Rep Power: 381

there is alot of posts about what can this model run or that model run stock. but im just curious to what all the models of civcs run, like the dx,lx,ex,hx,si. i know that the ex and hx are around the same, just like the dx and lx are about the same. both manual and auto. so anybody? perferably with accurate times not just educated guesses.

 
Rep Power: 401

to be honest, an LX manual can probably run the 1/4 mile just as fast as an EX manual. the weight difference, and transmission gearing offset the extra hp the EX has.

but to answer your question, this means the LX/EX manual civic can run in the 15.8 range with a VERY good driver and great launches. (i think hwoody ran a 15.7 stock)

 
Rep Power: 363

huh? ... an LX's gearing is longer than an EX's .........

well ... alloy wheels are lighter than steelies by a few pounds, correct? ... iirc, the LX's (01-03?) had a 175/70/14 ... while the ex's had a 185/65/15 with Si rims (03+).

True the EX's have 127 crank hp and the LX's have 115 crank hp ... but aren't the factory exhaust systems free-er flowing than the LX's on the EX's? ... which would put the EX at an even greater advantage on the whp

 
Rep Power: 401

the whp isn't going to be better for one car over another just because of the exhaust. they both will lose about the same % of power to the wheels from the crank.

and yes, the LX's smaller rims/tires help, as well as the unsprung weight.

i should clarify more on the gearing. the lx/ex have the same gearing, except the LX has a more aggressive (shorter) 1st gear than the EX. again, really an LX should be able to run the 1/4 just as fast as an EX.

 
Rep Power: 0

Video? Timeslip? Proof of purchase...

A stock sI runs that, a crappy ralliart/specV/MT RSX owner runs that, how does a stock 127hp car run that? Your gonna need more than just a VERY GOOD driver to shave almost a full second off your time.

 
Rep Power: 0

^^ actually there used to be a vid, buts its been a pretty long time so i dont know if its still around.

 
Rep Power: 401

actually, he posted a video of the run itself as well as the timeslip.

and when we still showed doubt, he even took his video camera out, videotaped the thread on the forum on his computer screen, walked straight out his front door, popped the hood, and went around the car, showing it was completely stock.

so. yeah. it was proven. 15.7 stock. timeslip. video. period.

 
Rep Power: 401

we've seen plenty of stock ex MT owners here go 16 flats. how is 16.0 to 15.7 a full second??

 
Rep Power: 0

Video, Timeslip, Proof of purchase...

A guy on here tears apart his car (not stock anymore), runs a 15.7, does a few more tearing, adds DR... makes 15.1. A bone stock civic runs 15.7, I do a search and come up with nothing, surely there has to be a thread or the vid/timeslip still floating around here, cuz that's truely amazing for a stock d17. Also just cuz a bunch of guys run a 16.0 doesnt mean all vics run 16.0. As just being here the past couple months , ive seen more thread of stock MT vic running around 16.5, and no threads of stock vics running anything less than 15.7

There is a assload of vics around my area modded and stock, we have a local meet every friday night, NON of the (stock) vics have taken a (stock) sI, but I know... it can happen thou.

Not bs'ing, but show me otherwise...

 
Rep Power: 401

you can't say a stock MT civic is a 16.5 car just because some worse off drivers run those times. in general, when you are bench racing, or talking about a car, you talk of the best or near best that the car can perform. in the case of the civic it's a 15.7-16.0. that would be the best times with the best drivers, indicative of what the car's true performance is capable of.

and hwoody's car was completely stock. no weight reduction, no aftermarket parts, no power steering removal, nothing.

and this was quite a while ago, so it doesn't surprise me you can't find the thread, considering after a while, the threads get archived. so you will simply have to take our word for it. like it or not, that guy ran a 15.7 in a stock civic and proved it to everyone with video footage and a timeslip.

 
Rep Power: 401

What it means is all civics are CAPABLE of those times. don't blame a car for a bad driver just because the best the person driving can muster is a 16.5.

i suppose next you'll tell me not all S2000's can run 13's??

 
Rep Power: 305

I heard EX has a shorter final-drive ratio, I wonder if that helps it.

 
Rep Power: 401

the NEW 2005 civic has a shorter FD on the ex. the previous generations were 4.11 to my knowledge.

 
Rep Power: 363

http://www.thinkthelen.com/honda/civc.shtml

yeah, final drive has always been 4.41 for the 7thgen ex's

 
Rep Power: 330

lx tires are 185/70/14. but it always has come down to the driver for time. even modded, people with identical mods can have large variances in times. maybe more so, when dealing w/ additional power it can make the launch more difficult.

 
Rep Power: 401

no... it hasn't

http://www.new-cars.com/2003/honda/h...upe-specs.html

those specs listed on your website are for the new civics. 2005+ i believe.

 
Rep Power: 401

and here's the 2004

http://www.new-cars.com/2004/honda/h...upe-specs.html


not until 2005, did the ex get a final drive of 4.41

 
Rep Power: 363

I don't think this site is correct ... because the 2003 EX's didn't come with "15" wheels w/ covers"

even the 2002 version on your site http://www.new-cars.com/2002/honda/h...fications.html it says the EX came with 4.41 final drive

 
Rep Power: 401

i suppose it's possible they incorrectly stated the FD. so far i haven't seen any official 2003 2004 civic specs though that state otherwise?

 
Rep Power: 363

neither have I ... I guess the only way to find out is to break open the 2 trannies and start counting teeth

(no thx)

 
Rep Power: 330

or maybe someone has a helms manual? that sounds a lot easier.

 
Rep Power: 330

http://www.hondaautomotiveparts.com/...gry5=MAINSHAFT
http://www.hondaautomotiveparts.com/...+++++MAINSHAFT
4th and 5th gear are same part #'s, 3rd is different, so it appears that whoever said there are differences btwn 01 and 05 is correct

 
Rep Power: 363

your argument isn't concrete because you're looking at LX transmissions while we are arguing the final drive of EX transmissions

 
Rep Power: 330

05 and 01 EX have different 3rd gears too

 
Rep Power: 363

I don't think so. they probably changed the part #'s according to the tsb's

I recorded the Part #'s for the 3rd gears and Mainshafts from the different trim/years:

Mainshaft:

01 LX 370778
05 LX 370778
01 EX 370779
01 EX 370779

3rd Gear set:

01 LX 370780
05 LX 1778207
01 EX 370780
05 EX 1178207

which means that the 3rd gears are the exact same for their respected years. Which means that the transmission itself changed, however the part #'s for the 3rd gear sets between trim levels did not ... which means ... the 3rd gear set has nothing to do with the 1st gear (obviously)

 
Rep Power: 0

WERD!

 
Rep Power: 330

yeah now the more i look, the more it does look like the 01 and 05 do have the 4.41 FD, lx with the bigger 1st. i guess it makes sense that they wouldn't change anything that major btwn 01 and 05.

 
Rep Power: 363

-_-;; ... lx has the 4.11 fd ... ex with 4.41 with bigger 1st

 
Rep Power: 330

ex is 3.143, lx is 3.462. 1st

 
Rep Power: 363

the smaller the number, the bigger the gear