Honda Car Forum

If you were planning on buying a new Civic--WAIT.

Buy the latest issue of "Honda Tuning" magazine. You can buy a copy at any
magazine store. www.hondatuningmagzine.com

There is picture of the concept car mentioned above in the magazine. It's
the MAY issue.

The article says that the new Civic will have 200 HP. My Accord only has
150 HP. The 2006 Civics will be for sale in November, 2006 (according to
the article).

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

"Jason" <jason@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:jason-1304051747050001@pm4-broad-49.snlo.dialup.fix.net...
>
> If you were planning on buying a new Civic--WAIT.
>
> Buy the latest issue of "Honda Tuning" magazine. You can buy a copy at any
> magazine store. www.hondatuningmagzine.com
>
> There is picture of the concept car mentioned above in the magazine. It's
> the MAY issue.
>
> The article says that the new Civic will have 200 HP. My Accord only has
> 150 HP. The 2006 Civics will be for sale in November, 2006 (according to
> the article).

Are you sure those are the correct dates? November 2006 is when we would
usually expect to see the 2007 model.

Is this actually a 2007 model? Or a 2006 coming out in November 2005?

Higher horsepower will translate into poorer fuel economy. I think for the
moment at least the muscle car era could be temporarily on hold.

In article <zUj7e.1193$051.826@news02.roc.ny> "Seth"
<seth_lermanNOSPAM@hotmail.com> writes:

>"Jason" <jason@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:jason-1304051747050001@pm4-broad-49.snlo.dialup.fix.net...
>>
>> If you were planning on buying a new Civic--WAIT.
>>
>> Buy the latest issue of "Honda Tuning" magazine. You can buy a copy at any
>> magazine store. www.hondatuningmagzine.com
>>
>> There is picture of the concept car mentioned above in the magazine. It's
>> the MAY issue.
>>
>> The article says that the new Civic will have 200 HP. My Accord only has
>> 150 HP. The 2006 Civics will be for sale in November, 2006 (according to
>> the article).
>
>Are you sure those are the correct dates? November 2006 is when we would
>usually expect to see the 2007 model.
>
>Is this actually a 2007 model? Or a 2006 coming out in November 2005?

"Bubba" <wdg@[204.52.135.1]> wrote in message
news:1vir51ts415j1tk7lsua42evsife2p844u@4ax.com...
> Higher horsepower will translate into poorer fuel economy. I think for the
> moment at least the muscle car era could be temporarily on hold.
>
I think that's pretty likely. The money people - the futures investors -
believe we are in he opening stages of what they are calling a "superspike."
Demand for oil is expected to rise rapidly as auto ownership soars in India
and China, leading to prices as high as $100 per barrel for crude. Sales of
SUVs are already tumbling.

Add to this the advent of hybrids, which separate the issues of fuel economy
and acceleration performance (like Honda's DualNote 2001 concept car), and
the era of cars with 200 hp engines is probably coming to a permanent end.
They are simply becoming obsolete. The new muscle cars will be hybrids.

Mike

In article <zUj7e.1193$051.826@news02.roc.ny>, "Seth"
<seth_lermanNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:

> "Jason" <jason@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:jason-1304051747050001@pm4-broad-49.snlo.dialup.fix.net...
> >
> > If you were planning on buying a new Civic--WAIT.
> >
> > Buy the latest issue of "Honda Tuning" magazine. You can buy a copy at any
> > magazine store. www.hondatuningmagzine.com
> >
> > There is picture of the concept car mentioned above in the magazine. It's
> > the MAY issue.
> >
> > The article says that the new Civic will have 200 HP. My Accord only has
> > 150 HP. The 2006 Civics will be for sale in November, 2006 (according to
> > the article).
>
> Are you sure those are the correct dates?

You are right--I made a mistake. The 2006 Civics will be for sale in
November, 2005.

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

Michael Pardee wrote:
| and the era of cars with 200 hp engines is probably
| coming to a permanent end. They are simply becoming obsolete. The
| new muscle cars will be hybrids.

That's right, about friggin' time we came to our senses.

a Tree Hugger (driving an old Civic when I drive)

"tomb" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:uto7e.2234$t85.53@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com. ..
> Michael Pardee wrote:
> | and the era of cars with 200 hp engines is probably
> | coming to a permanent end. They are simply becoming obsolete. The
> | new muscle cars will be hybrids.
>
> That's right, about friggin' time we came to our senses.
>
> a Tree Hugger (driving an old Civic when I drive)

homo

"tomb" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:uto7e.2234$t85.53@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com. ..
> Michael Pardee wrote:
> | and the era of cars with 200 hp engines is probably
> | coming to a permanent end. They are simply becoming obsolete. The
> | new muscle cars will be hybrids.
>
> That's right, about friggin' time we came to our senses.
>
> a Tree Hugger (driving an old Civic when I drive)
>
>
I'm a conservative myself, and a skeptic of the Hubbert curve. (The
"superspike" doesn't fit the curve at all.) I also feel it is just as well
we haven't been conserving gasoline up to this point, because conserving a
resource that is limited by production (as oil is in the contemporary sense)
during times of plenty has the same effect as wasting it does during times
of shortage. Because of the free-spending usage in our past we have room to
conserve now.

We have been using petroleum for fuel because it has been the cheapest and
most plentiful fuel available. But we are clearly entering a watershed time.
The problem is not that we are "running out of oil" - we've been doing that
since the first barrel was pumped, and no amount of conservation will change
the end of this path, only the rate. But world-wide demand will put rapidly
rising pressure on production for probably a generation... maybe more.
Production will inevitably increase (in complete defiance of Hubbert) but
the economics and politics surrounding the increase won't be pretty.

In 2002 my wife and I saw that whatever was going to happen to gas prices it
wasn't going to be good. Gasoline was about $1.50 per gallon and the price
was becoming unstable. We did the research and decided on our second new car
in 30 years: a Toyota Prius. On newsgroups people were scoffing at the idea
of ever recovering the premium over the equivalent Corolla by saving 40% of
$1.50 gasoline. But the car we traded in (a Nissan 300ZX) got 20 mpg and the
Prius gets 45-50 mpg, so gas prices have to rise to about $3.50 before we
pay as much for gas as we did then. The effect is to make gas prices
unimportant to our household and vacation budgets.

I have been a proponent of hybridization since I heard about it around 20
years ago. It is only now becoming ready for prime time. The concept of
using a 200 hp engine to drag a 5 passenger car around town or to cruise at
freeway speeds is ludicrous. Sizing the engine for freeway hill climbs and
using electric drive for the low power needs and to provide acceleration is
a lot smarter.

Mike

"Bubba" <wdg@[204.52.135.1]> wrote in message
news:1vir51ts415j1tk7lsua42evsife2p844u@4ax.com...
> Higher horsepower will translate into poorer fuel economy. I think for the
> moment at least the muscle car era could be temporarily on hold.

That's not always true. Higher horsepower allows the engine to work less and
to maintain a more consistent speed while doing so, at least that is the way
it works with trucks. A tractor trailer with an engine turning out 500-600
hp returns higher mpg than a truck putting out 400 hp.

Brian

In article <vwt7e.38435$jR3.34501@edtnps84>, "Brian Smith"
<Halifax@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote:

> "Bubba" <wdg@[204.52.135.1]> wrote in message
> news:1vir51ts415j1tk7lsua42evsife2p844u@4ax.com...
> > Higher horsepower will translate into poorer fuel economy. I think for the
> > moment at least the muscle car era could be temporarily on hold.
>
> That's not always true. Higher horsepower allows the engine to work less and
> to maintain a more consistent speed while doing so, at least that is the way
> it works with trucks. A tractor trailer with an engine turning out 500-600
> hp returns higher mpg than a truck putting out 400 hp.
>
> Brian

Brian,
Great point. Over 30 years ago, my brother had a Chevy that had the
smallest 8 cyld. motor made by GM--it may have been a 327 but am not sure.
The gas mileage was about 18 MPG. About 2 years later, he traded it in on
a new Chevy that had a 350 engine which was about the largest 8 cyld.
motor made by GM--at that time. He was able to get about 21 miles per
gallon. I asked a professor at the local college about this since no one
in our family could figure it out. He explained the same points that you
made in your post. A larger engine does not has to work as hard as a
really small engine--esp. when it involves going up and down mountains
like we had in West Virginia.

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.