On 08:12 PM 07/30/02 +0100, obob said... >hi i need to know loads about the crx vti possibly a >1993 - 1998 del sol model 160bhp. > >is it really as fast as the same age mr2 mk2 gt.
It will give the MR2 a run for it's money, but the MR2's overall horsepower will eventually overtake the CRX. This is "straight line" racing, that is. In an Auto-Cross (AutoX) or similar course where there are lots of tight turns and fairly short straights, and depending on the driver's skill level and experience, the CRX would most likely out-do the MR2. But it will still be close. The MR2 will have another advantage in that it's mid-engine car so it will perform very will under such racing conditions. It's one weakness would be it's weight. But like I mentioned earlier, the overall horsepower will (should) compensate for this. >and can it go faster without loads of stuff like new >engines and all that stuff. No... Not really... >can it be turbo charged and will the chassis take it Yes. I don't know what is available over in England. >where can i see a real one Here in the States (California for instance), all you have to do is attend any of the Import Nights or Import Daze events. It probably won't be a CRX VTi but it will be a similar engine in a Civic or Integra. >i live in birmingham england I have a friend that lives out in Dunstable England. But she's more into BMW's.... :^) >my email is [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >i am really interested in this car It's a good car. The power-to-weight ratio is excellent. Many of us out here in the States envy you folks across the pond! :^) Don't mistake what I said earlier... it may not be able to beat a MR2 in stock form, but it's by no means a slow car. There's a lot going for the MR2's in general. It has the advantage of being developed as a true-sports car. The CRX is a sports like car and has always been a debate as to whether or not it was intended to be a true-sports car. I suppose that all depends on your definition of "sports car". The CRX does, for the most part, meet a lot of the basic sport car requirements. But from my earlier talks with Honda of Japan (back in 2000), some of the people who were part of the CRX development informed me that the CRX really was meant to be an economic "fun" sport like car. It was never intended to be a sport car. The S2000, on the other hand, is. Whatever your definition of sport car is, the CRX is a contender and it doesn't take a lot to improve on it without sacrificing reliability. It's also a relatively inexpensive car to own. Because I have a somewhat biased opinion, I would say go with the CRX VTi although I do like the MR2's. But if I were to get an MR2, it would HAVE to be a twin Turbo (Intercooled, of course...) version. :^) >whats the differences with an import and a uk car I believe engine. I assume that when you say "Import" you are referring to "Japanese Import". >does the paint fade on an import Only if it wasn't properly cared for. Otherwise Honda uses good paint. >is the metal thinner or something I don't believe so. Although I've never actually given it much thought before. Robert K. Kuhn CRX Owners Group President (http://www.crx.org/southcal) 1990 Honda CRXsi (http://drive.to/jiggy) ICQ # 3714283 (nickname: godzilla)
