Honda Car Forum


 

Go Back   Honda Car Forum - Accord Parts Civic Tuning Acura Racing > Honda Acura > Honda 2

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 21 Aug 2007, 11:14 am
plenty560@yahoo.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Honda car got 47 mpg highway, 37 mpg city ... in 1978.

See the 1978 ad via http://Muvy.org

Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 21 Aug 2007, 01:54 pm
Henry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda car got 47 mpg highway, 37 mpg city ... in 1978.

plenty560@yahoo.com wrote:
> See the 1978 ad via http://Muvy.org
>



My niece drove that car in school. It sported a 1.2 litre
engine, and its performance with more than one person aboard
made it truly unsafe in western traffic. The gearing was such
that the driver was constantly busy clutching and shifting, and
there was no power brakes or power steering, so operator
functions became a serious distraction. Of course, air
conditioning was a matter of cranking down the windows.

That model was not available in California, and did not have a
catalytic converter. Further, according to the ad, the version
with auto transmission got 30mpg on the highway.

Honda (among the best of all car makers, in my opinion) would
not hold up that 1.2L '78 as an example of its engineering prowess.

It's truly a wonderful example of how far technology has moved
in the last thirty years. The Honda Fit is, I suppose, today's
equivalent...
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 21 Aug 2007, 02:54 pm
Jeff
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda car got 47 mpg highway, 37 mpg city ... in 1978.

Henry wrote:
> plenty560@yahoo.com wrote:
>> See the 1978 ad via http://Muvy.org
>>

>
>
> My niece drove that car in school. It sported a 1.2 litre engine, and
> its performance with more than one person aboard made it truly unsafe in
> western traffic. The gearing was such that the driver was constantly
> busy clutching and shifting, and there was no power brakes or power
> steering, so operator functions became a serious distraction. Of course,
> air conditioning was a matter of cranking down the windows.
>
> That model was not available in California, and did not have a catalytic
> converter. Further, according to the ad, the version with auto
> transmission got 30mpg on the highway.
>
> Honda (among the best of all car makers, in my opinion) would not hold
> up that 1.2L '78 as an example of its engineering prowess.
>
> It's truly a wonderful example of how far technology has moved in the
> last thirty years. The Honda Fit is, I suppose, today's equivalent...


I would think not. The Fit has 109 HP and air conditioning.

It's mileage is 34/28 though.

Jeff
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 21 Aug 2007, 02:58 pm
Blash
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda car got 47 mpg highway, 37 mpg city ... in 1978.

in article RpHyi.4513$z83.3452@trndny09, Jeff at kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com
wrote on 8/21/07 3:54 PM:

> Henry wrote:
>> plenty560@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> See the 1978 ad via http://Muvy.org
>>>

>>
>>
>> My niece drove that car in school. It sported a 1.2 litre engine, and
>> its performance with more than one person aboard made it truly unsafe in
>> western traffic. The gearing was such that the driver was constantly
>> busy clutching and shifting, and there was no power brakes or power
>> steering, so operator functions became a serious distraction. Of course,
>> air conditioning was a matter of cranking down the windows.
>>
>> That model was not available in California, and did not have a catalytic
>> converter. Further, according to the ad, the version with auto
>> transmission got 30mpg on the highway.
>>
>> Honda (among the best of all car makers, in my opinion) would not hold
>> up that 1.2L '78 as an example of its engineering prowess.
>>
>> It's truly a wonderful example of how far technology has moved in the
>> last thirty years. The Honda Fit is, I suppose, today's equivalent...

>
> I would think not. The Fit has 109 HP and air conditioning.
>
> It's mileage is 34/28 though.
>
> Jeff


What stock is this relevant to OR does the author cross-post just because
he's lonesome???

Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 21 Aug 2007, 07:56 pm
Wayne L
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda car got 47 mpg highway, 37 mpg city ... in 1978.

I bought one of these used in 1982. It was a fun little death trap to go
back and forth to work in. Had a manual choke too.....only car I ever owned
that had a manual choke.
The milage was around 30 or so. Not bad considering the drive was about 10
miles each way with at least 10 red lights. Before that I was driving a 72
Malibu 350 V8 that got arounf 12 Mph, so after a little accident I decide to
go small. Eventually the cross member under the engine rusted through,
making the front end slop a little squirely, so I gave it to a kid needing a
car who worked in my brother-in-law's body shop. He bought a new cross
member wholesale and drove it good as new after that. At the time, the
body shop prices for dealer parts were 20-30% what the cost for private
parties like me. I once went to the dealer in the 70s for an lower front
end A-frame (only cam with lower ball joint installed). My price was $125.
I declined, and mentioned it to my brother-in-law at a birthday party a
couple of weeks later. He got it for me for abot $30.


<plenty560@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1187712876.876674.309040@g4g2000hsf.googlegro ups.com...
> See the 1978 ad via http://Muvy.org
>



Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 21 Aug 2007, 08:22 pm
Hachiroku ハチロク
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda car got 47 mpg highway, 37 mpg city ... in 1978.

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:14:36 -0700, plenty560 wrote:

> See the 1978 ad via http://Muvy.org



These did too:

http://www.honda.co.jp/news/1971/image/a71lfp10.jpg

http://www.geocities.jp/poohtibitama/ex2lifevan.jpg

http://www.geocities.jp/poohtibitama/ex2step.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 21 Aug 2007, 11:08 pm
Grumpy AuContraire
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda car got 47 mpg highway, 37 mpg city ... in 1978.



Henry wrote:
> plenty560@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> See the 1978 ad via http://Muvy.org
>>

>
>
> My niece drove that car in school. It sported a 1.2 litre engine, and
> its performance with more than one person aboard made it truly unsafe in
> western traffic. The gearing was such that the driver was constantly
> busy clutching and shifting, and there was no power brakes or power
> steering, so operator functions became a serious distraction. Of course,
> air conditioning was a matter of cranking down the windows.
>


I'm not aware of the 1200 having safety issues due to the lack of power.

It was an economy car that measured up to the manufacturer's claims. The
lack of power steering, (It did have power brakes as is with most cars
with disk brakes), on a car so light is also a non issue.

Oh, A/C was indeed an option as well.


> That model was not available in California, and did not have a catalytic
> converter. Further, according to the ad, the version with auto
> transmission got 30mpg on the highway.
>
> Honda (among the best of all car makers, in my opinion) would not hold
> up that 1.2L '78 as an example of its engineering prowess.
>


Wrong again.

The 1200 evolved into the 1300 CVCC of which the '82/83 models got
nearly 60 mpg highway and 43 mpg in town. I know, I have one!


> It's truly a wonderful example of how far technology has moved in the
> last thirty years. The Honda Fit is, I suppose, today's equivalent...


Yeah, cars have gotten bigger and get worse mileage and are not user
friendly with regard to maintennace.

Yep, enjoy your trip in fantasy land...

JT



Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 21 Aug 2007, 11:36 pm
Gordon McGrew
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda car got 47 mpg highway, 37 mpg city ... in 1978.

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:54:30 -0700, Henry <not@all.com> wrote:

>plenty560@yahoo.com wrote:
>> See the 1978 ad via http://Muvy.org
>>

>
>
>My niece drove that car in school. It sported a 1.2 litre
>engine, and its performance with more than one person aboard
>made it truly unsafe in western traffic. The gearing was such
>that the driver was constantly busy clutching and shifting, and
>there was no power brakes or power steering, so operator
>functions became a serious distraction. Of course, air
>conditioning was a matter of cranking down the windows.


I drove a '74 Civic I got new until 1980. It actually outperformed
most economy cars of its time, at least partly due to its sporty
gearing. I once beat a Gremlin V6 in a drag race to 70 mph and I had
two 6 foot friends with me. It did have power brakes and it didn't
need power steering. Understeered like a SOB though if you pushed it.
It had 12" wheels.

I drove it very hard and I only got over 30 mpg on very rare
occasions. OTOH, this was at a time when big cars got 12 mpg.

Put it in perspective. Compared to my '94 GS-R, the '74 Civic weighed
33% less, had less than 30% of the horsepower, had erratic engine
performance due to carburetor and primitive ignition, and went maybe
17% farther on a gallon of gas in the Summer and not at all better in
the Winter. The Integra is a far better car in every way, but the
Civic was great for its time.

>That model was not available in California, and did not have a
>catalytic converter. Further, according to the ad, the version
>with auto transmission got 30mpg on the highway.


Someone mentioned the manual choke. In 1974 the automatic was called
a Hondamatic transmission and it had a torque converter and two
manually selected gears. I bet that was still in use in 1978.

>Honda (among the best of all car makers, in my opinion) would
>not hold up that 1.2L '78 as an example of its engineering prowess.
>
>It's truly a wonderful example of how far technology has moved
>in the last thirty years. The Honda Fit is, I suppose, today's
>equivalent...





Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 22 Aug 2007, 10:08 am
loewent via CarKB.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda car got 47 mpg highway, 37 mpg city ... in 1978.

my buddy had an 83 civic with Hondamatic. It took my 98 civic 5-spd to
school on more than one occasion. Did better on fuel too.

Gordon McGrew wrote:
>>> See the 1978 ad via http://Muvy.org

>>

>[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>>functions became a serious distraction. Of course, air
>>conditioning was a matter of cranking down the windows.

>
>I drove a '74 Civic I got new until 1980. It actually outperformed
>most economy cars of its time, at least partly due to its sporty
>gearing. I once beat a Gremlin V6 in a drag race to 70 mph and I had
>two 6 foot friends with me. It did have power brakes and it didn't
>need power steering. Understeered like a SOB though if you pushed it.
>It had 12" wheels.
>
>I drove it very hard and I only got over 30 mpg on very rare
>occasions. OTOH, this was at a time when big cars got 12 mpg.
>
>Put it in perspective. Compared to my '94 GS-R, the '74 Civic weighed
>33% less, had less than 30% of the horsepower, had erratic engine
>performance due to carburetor and primitive ignition, and went maybe
>17% farther on a gallon of gas in the Summer and not at all better in
>the Winter. The Integra is a far better car in every way, but the
>Civic was great for its time.
>
>>That model was not available in California, and did not have a
>>catalytic converter. Further, according to the ad, the version
>>with auto transmission got 30mpg on the highway.

>
>Someone mentioned the manual choke. In 1974 the automatic was called
>a Hondamatic transmission and it had a torque converter and two
>manually selected gears. I bet that was still in use in 1978.
>
>>Honda (among the best of all car makers, in my opinion) would
>>not hold up that 1.2L '78 as an example of its engineering prowess.
>>
>>It's truly a wonderful example of how far technology has moved
>>in the last thirty years. The Honda Fit is, I suppose, today's
>>equivalent...


--
Message posted via CarKB.com
http://www.carkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx...-cars/200708/1

Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 22 Aug 2007, 06:20 pm
Michael Pardee
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Honda car got 47 mpg highway, 37 mpg city ... in 1978.

"Blash" <blash1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:C2F0BC1C.78F79%blash1@comcast.net...

> What stock is this relevant to OR does the author cross-post just because
> he's lonesome???
>
>

He's spammed car groups for a few months now. Never anything useful - just
the National Enquirer beat.

Mike



Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
honda city how is it? avatwani Honda Technical 2 19 Aug 2007 06:28 pm
how many miles per gallon does a 91 honda accord gets city/highway? jdkustoms Honda Technical 3 19 Aug 2007 11:36 am
What engine can you swap into a honda 1978 cvcc? dj_pablodiablo Honda Technical 2 15 Aug 2007 11:19 pm
HONDA 400-450 cc TWINS 1978 -1987 SERVICE/ SHOP/MAINTENCE MANUAL FOR SALE dc Honda 1 0 21 Aug 2006 12:02 pm
Honda City Mike S. Honda 3 3 30 Jul 2003 11:28 pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:06 pm.


Attribution:
Honda News | Autoblog
Powered by Yahoo Answers




Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2 © 2011, Crawlability, Inc.
HondaCarForum.com is not affiliated with Honda Motor Company in any way. Honda Motor Company does not sponsor, support, or endorse HondaCarForum.com in any way. Copyright/trademark/sales mark infringements are not intended or implied.