Look at these fast civics! Makes me want to sell the stang.

#81
Strype said:
Mustang = Faster
Mustang = Cheaper
Cheaper + Faster = FTW

FTW is good for everyone :nice:
Click to expand...

Thats what I thought when I bought it.. Right now I am trying to solve the hot running issue. Its just been one thing after another with this ride. Still, it uses a LOT of gas compared to the other ride, so it will never be a DD for me. Faster? Not yet. I have 2.73's. I wanted 3.73's but wound up with 3.27's. Not sure if its worth my time to put those in. Right now, i'd say the stang is around high 14's. Don't have time anymore to hit the track up, or I would. Just seems that its so damn hard to get 12's or even 13's without a cam, heads, supercharger, etc.
 

  • Sponsors (?)


#82
I have the 2:73's also... man that thing is a dog in town and sucks a lot of fuel... I put a 4 banger tranny and 3:73's in my hatchback, that thing took less fuel than my ZX2 (zetec 2.0L) in town. Highway was a joke though, well it was more sad than funny...
 
#83
Yeah, u think it is hard to hit 12s with having to do cam, heads, or supercharger, look what you have done to your civic, JUST to make it run 13s or w/e you said it runs. Engine swap, turbo... I could do an engine swap, an old 351 with a DIY turbo, hello low elevens- high 10s.
 
#84
5.0's don't get bad gas milege at all. Mine, with gear, full exaust, cam, ported heads, intake, wider tires, I was averaging about 20mpg highway and city. I think the extra gas is worth driving a mustang instead of an econobox. Same with my silverado, compare it to an econobox, you can't. People drive too stupid for me to drive an econobox. A V8 is a nice battering ram. Ever see a civic hit by another even average sized car? Save gas, go ahead, I'm saving my head.

Also, no matter what you do to a civic, you'll never have the feeling of torque. We can be in high gear, punch the gas and actually feel something. Small displacment motors can't do anything uness the RPM's are way up.
 
#85
My dd is a little Suzuki hatch back. I like the car just fine, but I can't say I would do any thing to it. It gets 40mpg and has air. It is a fun car to drive, but if I want to go fast I jump in one of the Stangs.
 
#86
all econoboxes fall apart, and they are not worth getting fixed. Last year when my mom rearended an asian guy in my mustang, I needed a fender and a bumper, his car was totaled, the friggin bumper almost fell off, and the whole rear end and quarter panels were trashed. And in my sig are a few pics of the damage to my car, very minimal. NVM you can't even see it in the pic.
 
#87
grey5.0beast said:
Yeah, u think it is hard to hit 12s with having to do cam, heads, or supercharger, look what you have done to your civic, JUST to make it run 13s or w/e you said it runs. Engine swap, turbo... I could do an engine swap, an old 351 with a DIY turbo, hello low elevens- high 10s.
Click to expand...

I hate to point this out... but its not really an engine swap when its a STOCK Civic engine that came in the Si hatch that year, is it? lol. It cost me $400 for the engine, tranny, ecu, wiring, etc. The turbo kit was $1,200. Total of $1,600 and it runs mid 13's on low boost. It gets 28mpg in the city, who knows what on the highway. I drive city everyday. We are comparing apples to oranges. Problem is, I was willing to open my mind and try more then one platform (hence why I own two Mustangs). You guys on the other hand could never accept that something with 4 less cylinders and far less displacement might actually be "quick"..
 
#88
90mustangGT said:
5.0's don't get bad gas milege at all. Mine, with gear, full exaust, cam, ported heads, intake, wider tires, I was averaging about 20mpg highway and city. I think the extra gas is worth driving a mustang instead of an econobox. Same with my silverado, compare it to an econobox, you can't. People drive too stupid for me to drive an econobox. A V8 is a nice battering ram. Ever see a civic hit by another even average sized car? Save gas, go ahead, I'm saving my head.

Also, no matter what you do to a civic, you'll never have the feeling of torque. We can be in high gear, punch the gas and actually feel something. Small displacment motors can't do anything uness the RPM's are way up.
Click to expand...

I suppose 20 isn't THAT bad... but when you get 28 and go to 20, its a big jump. I have 4 kids and need all the money I can get as it is. Just can't afford to drive the Mustang everyday. Doesn't mean I don't like driving it, just means gas adds up. Civics have excellent crash test ratings, I have no fear of losing my head.

We are comparing apples to oranges here with the whole torque arguement. I certainly hope your 5.0l v8 can out torque my 1.6l Something serious would be wrong if it couldn't. You guys are stuck on the whole comparison thing. I'm not trying to start an import vs domestic war here. I am trying to open your minds a little to accept that maybe something else besides your beloved Mustang can be quick. You just don't want to accept it, and thats fine. You have your Mustang, I have mine. But I am also not going to limit myself to one platform. I understand that one car can't have it all.
 
#90
I think modifying compact FWD 4cyl cars like Civics is a waste of time and money.

Who cares how fast you can make one go.At the end of the day they still look gay and sound like a loud wet fart going down the road.

I never liked driving compact cars of any sort.Modifying one for me is totally out of the question.
 
#92
grey5.0beast said:
Yes 4 a 4 cyl that is quick, but I don't think u get what I am saying, I could take a lightning 351 from a 1994 for a few hundred bucks, drop it in and go 12s, with no boost.
Click to expand...

Thats fine. I'm working with the engine that came in my 5.0. I don't want to swap in a 351. I can't see it being that quick either. I researched modular swaps and it seems even with those, mid 13's are about as quick as it is in a fox. Of course, thats a stock modular, but still. I have a chance to score a 2001 Cobra engine for a g. But to do all that work and in the end only have mid 13's just doesn't seem worth it to me.
 
#93
So, your as save in a civic as a suburban or a silverado? Crash test ratings don't take in account many factors. If we had a head on colloision at 40mph, I would probally walk out of it and you wouldn't probally walk again if even survive. Your civic t-bones my truck, you'll go under and probally end up being decapitated when it goes under, while I might have a few bruises, and if I t-boned your civic, my truck would go right inside your car, and I would probally walk out unless the wreckage of your car was wrapped around my doors and I may not be able to open them. But then, we compare to mustangs here, mustangs won't fair too much better except from the front end, the V8 is a good battering ram.
 
#94
Cman88 said:
I hate to point this out... but its not really an engine swap when its a STOCK Civic engine that came in the Si hatch that year, is it? lol. It cost me $400 for the engine, tranny, ecu, wiring, etc. The turbo kit was $1,200. Total of $1,600 and it runs mid 13's on low boost. It gets 28mpg in the city, who knows what on the highway. I drive city everyday. We are comparing apples to oranges. Problem is, I was willing to open my mind and try more then one platform (hence why I own two Mustangs). You guys on the other hand could never accept that something with 4 less cylinders and far less displacement might actually be "quick"..
Click to expand...

If you take another motor from another car whether it's the same model it's still and engine swap. So by you stating it's not, then that means I can swap a 427 into my fox because it came from an older mustang, still a mustang, and it's not an engine swap. :shrug: Sounds good to me than....
However, you stated you put $1,600 into your civic and it runs 13's, I put a nitrous kit which is $500 and run 12's. There is no comparison between a honduh and a mustang. Who wants a street car that begins making power at 4,000rpms???? I sure as hell don't! Let alone you spent that much for 13's....money REALLY begins to get expensive once you go faster with the honda compared to the mustang.
 
#95
90mustangGT said:
So, your as save in a civic as a suburban or a silverado? Crash test ratings don't take in account many factors. If we had a head on colloision at 40mph, I would probally walk out of it and you wouldn't probally walk again if even survive. Your civic t-bones my truck, you'll go under and probally end up being decapitated when it goes under, while I might have a few bruises, and if I t-boned your civic, my truck would go right inside your car, and I would probally walk out unless the wreckage of your car was wrapped around my doors and I may not be able to open them. But then, we compare to mustangs here, mustangs won't fair too much better except from the front end, the V8 is a good battering ram.
Click to expand...


That would be like me asking you if I hit your Silverado with a locomotive, it would impale the silverado and prolly put it into several hundred pieces, including you. So your silverado sucks and is unsafe, right?
 
#96
ms93gt said:
If you take another motor from another car whether it's the same model it's still and engine swap. So by you stating it's not, then that means I can swap a 427 into my fox because it came from an older mustang, still a mustang, and it's not an engine swap. :shrug: Sounds good to me than....
However, you stated you put $1,600 into your civic and it runs 13's, I put a nitrous kit which is $500 and run 12's. There is no comparison between a honduh and a mustang. Who wants a street car that begins making power at 4,000rpms???? I sure as hell don't! Let alone you spent that much for 13's....money REALLY begins to get expensive once you go faster with the honda compared to the mustang.
Click to expand...

Come on, I KNOW you guys are more intelligent then this. We can't compare the cost of a turbo kit to a nitrous system. Anyone knows that nitrous is the cheapest route. I could have easily spent the same money on a nitrous kit and ran the same times as I do with the turbo. The turbo won't run out on my however.

Also, read what I wrote a little more closely. The engine is from a 93 Civic Si, in a 93 Civic CX. Did you have a 427 available in 93 or whatever year your stang is? Didn't think so.
 
#97
Cman88 said:
Come on, I KNOW you guys are more intelligent then this. We can't compare the cost of a turbo kit to a nitrous system. Anyone knows that nitrous is the cheapest route. I could have easily spent the same money on a nitrous kit and ran the same times as I do with the turbo. The turbo won't run out on my however.

Also, read what I wrote a little more closely. The engine is from a 93 Civic Si, in a 93 Civic CX. Did you have a 427 available in 93 or whatever year your stang is? Didn't think so.
Click to expand...

No but the cobra had an upgraded 302....could use that then. IF you run the same times with nitrous as appossed to a turbo than your car has issues, o wait it does, its a honduh.
 
#98
ms93gt said:
No but the cobra had an upgraded 302....could use that then. IF you run the same times with nitrous as appossed to a turbo than your car has issues, o wait it does, its a honduh.
Click to expand...

It would probably be easier to simply transfer the intake manifolds, MAF, and rockers, etc.. I don't think I'd do the whole swap in that case.

The names don't bother me. I've matured past that point in my life.
 
#99
Cman88 said:
The stock bottom end is capable of handling approx 250hp. Thats more then enough to put a 2,200lbs chassis in the 12's with traction. Add some forged pistons and some Eagle rods and you have enough to hold over 400 to the wheels. It cost me about $500 for pistons/rods, the labor is free.
Click to expand...


YAY!! :banana: :banana: and you still have a car that sounds like a weed wacker with a huge funny looking muffler
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
New
Hot
Menu