My Si has a DX motor!

In article > ,
says...
> Dave Garrett wrote:

> > Oh, and JT, this one's for you:
> >
> > http://www.houston-imports.com/forum...d.php?t=351953
> >
> > Too bad an engine swap is even being discussed - I'd leave it exactly as
> > is. Actually, the $3200 he spent on paint would've paid for one hell of
> > a mechanical restoration, plus a "normal" paint job.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> that's insane. don't get me wrong, it's a beautiful thing, but i want a
> car that goes - that means goes fast, stops fast, and pulls g's when
> cornering. the old cvcc's are just not on a par with the 88-91's in any
> way.

Well, yeah, but the old cvcc's are fine around-town cars - you just have
to adjust your expectations performance-wise accordingly.

OTOH, there's this:

http://ns.netmcr.com/~mdouglas/civic1200.html

I've come to the conclusion that no matter how extreme something is car-
wise, someone's probably not only thought of it already but has actually
done it. Case in point: there's a guy on the cover of either the current
or last month's issue of Super Street who has shoehorned a 700hp turbo
K-series engine into a Fit. And it's not a stripped-down race car.

Dave

In article >,
says...
> Dave Garrett wrote:

> > I've seen CRX shells, with no motor or trans, sell for more than $700.
> > Trade-in values are always ridiculously low, but I can't imagine many
> > CRX owners trying to trade them in at a dealer vs. a private sale.
> > Anyone who doesn't think $1500-2000 for a generally clean, unmodified
> > 88-91 CRX is easily attainable isn't familiar with how much in demand
> > these cars still are. A really nice one that's been well-maintained by
> > an original owner will sell for considerably more.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> no kidding. i just paid $1k for an unmodded crx - one lady owner from
> new. 105k miles. immaculate inside. 100% stock [apart from the brake
> pads]. never crashed. paint's not so great, but it's all stock. i've
> only had it a week, but already i've had two people offer to buy it!

Congratulations. That's the kind of deal you just have to be in the
right place at the right time for. What model is it, a DX?

Dave

Dave Garrett wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>> Dave Garrett wrote:
>
>>> I've seen CRX shells, with no motor or trans, sell for more than $700.
>>> Trade-in values are always ridiculously low, but I can't imagine many
>>> CRX owners trying to trade them in at a dealer vs. a private sale.
>>> Anyone who doesn't think $1500-2000 for a generally clean, unmodified
>>> 88-91 CRX is easily attainable isn't familiar with how much in demand
>>> these cars still are. A really nice one that's been well-maintained by
>>> an original owner will sell for considerably more.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>> no kidding. i just paid $1k for an unmodded crx - one lady owner from
>> new. 105k miles. immaculate inside. 100% stock [apart from the brake
>> pads]. never crashed. paint's not so great, but it's all stock. i've
>> only had it a week, but already i've had two people offer to buy it!
>
> Congratulations. That's the kind of deal you just have to be in the
> right place at the right time for. What model is it, a DX?
>
> Dave
>
>
yes, dx auto. i want auto because of a knee problem and have been
assembling parts from the 90-91 ex auto, originally so i could put the
d16a6 4pfi + auto into my 89 civic hatch. i think the crx is now the
candidate! if that goes well, maybe i'll do the b20 + auto swap from a
prelude on the civic...

On Jan 25, 2:02 pm, Tegger > wrote:

> Huh. I just replied to this thread in the other group, being unaware
> somebody would try to be clever and remove the crossposting, then continue
> the thread with info now invisible to the other group. Dumb.

Welcome to the new Improved Google Groups, where one of the
improvements is replying to postings only to the first group listed
unless you manually add the others. And to think that they're too
humble to even try to publicize this improvement.

On Jan 25, 1:59 pm, Dave Garrett > wrote:

> And yeah, I'm certainly not expecting to have any recourse at this late
> date other than never patronizing that dealer again.

Well, I doubt any dealers check every used car they sell to ensure
that it's got the right engine, any more than private buyers do. I
tried to buy a used Sentra SER from the local Nissan dealer, and they
couldn't tell me whther that car had ABS or not. They were pretty sure
it had disk brakes though; they gleaned this info from the chrome
circle impressed into the brake pedal.

"z" > wrote in
oups.com:

> On Jan 25, 2:02 pm, Tegger > wrote:
>
>> Huh. I just replied to this thread in the other group, being unaware
>> somebody would try to be clever and remove the crossposting, then
>> continue the thread with info now invisible to the other group. Dumb.
>
> Welcome to the new Improved Google Groups, where one of the
> improvements is replying to postings only to the first group listed
> unless you manually add the others. And to think that they're too
> humble to even try to publicize this improvement.
>
>



You mean Google, the company that's chock-a-block with
really, really smart PhD's? They did this?

--
Tegger

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

"Tegger" > wrote in message
...
> "z" > wrote in
> oups.com:
>
>>
>> Welcome to the new Improved Google Groups, where one of the
>> improvements is replying to postings only to the first group listed
>> unless you manually add the others. And to think that they're too
>> humble to even try to publicize this improvement.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> You mean Google, the company that's chock-a-block with
> really, really smart PhD's? They did this?
>
> --
> Tegger
>

Ah, remember that education and intelligence are distinct concepts! (It is
really mean to ask a college recruiter, "How much will my IQ increase if I
graduate from your institution?") Or maybe it's the same as the way donuts
make me smarter: after I've eaten a couple I know I shouldn't have, and
that's obviously *way* more than I knew to start with. <8^P

Mike

On Jan 31, 5:06 pm, Tegger > wrote:
> "z" > wrote groups.com:
>
> > On Jan 25, 2:02 pm, Tegger > wrote:
>
> >> Huh. I just replied to this thread in the other group, being unaware
> >> somebody would try to be clever and remove the crossposting, then
> >> continue the thread with info now invisible to the other group. Dumb.
>
> > Welcome to the new Improved Google Groups, where one of the
> > improvements is replying to postings only to the first group listed
> > unless you manually add the others. And to think that they're too
> > humble to even try to publicize this improvement.
>
> You mean Google, the company that's chock-a-block with
> really, really smart PhD's? They did this?

Well, you can't tell me they hire PhDs to answer the mail and clean
the toidies.

I've been less than thrilled re Google's "do no evil" philosophy since
they blocked my account years ago, because I had replied (in a
negative fashion) to somebody's antisemitic rant and they couldn't
figure out that it was me who had replied not me who had originally
ranted; and when I did get them to figure it out after a long series
of emails, most of which were ignored by them, "there is nothing we
can do, you'll have to start a new account from a different email
address". Me being one of the early adopters of Google when everybody
else was still using AltaVista. Humph.