Honda Car Forum

Here in the States, Civics are really shitty. The best handling stock Civic I
ever driven is a 91 sedan. The 92-95 handle poorly. 96-2000 are in the same
boat, literally. I got motion sickness driving a friend's 96 on a long trip last
week. They lean like a kayak on open water.

Honda Civic in the States are not good. They're only more reliable than others.
The only good Honda is the S2K. It's really good on clean dry road. On damp and
dirty roads, rwd on it makes it so suck to drive.

I got cut springs on my Civic. On long trips, I like it more than S2K. On errand
runs, S2K is better.

froglewis wrote:

> i always think why dont u save the money u
> spend of the 18inch rims, huge bore and full body kit and put it towards a
> good car LIKE MINE.

Hey Mark!

Seems like you're in a ranting mood this week. Is the time change getting to you?

About the new POS Civic, I would agree with you completely except for the fact that
the coupe can really take a hit in a crash situation. The new Coupe makes a great
car for a spicy image but conservative intent (a good combination for a reliable
woman). For myself, I'd take the older sure footed Civic and resign the new one to
the ladies.

l8r,
Pars

Mark Gonzales wrote:

> http://www.azcentral.com/business/ar...ivic25-ON.html
>
> "For years, Honda kept a hands-off attitude to the Civic customizing craze,
> generally avoiding a direct marketing appeal to young enthusiasts, a group
> sometimes referred to in the industry as "the fast and furious," after a
> movie with that title that celebrated the import-car street-racing culture.
> In 2001, Honda redesigned the Civic and made it more family-friendly and
> sedate, which in turn left the tuners feeling slighted."
>
> "Last summer, at an import-racing event in Irwindale, Calif., the crowd
> booed when the announcer mentioned Honda."
>
> Well, I guess I never had a problem with legitimate Civic tuners (although
> I've never understood it) but it seems you're all moving on. But can you
> take the ricers with you please?
>
> Ricers, Honda doesn't want you! Honda doesn't support you! Your ill-fitting
> body parts, outrageous spoilers, and obnoxious exhausts are spoiling their
> image of refinement and perfection. Honda ask that you to go f up another
> kind of car (I personally recommended the Ford Focus) and leave the poor
> Civic alone!
>
> Honda, listen to Car & Driver when they note that the Civic is becoming a
> POS and START MAKING IT BETTER...
> http://caranddriver.com/article.asp?...&page_number=5
>
> Well, actually they only called it a "loser".
>
> That is all.
> --
>
> Mark
> '99 Civic Si

"Mark Gonzales" <enter_my_name@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:c4u9m8$q5c$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...
> "froglewis" <froglewis@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:c4u236$s2m$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
>
> > ffs, just beacuse u have a good, fast civic doesnt make u a ricer boy.

True. Is souping up a car a ricer boy thing? The only time I think "rice
boy" is when I hear someone say that the new yellow top battery they put in
the car makes their car go faster, or something similar in context.

> Well, I certainly never said otherwise.
>
>
> > im 18
> > and i have a black 1999 civic 1.6 VTi - i bet u think im a ricer boy
huh?

Who cares if you're 18, and yes, I think you're full of rice.

> A 1999 civic 1.6 VTi??? I have no idea what that is. In the U.S. for '99,
we
> had the Civic DX, LX, EX, HX, Si and CX. But no VTi.
>
>
> > 160bhp. no one i know that mods has a decent car, all clios and novas. i
> > hate ppl who mod their cars - i always think why dont u save the money u
> > spend of the 18inch rims, huge bore and full body kit and put it towards
a
> > good car LIKE MINE.
>
> Eh <scratching head>, ok. Sounds like a good idea to me.
>
>
> > Min is unmodded apart from the factory extras of course. never will mod
it
> > either.
>
> Sounds sweet. But like I said earlier, I have no problem with Civic
tuners.
> It's all the rice that bothers me.

Rice is good. I like rice. Yum!

> It's oh so rare but it is cool to see a legitimately fast Civic that's
kept
> a sleeper.

What does legitimately fast mean? Are tuners that make their cars fast
legitimate? Do you still not understand why tuners do what they do? I don't
get you, Mark. You seem confused.

> --
>
>
> Mark
> '99 Civic Si

> > > The first Hondas that REALLY caught my attention...
> > > http://www.velocityjournal.com/ip/stk/4142.html
> > > http://www.velocityjournal.com/ip/stk/4143.html
> > >
> > > They may look dated today, but in 1986, these cars were sharp!
> > > --
> > >
> > >
> > > Mark
> > > '99 Civic Si

They definitely look conservatively fast. Back then I'd buy one if I could
afford it. I still can't afford one today so what am I talking about.

--Viktor

"Pars" <"sdaro(remove)"@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40731F19.E7750214@hotmail.com...
> Hey Mark!
>
> Seems like you're in a ranting mood this week. Is the time change getting
to you?

LOL! Hey man. It's nice to see some of the old-time regulars still around.


> About the new POS Civic, I would agree with you completely except for the
fact that
> the coupe can really take a hit in a crash situation. The new Coupe makes
a great
> car for a spicy image but conservative intent (a good combination for a
reliable
> woman). For myself, I'd take the older sure footed Civic and resign the
new one to
> the ladies.

I do like the new coupe's styling (exterior and interior) even if it has
softened up a bit. In some areas, the interior makes mine look Mickey Mouse.
I've always appreciated the Civics' safety record. But I've seen some
unHonda-like fit-and-finish flaws on both new Accords and Civics that has me
worried. QC needs to be raised up a notch, IMO.

Does Crush ever stop in and say hello? ;-)
--


Mark
'99 Civic Si

>
> l8r,
> Pars
>
> Mark Gonzales wrote:
>
> > http://www.azcentral.com/business/ar...ivic25-ON.html
> >
> > "For years, Honda kept a hands-off attitude to the Civic customizing
craze,
> > generally avoiding a direct marketing appeal to young enthusiasts, a
group
> > sometimes referred to in the industry as "the fast and furious," after a
> > movie with that title that celebrated the import-car street-racing
culture.
> > In 2001, Honda redesigned the Civic and made it more family-friendly and
> > sedate, which in turn left the tuners feeling slighted."
> >
> > "Last summer, at an import-racing event in Irwindale, Calif., the crowd
> > booed when the announcer mentioned Honda."
> >
> > Well, I guess I never had a problem with legitimate Civic tuners
(although
> > I've never understood it) but it seems you're all moving on. But can you
> > take the ricers with you please?
> >
> > Ricers, Honda doesn't want you! Honda doesn't support you! Your
ill-fitting
> > body parts, outrageous spoilers, and obnoxious exhausts are spoiling
their
> > image of refinement and perfection. Honda ask that you to go f up
another
> > kind of car (I personally recommended the Ford Focus) and leave the poor
> > Civic alone!
> >
> > Honda, listen to Car & Driver when they note that the Civic is becoming
a
> > POS and START MAKING IT BETTER...
> >
http://caranddriver.com/article.asp?...&page_number=5
> >
> > Well, actually they only called it a "loser".
> >
> > That is all.
> > --
> >
> > Mark
> > '99 Civic Si
>

"electricked" <no_emails_please> wrote in message
news:vNednSZNJ6Woqu7d4p2dnA@comcast.com...

> I don't get you, Mark. You seem confused.

Confused. Disillusioned. You name it.

In 1989 I bought a new CRX Si. One year later my best friend bought a new
Acura Integra. Another friend bought a new Accord EX coupe. At an Atlanta
engineering company I worked at, there were new Preludes (late '80s, very
early '90s), Integras, Legends, Civics, Accords. Mostly new or nearly new,
and a few older ones too.

Thinking back over all of these Hondas at that time, I don't recall a single
one being modified (cosmetic nor performance). For whatever reason, we
appreciated Hondas for what they were and the way that Honda engineered
them. Fast forward to 2004 and it's hard to find an unmolested Honda on
ebay. It's usually Civics that get the worse of it, but Accords get the
treatment sometimes too. At least most people have the good sense to leave
the higher-end cars alone like the S2000 and NSX, as well as other higher
end Hondas and Acuras.

Of course, I'm referring to cosmetic "enhancements" more than anything.

My how times have changed, eh? ;-)
--

Mark
'99 Civic Si


>
> > --
> >
> >
> > Mark
> > '99 Civic Si
>
> > > > The first Hondas that REALLY caught my attention...
> > > > http://www.velocityjournal.com/ip/stk/4142.html
> > > > http://www.velocityjournal.com/ip/stk/4143.html
> > > >
> > > > They may look dated today, but in 1986, these cars were sharp!
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Mark
> > > > '99 Civic Si
>
> They definitely look conservatively fast. Back then I'd buy one if I could
> afford it. I still can't afford one today so what am I talking about.
>
> --Viktor
>
>

"Mark Gonzales" <enter_my_name@comcast.net> spake unto the masses in
news:c4t9jf$k25$2@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com:

> Follow-up..
> ========
>
> The first Hondas that REALLY caught my attention...
> http://www.velocityjournal.com/ip/stk/4142.html
> http://www.velocityjournal.com/ip/stk/4143.html
>
> They may look dated today, but in 1986, these cars were sharp!



Yeah, but I never liked the pop-up headlights. When the gen2 came out in
'90, then I was interested.

Still got my '91, bought new. It's bone-stock.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda FAQ
http://www3.telus.net/public/johnings/faq.html

How to find anything on the Internet or in Usenet Groups:
www.google.com
www.groups.google.com

"Mark Gonzales" <enter_my_name@comcast.net> spake unto the masses in
news:c4u9m8$q5c$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com:

>
> Sounds sweet. But like I said earlier, I have no problem with Civic
> tuners. It's all the rice that bothers me.


There ya go!

>
> It's oh so rare but it is cool to see a legitimately fast Civic that's
> kept a sleeper.


Now that's a good point. Why does "fast" have to look so, well, obvious?

Remember the '80s phrase "Q-ship"? It meant a car with much more power and
better handling than stock, but that looked totally factory-original. All
go, no show. Much more tasteful. The cops never knew as long as you didn't
put the pedal down. Sort of the descendant of the base '64 Chev Bel Air
409.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda FAQ
http://www3.telus.net/public/johnings/faq.html

How to find anything on the Internet or in Usenet Groups:
www.google.com
www.groups.google.com

"Tegger®" <teggeratistopdotcom@changetheobvious.invalid> spake unto the
masses in news:Xns94C3E0E8B16F4teggeratistop@207.14.113.17:

> Sort of the descendant
> of the base '64 Chev Bel Air 409.



Sorry, '62 Bel Air. Typo.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda FAQ
http://www3.telus.net/public/johnings/faq.html

How to find anything on the Internet or in Usenet Groups:
www.google.com
www.groups.google.com

"Mark Gonzales" <enter_my_name@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:c4vl1k$122$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...

<snip>

> Thinking back over all of these Hondas at that time, I don't recall a
single
> one being modified (cosmetic nor performance).

Times have changed I guess. Wouldn't you appreciate the availability and
comparatively inexpensive part cost for performance upgrades? I definintely
do. Cosmetic, that's another story. To each their own.

> For whatever reason, we
> appreciated Hondas for what they were and the way that Honda engineered
> them.

I bet. People still do but they try to get some more juice out of the lower
end hondas so they can compete with the higher end--S2k, NSX, you name
it--with much lesser price than the higher end cars. Not everyone's got
money hanging out of their pockets, and performance upgrade on an underdog
is the way to go for the lower/middle class families.

Again, availability and price is what makes this possible. If you'd look in
the technology, it's the same, things change because there's an availability
of resources and they're not as expensive.

> Fast forward to 2004 and it's hard to find an unmolested Honda on
> ebay.

Maybe that should tell Honda something. If you don't want to see a molested
honda maybe the stock should come with more power. If a bunch of stuff is
put for show then I agree, a lot of people overdo the flash mods and it
starts looking like a clowned box than anything else.

Some mods I agree with are clear corner lights, maybe HIDs or something that
improves visibility, etc. Body wings, spoilers and fart pipes that are there
just for show get me mad, but hey, to each their own. If you got the money
do what you want with it, I wouldn't care.

> It's usually Civics that get the worse of it, but Accords get the
> treatment sometimes too.

Read above. Civics are less powerful than the accords. Accords come with
reasonable power for everyday driving so they don't need to be modded as
much to gain some "get-go" power.

> At least most people have the good sense to leave
> the higher-end cars alone like the S2000 and NSX, as well as other higher
> end Hondas and Acuras.

Why would you want to mod an S2K, NSX or Acuras? They've been highly tuned
up, specifically made for recreational use, and already got enough "go-get"
power, especially the S2K and NSX. They've been made aerodynamic already so
you don't need to put wings and whatnot. They look cool too. But not
everyone's got the funding, and let me tell you, insurance ain't cheap
either on those beasts!

> Of course, I'm referring to cosmetic "enhancements" more than anything.

Well, true, everyone want to be like big pappa NSX. Too bad not everyone has
the cash to afford it.

> My how times have changed, eh? ;-)
> --
>
> Mark
> '99 Civic Si

They've definitely changed but I think it's for the better. Of course, there
are always the idiots who do cosmetic changes for show more than performance
and for me those are the rice boys. I mean you gotta get some girls right!

Anyway, I keep my honda's stock. The reason I stick to honda is that they
are not as bulky as some other cars, they are comperatively aerodynamic, and
most of the time they drive smoother than other cars in their class--forgot
to mention they are cheaper on the pockets :-)

I agree with you though, most of the cars out there are just show and no go.
I dream to see some tuned up civics that really do what it advertises on
that big front windshield!!

--Viktor

"Tegger®" <teggeratistopdotcom@changetheobvious.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns94C3DF99676CCteggeratistop@207.14.113.17.. .
> "Mark Gonzales" <enter_my_name@comcast.net> spake unto the masses in
> news:c4t9jf$k25$2@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com:
>
> > Follow-up..
> > ========
> >
> > The first Hondas that REALLY caught my attention...
> > http://www.velocityjournal.com/ip/stk/4142.html
> > http://www.velocityjournal.com/ip/stk/4143.html
> >
> > They may look dated today, but in 1986, these cars were sharp!
>
>
>
> Yeah, but I never liked the pop-up headlights. When the gen2 came out in
> '90, then I was interested.
>
> Still got my '91, bought new. It's bone-stock.

Cool. Yeah, these were really sharp. Never cared for the last gen but I
liked the first two...
http://www.franksimports.com/2UNZ956.html
http://www.franksimports.com/3ROC727.html

I still like this one though...
http://www.franksimports.com/3VHU484.html

But this one never grew on me...
http://www.franksimports.com/3DVW499.html


As far as your other posts in this thread, you are someone who really
understands what I'm trying to say. ;-)
--

Mark
'99 Civic Si

>
> --
> TeGGeR®
>
> The Unofficial Honda FAQ
> http://www3.telus.net/public/johnings/faq.html
>
> How to find anything on the Internet or in Usenet Groups:
> www.google.com
> www.groups.google.com