Most Aero. Honda
 

Simple question:What year and model of honda besides the ultra expensive NSX is the most aerodynamic in stock configuration?:turtle:

2000 to 2006 Honda Insight .25Cd vs .32 Cd on the NSX

Maybe I should clarify...What if someone didn't start with a insight type hybrid and built up a small say D14 engine for max effieciency,couple that with a a crx or early civic. Bet that the fuel consumption would be close to what the new hybrids are getting due to the low weight and decent areo.!

Well, then I guess you'd end up with Ben's CRX (SVOboy)!

http://www.crxmpg.com/wp-content/the...img/header.jpg

- Cd 0.30 in stock condition - his is now lower with the partial grill block and lowered ride height

- lean burn VX d15z1 engine and taller gearing

Ben's car is capable of ridiculously good mileage in lean burn mode on the highway. If he relaxed a little instead of blasting down the interstates at 70 mph, he'd be killing his fuel log with 70+ mpg (US) tanks in the summer.

Although, to be fair (meh), he hasn't had a tank below 50 mpg (US) since he did the VX engine swap.

http://ecomodder.com/forum/fe-graphs/graph13.gif

Ben's fuel log

His web site: crxMPG - Gas mileage never looked so good

Here is my CdA list I threw together a while back. Lists many popular vehicles including all the Hondas I could get info on.

These are the top three:
Insight
CRX HF
CRX


http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...list-1935.html

Hey man, when I need to drive for 15 hours I need to get there, :)

Wow Thanks Metro and Doax, great info. Yes Ben's car is very close to what I had in mind. Just 1 point, is the 88-91 crx the absolute best choice weight and cda wize? Seems like the older 84-87 crx might be slightly better in the long run after just a few basic mods to clean up the Aero as it is 2 inch's narrower and undoutedly lighter. Or is it too narrow to accomidate that engine tranny combo?.

I don't know if the VX engine/transmission combo will fit in the older CRX. Not a Honda expert. Ben?

The US market first generation CRX Si (84-87) came equipped with a D series engine according to Wikipedia. I don't know how the mounting locations match up with later revisions. I am 90% an 88-00 D series is the same regardless of application, but outside of that no clue.

However, I have been tempted to follow OP's route after seeing several scrapper CRX Si's in the area for $500. Best of luck

The 1st-gen CRX will fit most or all D-series drivetrains. However, the mounting points are different, so it definitely is not a bolt-in operation. Also, the DX (or "standard") and HF models were carbureted, and used a different fuel supply setup than the fuel injection uses. So a fuel return line has to be added, in addition to any other changes.

It's definitely doable to swap a very FE D-series drivetrain into a 1st-gen CRX. It is easier to swap into the 2nd-gen car, though.

I'm guessing that the 2nd-gen shape is more aerodynamic than the 1st-gen one, but that's just a guess. The 1st-gen is smaller and lighter, though.

-soD

Most Aero
 

I'd give the title to the 1972 P-100 hybrid with "S.W.A.G.'d" Cd0.17 and 173-mpg.HONDA never produced it but they did build it.It's a CIVIC with everything Walter Korff and R.G.S.White said to do aerodynamically,plus a little more.Sure could have used it in October,1973 when OPEC turned off the valve.

HONDA P-100 photo
 

I went into the archives to the phil know aerodynamic photos album,and under "other vehicles 1",on page-2 there is a photo of HONDA's first hybrid,you can't miss it( it says "proven 173-mpg" on it's side.

I just sold my 1985 crx hf (to get a HX). If I'd kept it I'd have shielded the recessed headlights which were a source of drag (or swap in the whole front assembly and valance from an '86'87). Blocked the grill. Extend the front air dam (the stock from lip is only about 1/2" deeper than the dx or si). It already had a passenger side mirror delete from the factory.

As for motor swap, thats ALOT of work to get another motor in there that gets the same fuel mileage. I wouldn't be surprised if you had to modify the frame due to the crank pulley hitting it.

btw, I was getting 47-49 and I was NOT hypermiling at all.

It was interesting that the owners manual said rolling down your windows would hurt your fuel mileage. That's fine but a black interior in a car with no a/c and a shape with lots of windows that makes it a moving greenhouse in the summer is just not conducive to keeping the windows rolled up. The dash would get so hot in the summer that only hot air came through the vents:(

Funny, a buddy and I discussed doing this with the civic (the one in my avatar) when a busted timing belt resulted in crashed valves a couple months ago. I located a motor at NAD in Atlanta for ~$500. Obviously the Civic wouldn't have the aerodynamic advantages of the CRX, but the D15A1 is a bit of a gas hog compared to the carb'd motors. As the car is my DD, I ditched the idea in favor of "cheap & easy."

As far as fitment, space should be of no concern. There are plenty of guys running massive turbo B-series motors in these cars. The usual suspects would apply for mounting issues, but a case of beer and a welder can yield free solid motor mounts in an afternoon. Driveshafts would be the big pain, but I've seen guys dirt-track on half CRX/half (whatever the donor motor is) shafts welded together.

Swap the wiring harness and make sure fuel delivery is adequate, and voila, you've got hypermiling, fuel injected goodness. As Daveedo pointed out, it might be a lot of work to go through to get similar gas mileage to the HF, but the advantage of not having to deal with 80 gazillion 20-year-old vacuum lines, combined with the fact that pre-88 Honda motors aren't showing up on containers anymore, might be worth it. The sheer "cool" factor is pretty high too, IMO.

most aero Honda
 

Does the Honda Dream II solar car with Cd0.10 qualify?

Saw both a first gen crx(86) and a sec gen(89) today at the wrecker. It is hard to tell that the 86 is narrower but it is certianly shorter and the front a little blockier looking. However one thing that really struck me was the difference in the front suspentions. The 88 Iam sure handles really well but the older crx would be lighter suspention wise and would lend itself to easier lowering with it's torsion bar setup!. So again ...for fuel economy purposes the 86 would be better if you dont mind a bunch of electrical swap work, plus motor mount welding inorder to install a more fuel efficient EFI engine.