Honda Car Forum


 

Go Back   Honda Car Forum - Accord Parts Civic Tuning Acura Racing > Honda Acura > Honda 3


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 30 Jan 2005, 06:16 pm
BE
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 2000 Civic DX

Just wondering if there are any known caveats regarding the Civic DX model
year 2000

Thanks...


Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 30 Jan 2005, 06:47 pm
motsco_ _
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: 2000 Civic DX

BE wrote:
> Just wondering if there are any known caveats regarding the Civic DX model
> year 2000
>
> Thanks...


------------------------


:-) They're too expensive because they hold their value WAY too long,
and they're worth buying even if the mileage seems high . . . and
here's your caveatunless they were driven by a teenager who wears a
Metallica T-shirt). :-)

'Curly'

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 31 Jan 2005, 12:30 am
Pars
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: 2000 Civic DX

When mated with a 5spd tranny, it's the best Civic ever made. The automatic
is 'too big' for the engine and guzzles gas (my wife's automatic returns
8.8L/100km while my 5spd returns 6.8L/100km).

I tend to drive as if I'm on the race track and after 215,000km of abuse,
the car still drives like new. The tranny has gotten noisier, but it'd
require a sensitive ear to tell the difference.

Exterior is excellent and no rust, but the driver's cockpit looks like it's
gone through hell. The 3/9 o'clock hand position on steering wheel has worn
through to the softer (but more grippy) core. All the rubber has been worn
away from the clutch peddle to expose the metal underlay. The floor mat has
a large hole from my heavy right foot. The left edge of the seat has worn
through to expose it's spongy guts. The windshield is constantly dirty from
the thousands of tinny stone chips. Even with all the hard driving, all the
component in the engine is still original (except for spark plugs, timing
belt and water pump). Tranny is also all original.

Pars
98 DX Hatch (5spd)
2000 EX Sedan (Automatic)

"BE" <be@home.com> wrote in message
news:6VdLd.2433$cl1.2047@newsread3.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
> Just wondering if there are any known caveats regarding the Civic DX model
> year 2000
>
> Thanks...
>
>



Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 31 Jan 2005, 12:44 am
SoCalMike
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: 2000 Civic DX

Pars wrote:
> When mated with a 5spd tranny, it's the best Civic ever made.


really? just curious why youd say that. not that im disputing you- i
have a 98CX, 5-spd. 48k miles and i could easily see myself keeping this
car another 15-20 years. no matter how tempting the scion xA is to me!

im a big fan of the 88-91 gen civic. always have been, although ive
never owned one. i like the low cowl, wedgy profile, and that they
offered up a really nice Si hatch.

honda could have sold a lot more 96-00 hatches if theyd offered one with
an EX or integra motor, maybe a few power amenities, like windows and
locks... and a sunroof. but then whod want a integra?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 31 Jan 2005, 06:01 pm
someone
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: 2000 Civic DX


> Just wondering if there are any known caveats regarding the Civic DX model
> year 2000
>


If there are any problems I sure haven't run into them, my stock adult
driven `00 has never let me down, nothing but routine maintenance
needed, might be in the market to sell when the new & improved 2006
hybrid comes out ...


--
Rob Fruth - Houston, Tx
http://www.rfruth.net

1981 Raleigh for errands & fun ____ __o
1997 Trek 2300 for real fun ! ____ _ \ | _)
2000 DX 5 speed Civic hatchback (_)/ (_)
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 31 Jan 2005, 06:28 pm
Pars
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: 2000 Civic DX


"SoCalMike" <mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cOKdndUImuNPWGDcRVn-tQ@comcast.com...
> Pars wrote:
> > When mated with a 5spd tranny, it's the best Civic ever made.

>
> really? just curious why youd say that. not that im disputing you- i
> have a 98CX, 5-spd. 48k miles and i could easily see myself keeping this
> car another 15-20 years. no matter how tempting the scion xA is to me!
>


The 96-00 model is a perfection of design/specification that began in 1988.
The previous Civic models had a weak chassis (not suspension) and a weak
engine (ok, for normal driving but tended to fail from hard driving over the
long term). In certain areas in Toronto, every other car is a Civic and I've
yet to see a 96-00 (and up) spoiting blue smoke.

Back in 2000, it was possible to obtain a double wishbone (front & back)
for $14,000 (Canadian). Today, it will cost $25,000 (minimum) to obtained a
car with the same suspension setup (in the form of an Accord or Mazda 6).
The Accord and the Mazda 6 are the only mainstream front-drive to offer the
double wishbone suspension in the front. When compared to other sedans, the
Accord and Mazda 6 will always capture 1st and 2nd place. It doesn't make
sense that a heavy weight like the Camry can get edged-out by a new comer
(Mazda 6), unless you factoring in the capability of the suspension system.
5 years ago, it was possible to get the same kind of suspension for $14k.

> im a big fan of the 88-91 gen civic. always have been, although ive
> never owned one. i like the low cowl, wedgy profile, and that they


I've spent many hours in the 88-91 Si Hatch and raced against them countless
time. At the time, I had a 90' Corsica V6, while one friend owned a 90 Si
Automatic, and another friend owned a 91 Si 5spd. Surprisingly, the 91 Si
Hatch was able to out perform my V6 Corisca from 0 - 180 km/hr (my cut off).
I also, liked the wedgy looks and ability to look slightly down and see the
road (instead of the instrument panel).

> offered up a really nice Si hatch.
>
> honda could have sold a lot more 96-00 hatches if theyd offered one with
> an EX or integra motor, maybe a few power amenities, like windows and
> locks... and a sunroof. but then whod want a integra?


I think the front double wishbone was becoming too expensive to make, for
it's economy class. Honda needed to come up with a new mold that was less
expensive to assemble.

Also, the company made a huge mistake by putting inferior tires on the 96-00
Civic which hid the suspensions capability. Instead of getting top rankings
in the comparisons test, the car ended up mid-pack.

Pars


Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
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
Selling a 2000 Civic Hatchback (black) with a 2000 B16A2 engine Prigoci, Andrei Honda 2 0 16 Aug 2005 10:39 am
buying 97 Civic EX with 2000 Civic engine? DentedCivic Honda 2 2 11 Jun 2005 10:35 pm
2000 Civic Stereo in 1987 Civic Lennon Honda 2 2 11 Jun 2004 08:50 pm
1997 honda civic/ 2000 Civic CD radio Art Honda 3 0 26 Nov 2003 07:23 am
2000 Civic Forest Honda 3 11 12 Nov 2003 08:11 am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:52 pm.


Attribution:
Honda News | Autoblog
Powered by Yahoo Answers

Archive: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.3.2 © 2009, 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.