0800, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:
>
> >xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
> >>
> >> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the
> >> CRX that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a
> >> place to get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
> >
> >The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
> >injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
> >model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
> >
>
> Why those years?
I drive an '88 Civic 4 Dr. I prefer the fuel injected system to the
feedback carburetors on the '84-7 Civics. It seems more reliable and
easier to work on (I've done extensive work on both systems). I would
recommend the later years from the '88-91 series since Honda had a few
problems with the early years which were solved with design changes in
the later years. A few examples off the top of my head include the
distributor which was redesigned with better and more reliable pick-up
coils, the head lights which were redesigned with air vents so that they
don't accumulate condensation inside, the spot welds on the pedal clusters
of the early years also have a tendency to break apart, and the rear
suspension lower control arms which were redesigned to be solid steel
instead of pressed and formed sheet metal (however the latter point might be
argued by some folks since the solid arms have a large lower strut bushing
which tends to be problematic and the strut bushing is included with the
struts on the early years).
Eric
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>
> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:09:46 -0800, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:
>
> >xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
> >>
> >> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the
> >> CRX that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a
> >> place to get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
> >
> >The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
> >injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
> >model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
> >
>
> Why those years?
I drive an '88 Civic 4 Dr. I prefer the fuel injected system to the
feedback carburetors on the '84-7 Civics. It seems more reliable and
easier to work on (I've done extensive work on both systems). I would
recommend the later years from the '88-91 series since Honda had a few
problems with the early years which were solved with design changes in
the later years. A few examples off the top of my head include the
distributor which was redesigned with better and more reliable pick-up
coils, the head lights which were redesigned with air vents so that they
don't accumulate condensation inside, the spot welds on the pedal clusters
of the early years also have a tendency to break apart, and the rear
suspension lower control arms which were redesigned to be solid steel
instead of pressed and formed sheet metal (however the latter point might be
argued by some folks since the solid arms have a large lower strut bushing
which tends to be problematic and the strut bushing is included with the
struts on the early years).
Eric
>
> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:09:46 -0800, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:
>
> >xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
> >>
> >> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the
> >> CRX that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a
> >> place to get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
> >
> >The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
> >injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
> >model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
> >
>
> Why those years?
I drive an '88 Civic 4 Dr. I prefer the fuel injected system to the
feedback carburetors on the '84-7 Civics. It seems more reliable and
easier to work on (I've done extensive work on both systems). I would
recommend the later years from the '88-91 series since Honda had a few
problems with the early years which were solved with design changes in
the later years. A few examples off the top of my head include the
distributor which was redesigned with better and more reliable pick-up
coils, the head lights which were redesigned with air vents so that they
don't accumulate condensation inside, the spot welds on the pedal clusters
of the early years also have a tendency to break apart, and the rear
suspension lower control arms which were redesigned to be solid steel
instead of pressed and formed sheet metal (however the latter point might be
argued by some folks since the solid arms have a large lower strut bushing
which tends to be problematic and the strut bushing is included with the
struts on the early years).
Eric
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
>
> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:09:46 -0800, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:
>
> >xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
> >>
> >> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the
> >> CRX that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a
> >> place to get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
> >
> >The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
> >injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
> >model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
> >
>
> Why those years?
I drive an '88 Civic 4 Dr. I prefer the fuel injected system to the
feedback carburetors on the '84-7 Civics. It seems more reliable and
easier to work on (I've done extensive work on both systems). I would
recommend the later years from the '88-91 series since Honda had a few
problems with the early years which were solved with design changes in
the later years. A few examples off the top of my head include the
distributor which was redesigned with better and more reliable pick-up
coils, the head lights which were redesigned with air vents so that they
don't accumulate condensation inside, the spot welds on the pedal clusters
of the early years also have a tendency to break apart, and the rear
suspension lower control arms which were redesigned to be solid steel
instead of pressed and formed sheet metal (however the latter point might be
argued by some folks since the solid arms have a large lower strut bushing
which tends to be problematic and the strut bushing is included with the
struts on the early years).
Eric
>
> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:09:46 -0800, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:
>
> >xxx@xxx.xxx wrote:
> >>
> >> I am trying to find out which year and exactly the gas mileage of the
> >> CRX that got the great 60? mpg mileage in the middle 80s. Also a
> >> place to get mileage info of other cars would be good too.
> >
> >The CRX HF which was available from '85-7 carbureted and '88-91 fuel
> >injected. However, I don't know the specific mpg associated with each
> >model. If it were my choice, I'd probably go with a '90 or '91.
> >
>
> Why those years?
I drive an '88 Civic 4 Dr. I prefer the fuel injected system to the
feedback carburetors on the '84-7 Civics. It seems more reliable and
easier to work on (I've done extensive work on both systems). I would
recommend the later years from the '88-91 series since Honda had a few
problems with the early years which were solved with design changes in
the later years. A few examples off the top of my head include the
distributor which was redesigned with better and more reliable pick-up
coils, the head lights which were redesigned with air vents so that they
don't accumulate condensation inside, the spot welds on the pedal clusters
of the early years also have a tendency to break apart, and the rear
suspension lower control arms which were redesigned to be solid steel
instead of pressed and formed sheet metal (however the latter point might be
argued by some folks since the solid arms have a large lower strut bushing
which tends to be problematic and the strut bushing is included with the
struts on the early years).
Eric
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
Eric wrote:
>
> the spot welds on the pedal clusters of the early years also have a
> tendency to break apart
After rereading my post I realized that this statement was not clear. It
was intended to describe the '84-7 Civics and NOT the early years of the
'88-91 Civics which is implied in my earlier post.
Eric
>
> the spot welds on the pedal clusters of the early years also have a
> tendency to break apart
After rereading my post I realized that this statement was not clear. It
was intended to describe the '84-7 Civics and NOT the early years of the
'88-91 Civics which is implied in my earlier post.
Eric
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
Eric wrote:
>
> the spot welds on the pedal clusters of the early years also have a
> tendency to break apart
After rereading my post I realized that this statement was not clear. It
was intended to describe the '84-7 Civics and NOT the early years of the
'88-91 Civics which is implied in my earlier post.
Eric
>
> the spot welds on the pedal clusters of the early years also have a
> tendency to break apart
After rereading my post I realized that this statement was not clear. It
was intended to describe the '84-7 Civics and NOT the early years of the
'88-91 Civics which is implied in my earlier post.
Eric
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 84-87 Honda CRX mileage
Eric wrote:
>
> the spot welds on the pedal clusters of the early years also have a
> tendency to break apart
After rereading my post I realized that this statement was not clear. It
was intended to describe the '84-7 Civics and NOT the early years of the
'88-91 Civics which is implied in my earlier post.
Eric
>
> the spot welds on the pedal clusters of the early years also have a
> tendency to break apart
After rereading my post I realized that this statement was not clear. It
was intended to describe the '84-7 Civics and NOT the early years of the
'88-91 Civics which is implied in my earlier post.
Eric