What new ITB Honda would YOU choose?

R

RFloyd

New member
OK, so now in the past few months a couple of new Hondas are moved to ITB the 85-87 CRX/Civic Si, or back to ITB in the case of the 86-88 Accord. So if a person were looking to go to ITB in one of these cars, which one is the better overall pic?

Obviously the Accord has the hp/torque advantage, but is heavier and I seem to remember the Accord has really tall gearing. The CRX/Civic is lighter, and I would suspect better on brakes and tires as a result, but a little down on power comparatively but with possibly better gearing.

I can't seem to find and lap times for the CRX or Civic because when they were in ITA the event results didn't differentiate the older CRX/Civics from the newer gen ITA CRX/Civics. Lap times for the Accord are no problem since I remember both Rivergate, OPM, and P Keane ran the cars in the SEDIV for several years.

I guess my question to all the Honda/Acura guys in IT, particularly guys who have direct experience with either of these two cars, is if you were today deciding to build or buy your car again, now that these cars are classed together the way they are, would you make the same decision? Would any of the guys who built the Accord build the CRX instead if you were doing it today? Vice versa?

Pros/cons of each model?

Thanks,

Floyd, who sold the Integra and is seriously jonesing to come back to IT. The question is "in what?"

------------------
Richard Floyd
'86 Acura Integra LS #90
SCCA ITA / NASA ECHC H5
 
Originally posted by RFloyd:
OK, so now in the past few months a couple of new Hondas are moved to ITB the 85-87 CRX/Civic Si, or back to ITB in the case of the 86-88 Accord. So if a person were looking to go to ITB in one of these cars, which one is the better overall pic?

Obviously the Accord has the hp/torque advantage, but is heavier and I seem to remember the Accord has really tall gearing. The CRX/Civic is lighter, and I would suspect better on brakes and tires as a result, but a little down on power comparatively but with possibly better gearing.

I can't seem to find and lap times for the CRX or Civic because when they were in ITA the event results didn't differentiate the older CRX/Civics from the newer gen ITA CRX/Civics. Lap times for the Accord are no problem since I remember both Rivergate, OPM, and P Keane ran the cars in the SEDIV for several years.

I guess my question to all the Honda/Acura guys in IT, particularly guys who have direct experience with either of these two cars, is if you were today deciding to build or buy your car again, now that these cars are classed together the way they are, would you make the same decision? Would any of the guys who built the Accord build the CRX instead if you were doing it today? Vice versa?

Pros/cons of each model?

Thanks,

Floyd, who sold the Integra and is seriously jonesing to come back to IT. The question is "in what?"
Click to expand...


I remember somebody say that they submitted a reclassification of the 92-95 Honda Civic DX to ITB. I wonder how that car would fare against these others. I think that would be my choice.

s

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

http://www.swltech.net/gallery/
 
The other problem here is that, since there were strong disincentives to running the models that moved from A to B, prior to that move, there's no data on good examples.

It's an interesting question but regardless, I think it's going to inject some additional interest into ITB.

K
 
Originally posted by Knestis:
The other problem here is that, since there were strong disincentives to running the models that moved from A to B, prior to that move, there's no data on good examples.

It's an interesting question but regardless, I think it's going to inject some additional interest into ITB.

K
Click to expand...

Yeh, like I said the Accord is easy since people actually bothered to build it. I really haven't bothered to try and look for the ITA lap times for the now ITB CRX/Civics because I know, like you said, the "top guys" likely didn't even bother building and racing the car in the first place. However, Giles did point out that in ITA trim Trevor did pedal a 1g CRX to 1:49's in the ARRC enduro. That would be a pretty darned good ITB time. The question is how much the extra weight for ITB might hurt the chances of being able to reproduce those times.

I guess the better judge of potential for these cars (the CRX/Civic) is to take the same chassis in its ITC configuration, and try to imagine what effect the extra power of the FI engine might have on its lap times, and what potential the extra weight might take away. Essentially what we have here is a more powerful but heavier ITC car.




------------------
Richard Floyd
'86 Acura Integra LS #90
SCCA ITA / NASA ECHC H5
 
Floyd-

The MARRS results do differentiate my model year as well and go back to '97 (though I would try to find something more recent due to tire changes).

http://www.wdcr-scca.org/results/index.htm

For example, Jedd Fahnstock and Lewis Lamb were running low-to-mid 1:31's at Summit back in '01. Michael Phelps (who was driving Lamb's car) ran similar times in '02 until the car was destroyed. How the cars would do with all the extra weight I'm not sure, but since the top runners in ITB were running low 1:32's most of the year (except in the cold of October) it might still be a contender on that track assuming you don't kill your brakes and front tires before the checker.
 
I've also been contemplating the ITB Honda question. I looked back at results from my ITA days which were back when 1g CRX had a chance against 1g RX7 and MR2. Based on that info, it would seem that the CRX should be competitive, even with the extra weight. In fact, even with the extra weight, it remains one of the lighter cars in ITB.

I also looked at IT7 times. Since teh 1g was fairly competitive against 1g RX7s, it would seem like the times of current IT7s should give some idea of potential.

The good news is that parts, information, and expertise are available since the cars are essentially identical to the C cars.

I'll be curious to see the conclusions people come to. If enough of us build them, we'll have a great time.
 
I'm voting for the Civic. Just remember that the min. weight is 2130. I plan on doing some MARRS events with mine this year.

------------------
<A HREF="http://www.teambodega.com
1987" TARGET=_blank>www.teambodega.com
1987</A> Honda Civic Si (CSP)
1987 Honda Civic Si (ITA/H5)
2000 Toyota Celica GT-S (DS)
 
From our experience with the ITB Accord and the first gen CRX, I expect the Accord would qualify faster, but the CRX will finish a race in front. The Accord has so much power and weight on the front tires that overheating the front tires seems unpreventable. Randy Pobst was able lead the ARRC for several laps, then faded back as the front tires overheated on the Accord. And I know no driver better at taking care of the tires than Randy.

The ITS Prelude suffered the same fate.

But I still wish we had the Accord back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top