EcoModder.com

EcoModder.com (https://ecomodder.com/forum/)
-   Introductions (https://ecomodder.com/forum/introductions.html)
-   -   new (to me) crx owner (https://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/new-me-crx-owner-20977.html)

mikehallbackhoe 03-14-2012 10:28 AM

new (to me) crx owner
 
Hi, I am new to this forum, but have been in other fuel saving forums over the past few years. I ride a valkyrie motorcycle that gets me between 45 and 50 mpg. my latest purchase is a 1984 crx, with ethe 1300 cc engine, and high gear ratio. I am hoping for 50 + mpg. I live in the mountains and practice eoc, whenever I can. The crx , with a standard transmission, manuel steering and manuel brakes, should be much easier to coast with than my 95 nissan 4x4 pickup, with power steering and power brakes. I have gotten 26mpq with my nissan, but I really had to work for it. Hoping to implement some of the ideas on this forum.

MetroMPG 03-14-2012 11:15 AM

Congrats on the CRX find! Lucky you.

I had an '85 breadbox Civic hatchback for a while with the same engine (don't remember which transmission - though it was manual). This was before fuel economy became a big interest for me, but I do remember being genuinely shocked at how good the mileage was just by keeping it to 90 km/h (55 mph) on trips on rural roads.

Are you sure it has manual brakes? I don't remember that.

Anyway, welcome to the site.

MetroMPG 03-14-2012 11:16 AM

PS - post a pic of the car!

larrybuck 03-14-2012 10:51 PM

You have me drooling! I love my '87. My best is 62.9mpg. Do you know if yours is stock,
or maybe someone inserted the 1.3 later?
If stock, you are supposed to have an energy efficient special alternator which is quite rare now.

I have traveled through your area on vacations twice. Once on a motorcycling camping
trip, and last fall in the CRX. Beautiful area! Love the twisty road to the coast!

If I had an original 1.3, I'd be planning on how to get mid 70's mpg., but where I live
is much flatter!

Hope to read more posts of your ventures!

mikehallbackhoe 03-15-2012 08:42 PM

pictures are beyond my ability, I don't own a camera, or even a cell phone. this is definitely the original,unmodified 84 with 1.3 and high gears. when I say I am hoping for 50 + mpg, I am really hoping for the +. with the hills, comes lots of opportunities to coast. just turn the key off. and you can't even tell you are coasting, except that it speeds up :). the guy who owned it before me didn't have it very long, but he had the carb rebuilt, major tune up, new exhaust system, new cv joint covers. IT is fairly clean, except the left front fender, which is mostly duct tape painted white. it has 130 thousand miles and runs like a champ. the guy I bought it from complained that after he did all those repairs, it started leaking oil really bad, and his mechanic told him it was either the oil pan gasket or the rear main seal, so he sold it to me for 1700 . I checked the leak, and found the oil filter had been put on too tight. new oil filter, and no more leak.

GottaCruise 03-15-2012 08:58 PM

Congrats on the purchase - owned a '89 CRX si what seems like forever ago, have lots of fond memories of that car.. Wish I still owned it today.

In high school, my friend owned the '85 carb'ed version, it got crazy gas mileage (for mid eighties), over 40mpg consistently, not that he used any hypermile techniques while driving.. :)

Looking forward to hear of your experience w/ the CRX.

mikehallbackhoe 03-15-2012 09:41 PM

I too have heard something about a special alternator on some of the crx's .anybody know what years had the special alternator?

MetroMPG 03-15-2012 10:12 PM

My understanding is that the HF model (and Civic VX) had the special alternator.

Quote:

- The high efficiency Honda Civic VX and CRX HF models reduce alternator charging under certain cirucumstances. The VX computer instructs the alternator to drop from 14.5 volts to 12.5 (ie. not charging the battery) when all of the following are true:
- Load below 10A
- Speed below 40 MPH
- Engine speed below 3600 RPM
- Coolant temp above 140 F
- A/C off
- Intake air temp above 65 F
- Brake switch off
- Fuel cut-off not active
In other words, the alternator is essentially "idling" when the load on it is low, the car is warmed up and being driven gently. Note that the alternator reverts to normal charging when braking or decelerating (fuel cut-off mode), which is like a simple form of regenerative braking found in modern hybrids and electric vehicles.
Plug-in Blackfly: going alternator optional nets +10% mpg - MetroMPG.com

Info came from EcoModder member Randy. I forget which one :)

mikehallbackhoe 03-15-2012 11:08 PM

I was conidering doing the alternator delete, but now I don't think so. what gets me. is that the new honda hybrid has a 1.3 liter engine, plus an electric motor and a bunch of batteries, and gets 48 mpg. why don't they drop that electric motor and heavy batteries, and just run the 1.3 like they did in 84? if honda could build a 1.3 in 84 that could get over 50 mpg, surely they could improve on that concept 28 years later.

MetroMPG 03-15-2012 11:21 PM

Mostly because the motoring press and the automakers have trained the public to think that a 0-60 acceleration time in excess of 10 seconds is ludicrously slow, bordering on dangerous.

Well, that's one reason, anyway.

mikehallbackhoe 03-15-2012 11:42 PM

I would think with 28 years, that 1.3 should be lighter , more powerful, and more fuel efficient. . surely the new hybrid must also be more aerodynamic than the crx.

Ryland 03-16-2012 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikehallbackhoe (Post 293749)
I was conidering doing the alternator delete, but now I don't think so. what gets me. is that the new honda hybrid has a 1.3 liter engine, plus an electric motor and a bunch of batteries, and gets 48 mpg. why don't they drop that electric motor and heavy batteries, and just run the 1.3 like they did in 84? if honda could build a 1.3 in 84 that could get over 50 mpg, surely they could improve on that concept 28 years later.

The EPA numbers for the insight are the newest numbers, if you look at the 1984 CRX EPA numbers you see that it "only gets 38mpg" just like the insight "only gets 48mpg" yet people get 70+mpg out of the insight.
pretty sure that the "special" alternator is that it cut out under high engine load, same way the carburetor cut off the fuel when you let off the accelerator while in gear.

mikehallbackhoe 03-16-2012 01:10 AM

the two ratings in that chart are 41mpg combined city and highway, and 39 mpg city and highway. how do you get 38? the highway epa is 45 and 47. these numbers, from everybody I have talked to, seem low. regardless, the hybrid is only 44 on the highway. and remember, honda has had 28 years to improve these numbers. the crx could be purchased for 6200.00 in 1984. the honda hybrid base price is 24,050. the crx won't have to buy an expensive battery pack down the road. imagine what a 1.3 fuel injected, modern day, stream lined crx would be able to achieve.

Ryland 03-16-2012 02:00 AM

CPI Inflation Calculator

says that the CRX today would cost $14,834 and that is a car with a steel body, no battery pack and lots of cast iron parts.

You said the insight only gets 48mpg, that is the insights in town mileage, the in town mileage of the CRX 1.3L is 38 or 36mpg if you have the CA model, all Insights are CA models... so a 36mpg CRX to a 48mpg Honda Insight, when compared on a level playing field, when using the same testing figures and same smog standards... for the year built.

mikehallbackhoe 03-16-2012 02:48 AM

I was wondering what a new crx would cost. of course it would also need air bags. I live in the country, so city driving doesn't really apply to me. most of my driving will be mountain roads. the epa rating for the insight on that same site was 44/ 44. if you factor in fun , looks, and initial cost, I would take a new crx over an insight any day. my daughter is grown up, so it's just the wife and I. the crx has plenty of room for storage, and two seats, all I need. and no seat for my mother in law, another plus:)

mikehallbackhoe 03-22-2012 07:20 PM

did my first fill up since initall fillup. 262.1 miles, 5.594 gal, =46.85 mpg. not bad considering a mixture of city and highway. replacing the 175 70 13 tires with 165 70 13 tires on monday. hope that helps mpg. weather has been cold and wet.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com