Honda Car Forum

jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in news:2u-dndafI_
6NAAjbnZ2dnUVZ_h2pnZ2d@speakeasy.net:


>
> both are SWEET vehicles. even the dx goes like a bat out of tegger's
> underpants.


What are *you* doing in *my* underpants?



--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 05:56:22 -0700, jim beam wrote:

>> The DX has rear wheel discs?!?!?! This is also interesting, since on
>> Toyotas and most other Hondas, you have to move to at least the LX to
>> get rear discs.
>
> no, the 89 /doesn't/ have disks - on either model.
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>> And if you don't want it, WHERE IS IT?!?!?!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
> dude, why do you post if you're just making stuff up? electric windows in
> a crx? 89 disks? you're just being a clown.


I've had two Accords. A DX and an LX.
I was going by that. Oh, well.
Why pay the extra for a CRX if the DX is almost the same car?

jim beam wrote:

> ben wrote:
>
>> What are the differences between the DX and the other versions like
>> SI, etc?
>> I may be acquiring an 89 1 owner and am curious about the options.
>> It is all factory. No mods.
>>
> there's not a lot of difference for the 89's other than the motor.
>
> x = present, o = absent
>
> dx si
> x x tacho
> o x red trim on seats and door linings
> o x sun roof
> x x front sway bar [identical]
> o x rear sway bar
> o o rear disk brakes
>
> all interior creature comforts are pretty much identical. other than
> that, the si has 185/60-14 tires, dx has 175/70-13's, the si shocks are
> supposed to be slightly different, but you'll never notice, and the si
> has twin outlets on the muffler vs. the single on the dx.
>
> both are SWEET vehicles. even the dx goes like a bat out of tegger's
> underpants.
>
> if you want to convert to the si motor, there's a number of write-up's
> on how to do it on the net. biggest issue is the wiring. if you don't
> want to re-wire it the hard way, you ban buy a kit from boomslang.com.
>
> all-factory original crx's are rare and highly coveted. be happy!


I had an '89 crx project car, (needed an engine and left front fender).
It had no trim level designation anywhere and since it did not have a
sun roof and the engine was the 1.5, I assume that it was the basic
edition except that it did have an automatic tranny.

I never did anything to the car and got rid of it about three years ago
and have regretted it since...

JT

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 14:38:03 +0000, Tegger wrote:

> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in news:2u-dndafI_
> 6NAAjbnZ2dnUVZ_h2pnZ2d@speakeasy.net:
>
>
>
>> both are SWEET vehicles. even the dx goes like a bat out of tegger's
>> underpants.
>
>
> What are *you* doing in *my* underpants?


THERE'S a question I wouldn't ask...

Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/ wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 05:56:22 -0700, jim beam wrote:
>
>>> The DX has rear wheel discs?!?!?! This is also interesting, since on
>>> Toyotas and most other Hondas, you have to move to at least the LX to
>>> get rear discs.
>> no, the 89 /doesn't/ have disks - on either model.
>>
>>
>>>>> And if you don't want it, WHERE IS IT?!?!?!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> dude, why do you post if you're just making stuff up? electric windows in
>> a crx? 89 disks? you're just being a clown.
>
>
> I've had two Accords. A DX and an LX.
> I was going by that. Oh, well.
> Why pay the extra for a CRX if the DX is almost the same car?
>

er, because the crx is a model, not a trim level.

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 20:20:28 -0700, jim beam wrote:

> Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/ wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 05:56:22 -0700, jim beam wrote:
>>
>>>> The DX has rear wheel discs?!?!?! This is also interesting, since on
>>>> Toyotas and most other Hondas, you have to move to at least the LX to
>>>> get rear discs.
>>> no, the 89 /doesn't/ have disks - on either model.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> And if you don't want it, WHERE IS IT?!?!?!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> dude, why do you post if you're just making stuff up? electric windows
>>> in a crx? 89 disks? you're just being a clown.
>>
>>
>> I've had two Accords. A DX and an LX. I was going by that. Oh, well.
>> Why pay the extra for a CRX if the DX is almost the same car?
>>
>>
> er, because the crx is a model, not a trim level.


'K!

In article <1184161493.810750.45650@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.c om>,
ben <benmita@gmail.com> wrote:
>What are the differences between the DX and the other versions like
>SI, etc?

HF = extra light model, engine tuned for fuel economy
DX = the "normal" model (1.5L engine)
Si = the "sporty" model (1.6L engine)

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/ wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 20:20:28 -0700, jim beam wrote:
>
>> Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/ wrote:
>>> On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 05:56:22 -0700, jim beam wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The DX has rear wheel discs?!?!?! This is also interesting, since on
>>>>> Toyotas and most other Hondas, you have to move to at least the LX to
>>>>> get rear discs.
>>>> no, the 89 /doesn't/ have disks - on either model.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> And if you don't want it, WHERE IS IT?!?!?!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>> dude, why do you post if you're just making stuff up? electric windows
>>>> in a crx? 89 disks? you're just being a clown.
>>>
>>> I've had two Accords. A DX and an LX. I was going by that. Oh, well.
>>> Why pay the extra for a CRX if the DX is almost the same car?
>>>
>>>
>> er, because the crx is a model, not a trim level.
>
>
> 'K!
>
>
do us [and your credibility] a favor - don't respond /like/ you know the
answer, unless you actually /do/ know the answer. thanks.