CRX Del-sol

Chowley

Does anyone know how long it takes to retract the targa top on the Del-sol? the electric one not the manual targa.

:ninja: :ninja: :ninja: :ninja:

ondafly

some guy posted this on JSpeed , he had a link to an mpeg as well. If I recall it was about 45 seconds maybe longer ?

here might know to http://clubsol.net/

Gmodified

Roof is original idea but extremely expansive to fix. I took something like 10 months to get parts for the roof, not mentioning the actual cost. The owner of the car went totally mad and swapped the car for MX5.

Del-sol doesn't come close to old CRX

Chowley

Thanks thats not too bad the 45 secs.
I have heard of the roof problems alright,I'd put up with it.

From what I have read the del-sol with a bit of intelligent modding, good shocks springs, good tyres, roll bars and a few other pieces it is supposed to be incredible to drive.Very tempting car.

I had an Mk. 1 crx actually a few years back, when there were absolutely no crx's around noone knew what it was.Great car.

Chimaera

Hmmm, at this year's Rally of the Lakes, I followed a fairly well driven CRX through Moll's Gap and had no trouble keeping up in a 1.4 Focus - any time the road got rough I was catching right up with him, and he wasn't getting very far from me on the smoother sections either.

Chowley

He really ust have been pushing that crx to keep a 1.4 focus behind thats good driving a big achievment for the crx.

kdevitt

The most underpowered Del Sol is 130BHP, the most powerful is 160 or 170 BHP depending on whether its imported or not - if a 1..4 Focus could keep up with one, either a: The guy in the Del Sol cant drive, or B: he wasnt actually trying...

Anyway - the problems with the roof usually result in owners having to wind the roof shut manually, the manual roof version is a lighter and hence faster car - I used to have my Civic serviced by Tom Canavans, who told me that every single trans top Del Sol had come back to them because of roof faults - no exceptions... I really would avoid this!!

Chowley

Ya your right about the crx he really musnt have been trying even a bad driver could have left the focus far behind.

I met a guy recently who had the roof problem.It really did'nt seem to bother he just does it manually while hes waiting for the parts.Are all the import ones electric roof or is it the european ones.I know the americans seem to all have manual roofs anyway.

RicardoSmith

Personally I think the Mk3 has an awful cheapo plastic interior. When I sold my MkII I didn't consider the Mk3 at all. The MkI & II are vastly better. The Mk3 chassis isn't up to much either. Its not stiff enough and personally I didn't like the way it handled at all. If is a soft top you're after go for the MX5 brilliant chassis and pretty much bomb proof. If your after a Honda theres lots of Civics and Preludes which are much better than the Del Sol. Even consider a later T-bar MR2 MkII which are a lot nicer than most people give them credit for. Avoid the low powered ones though.

RicardoSmith

Originally posted by Chimaera
Hmmm, at this year's Rally of the Lakes, I followed a fairly well driven CRX through Moll's Gap and had no trouble keeping up in a 1.4 Focus - any time the road got rough I was catching right up with him, and he wasn't getting very far from me on the smoother sections either.

He was probably reading a book or something

ondafly

Import Del Sols come in both trans top and manual.

This is alot nicer than an MX5 in all fairness, plus you have the added comfort of a steel roof (security wise), with the rear window being able to open fully, so its kinda like a MX5 with a big huge roll over bar




Trans top doing stuff

kdevitt

MX5 is a bit of a hairdressers car to be honest...

I've driven both the Del Sol, and the previous incarnation of the CRX - the older CRX's interior definitely shows it age at this stage, the Del Sol has a really nice cabin compared to it..

awful cheapo plastic interior

?? All japanese cars have relatively cheap plastic interiors! You generally buy a Honda for its engine, chassis and looks - and the chassis in the Del Sol is basically shared with the EG Civic - superb handling car imho...thats if the shocks / springs are still in good nick of course

Gmodified

I can't see del sol holding value like MX5 which is also easier to resale.

OK, Interior is dated in Mk2 CRX but car looks and handles much better then Del sol which should be called Honda Breeze or something like this as has nothing to do with old CRX.

kdevitt

The Del Sol has generally held its value remarkably well -

You'll be looking at about €4000 for a 92 Del Sol in good nick, thats about the same as they were about two years ago when I was looking to buy one...

RicardoSmith

Originally posted by kdevitt
MX5 is a bit of a hairdressers car to be honest...

I've driven both the Del Sol, and the previous incarnation of the CRX - the older CRX's interior definitely shows it age at this stage, the Del Sol has a really nice cabin compared to it..

?? All japanese cars have relatively cheap plastic interiors! You generally buy a Honda for its engine, chassis and looks - and the chassis in the Del Sol is basically shared with the EG Civic - superb handling car imho...thats if the shocks / springs are still in good nick of course

Sorry but I completely disagree. The old CRX had a cabin that was made from high quality plastics very similar to the old Golf GTI MK2 I used to have and I also had a CRX Mrk II. The CRX also had that furry stuff or even leather if you got a SiR or the Irish Vtec. The Del Sol has a cabin that looks like its made from poor quality biscuit tin plastic. Its all shiny and really nasty. The chassis is not even close to a Civic. A Del Sol wouldn't hold a corner anything like a Civic and nothing like a Mrk I/II CRX.

"MX5 is a bit of a hairdressers car to be honest.." at least the MX5 is drivers car, the Del Sol is all show and not much ability, so in fact any one with an ounce of petrol in their blood wouldn't look twice at it. In fact for most petrol heads the Del Sol is the ultimate hairdresser/Max Power car and the Mx5 mucho cred. In fairness though many call it the Del La Slow , its actually quite quick in a straight line, especially the 1.6 Vtec. But its a one trick pony.

Lots of Jap cars have great interiors. The CRX I had was one of the best made interiors I've had in any of the cars I've been. The seats in particular were fantastic. You must have been in some trashed reject import. Theres a few really dodgy ones around. After the Mrk II. Hondas interior quality really went down in the Civics. The Prelude and the bigger cars seem ok though. Incidentally theres a Civic SiR with 170bhp. The one with the stupid split tailgate. Looks completely stock. 15" steel wheels. Real Q car. Absolutely nuts to drive (had a test drive once) But interior is pants that cheapo Civic one. Insurance is a nightmare on them all, which is why I got rid of mine. 3k renewals eeer NO! You want to check that out.

As for wanting the the steel roof for safety. Jeeezzz Get a pair will yah.. You big girls blouse...:D

Chowley

I have to say I much prefer the interior in the del sol to my old crx or to my friends crx , but to be honest I dont care about the interior if it bothered me Id change it..

I have never driven the del sol but the old crx was great.From all the reviews the handling is supposed to be really excellent whatever car you drove must have had ****ed anti roll bars or shocks or something.

ondafly

Originally posted by RicardoSmith
As for wanting the the steel roof for safety. Jeeezzz Get a pair will yah.. You big girls blouse...:D

Originally posted by Ondafly
plus you have the added comfort of a steel roof (security wise)

nah mate, I said for security , no one is going to slash the steel roof with a knife now are they ?

Ricardo - anyone with Petrol in their blood would not turn down this engine


And its far from an ugly car


Have I sold you yet Ricardo
altough I've been well known for my love of the REX , my friends old one - being a big favourite


As for the MX5 simply due to its popularity among women and hairdressers ! it does have that stigma attached and as such I don't think its as highly rated as it should be, with regards to performance etc.

RicardoSmith

For example it has quarter lights. The previous one didn't. Personally I'm not a fan of making newer versions of a car uglier than the old one. The design, shape is complete unresolved. Basically its ugly. Slapping on max power crap on to it doesn't make it look better. Its like a some old slapper layering on the war paint.

Its not a convertible, its not a coupe. Its doesn't handle all that well, and its quick in a straight line. For me thats not a recipe for desire. The older one was lighter, handled better, had the same engine and was thus faster. For me it looked better. It didn't have quarter lights either! What other then an overcomplicated roof design that breaks a lot, is better about the Del Sol over the previous model? Diddly squat.

Theres a lot of cars for less money that are quicker. So overall I just don't see the point of the Del Sol. Never did customers so that along with high insurance is why never sold that well.

As for secruity, you could just break that quarter light, as the window is cheaper to fix than the roof. Or as with most Honda, a screwdriver pops the door handle/locks in about 10sec. Even on the NSX. Which is most CRX's that have been modded have the locks removed. My own one had the locks popped a couple of times. ...What security.

Drive the MX5 and then tell me it not a great car. Of course if all you're into is posing.....

ondafly

I believe that the Del Sol was not intended to replace the CR-X , but moreso to be a subset of the model, hence the name CR-X Del Sol. If it was the new model, it would have just remained as the CR-X

It doesnt claim to be a convertible or a coupe (which would have rear seats, yet anther difference to the CR-X). Its an individual design, something that used to happen in the car industry. I'll agree with you on the handling, altough this seems to effect the Trans-Top models more than the manual ones. sheer weight etc. As for the roof breakage etc, well then thats why everyone recommends the manual roof, just like the old days of the Lancia X19, it takes you a few minutes but it works.

The point of the Del Sol is a fun little car, that is fast, and the roof comes off. Thats all ! its fair from practical, but I'll be happy if the missus buys one, and I can take it out for a laugh every now and again.

By the way - you should expand your mind on what modifying is possible to cars (altough I sense you are strongly against it), and quit basing your views from ideas in Max Poo and its ilk - tripe is all those magazines represent

If you have an MX5 I can try, I'll gladly give it a go, but all convertibles are viewed by the general public as a poser motor - but at the moment I'll stick to my Honda, thats been delocked for sometime, and an MX5 will be hard touched to change my mind on the best pure convertible the; S2000 altough obviously they are not in the same league and I think that brings me to my final point;

You can't really compare the MX5 to the Del Sol they are a completely different style of car.

ondafly

So Chowley - have you made your decision ?

RicardoSmith

Ok I conceed the point the Del Sol is meant to be a little fun car for amusing people. The only reason the comparision comes up I guess is due to price. Its not really meant to be a "drivers" car. In that way the MX5 is a proper convertable that is a drivers car, and one of the best on the road in fact. The older CRX only has seats in Europe and Japan in the US it didn't have seats in the back. In fact the European CRX only had lap belts in the rear so I'm be doubt full of how legal/safe seats in the rear are. That said I had three people in it at times in the past which was a little tight!

If you were buying the Del Sol for performance I think there better performing cars out there especially for the money. If you are buying it just as a fun car and to pose around in then it makes sense. But that makes it more of a hairdressers car no? Because thats the same reason most people drive the MX5 no?

Actually lots of people say the Boxster is the ultimate hairdressers car, but having driven the 3.2s I don't understand that at all. I thought it was amazing to drive. I love the s2000 myself. Love to get a drive in one of those some day. If I won the lotto I'd buy the boxster though.

I know theres lots of valid mods you can do to a car. From Grand Turismo if nothing else But the Max Power reference is what its is. Incidentally most mods invalidate your insurance buy I guess most people don't declare them anyway. But thats another story.

Chowley

Onda that lovely 89 CRX is actually belong to a buddy of mine now lovely car, but it is getting old.Christ up to Dublin in the back of that last week Fookin torture, jesus.:D

Chowley

Its not a convertible, its not a coupe

Youre dead right.Its a targa top, I think, please correct me if Im wrong.

I love the mx-5 but frankly the 1.6 is a hairdresser car looks fast has rear wheel drive but not much power, the 1.8 is nice but I have to say if you want a car to get more power out of it I would go for the del sol vti every time, I think it looks great , and to be honest the only PROPER convertible I would go for is the S2000 or maybe the boxer, offer me an F360 spider feck off give me the coupe.Thats is my opinion Im not into these cars Id much rather a car with one roof you can take off and leave it on all year round than a car with two.

I saw some amazing videos last night actually of 1000hp skyline r34's street racing in japan and evo's drifting and all that.Really amazing stuff, they are serious lunatics 200mph on public roads.But they are bloody entertaining.Ill have topost the url if only I could remember it.

RicardoSmith

Personally I'm not a someone who needs a lot of horse power under the bonnet to enjoy driving a car. Most of the time you can't use it anyway. Its only really useful when overtaking. The MX5 is not about power. Personally if you want power then I'd get a Integer 1.8 Vtec or the 2.2 Prelude or for mega power the Mr2 Turbo. Thats a nutter car. Also a T-Bar if that floats your boat. Though many dismiss that as a hairdresser car to. Which is dumb.

Chowley

The problem there is the huge cost of buying insuring and maintaining those cars.The Integra R parts from what I have heard are HUGE.But maybe when Im 35 my insurance might drop below €20 000 for the Teg R.I agree most of the time you cant use big power but, to be honest I love cars and the sound of a bloody nice engine, v-tec skyline whatever at work aural sex

ButcherOfNog

Originally posted by RicardoSmith
Personally if you want power then I'd get a Integer 1.8 Vtec or the 2.2 Prelude

make sure its the 2.2vtec prelude not the standard 2.2, lots of jap imports have that engine.

Chowley

I never even new there was a non vtec 2.2!
Seems pretty pointless if you build a 2.2 go nthe whole way.

ondafly

that rex was my friends old car, he sold it, and bought my old Integra.

Funnily enough I'm driving a 1.8 Integra at the moment, 180BHP , and as you can imagine im not interested in owning a Del Sol personally, but more for the girlfriend, so that I can take it for a spin every now and again. I'm not a speed freak, but I do love the roar of VTEC. Also all my mods are declared on insurance before anyone asks, and it gives me a huge comfort, because I know if anyone rear ends my car, they will be seriously stung.

I drove my cousins MR2 Turbo, and holy H Christ that was one fast car, too fast for me personally, you had to be extremely quick on the gears to keep up with the engine.

Also there was a 2.3 Non VTEC Prelude also, madness all that literage and no VTEC kick !

I took an S2000 for a spin last year, and that was the car for me, and hopefully in a year or two, I can get a loan for one ! it would have to be a Japanese import one also, they seem to work out at about 20K euro compared to 40K for a similiar year one here.

finally the Integra R parts aren't too expensive, a whole engine can be sourced for a 1000euro from the UK

RicardoSmith

A lot of the 2.2 and 2.2 vtecs are autos too.Its hard to find a manual one. A big engine gives lots of torque which is why they are well suited to automatics and cruising in general. Not everyone want to drive fast. Lots of people are happy just cruising about. Personally I like an engine with a lot of torque like a diesel or a bigger engine. You get tired of the smaller higher reving engines after a few years.

Incidentally the Mr2 Turbo is a great car in Grand Turismo2 (don't have a PS2) you can mod it up to serious power, mid engined means that you can hold a really tight line on the corners to stay in front, and its really cheap to buy so you can get it really early. I found its one of the fastest way to get through the licences. That said you have to get used to driving a mid engined car, which is a lot different from front engined or 2rd car.

Chowley

If your after a S2000 you should look into it yourself, with R34 skylines going for €13000, if only I could get insured, all the cars are similarily priced, check Best japan car or other websites for cars and info.

I have heard that the mr2 as extremely on the edge handling, the back will snap out at any moment and getting t back is a lottery.It is a bloody lovely car though I must admit.
Do any of ye know how the insurance companies feel about mid rear cars?

RicardoSmith

The Mr2 as all mid engined cars needs to be driven properly and with respect. Its a different technique than with front engined and 4wd drive cars. The later Mk2 Mr2's had their suspension modified to make them less "snappy" but its a trait of all mid engined cars. In the right hands it makes the car respond faster and corner quicker.

Some other cars like the 205 1.9 GTI and CRX are known for leaving the road backwards too. My own CRX was fairly lively in that regard too. As were any Mr2's I've driven.

AFAIK Insurance companies don't differenciate between front, rear or mid engined cars. Most of them don't know one car from another anyway. But the Mr2 turbo is a beast and insurance is priced accordingly.

Chowley

I never noticed any tail happiness, so to speak from my crx only understeer.Maybe it was only the mk2 crx.

RicardoSmith

Originally posted by Chowley
I never noticed any tail happiness, so to speak from my crx only understeer.Maybe it was only the mk2 crx.

Ever see any crashed ones? Front AND rear damage is usual : )

ondafly

this site is great, but you need to apply for a user name etc

http://www.isibike.com

I'm gonna hang onto the Teg for a good while , simply because I love it, after I get tired of this, I might go Integra Type R (altough not much difference) , an S2000 would be nice step up!

KoNiT

I'd go for the del sol before the mx5. but I'd hunt down a SIR for the 170bhp & 8000 revs.. (B16A2 engine ?)

You wouldn't chance an MX6?

Would you try 4wd - Lancer 1.8T?

The nose on my crx always goes first (1.6 16V), but I did have the eibachs & konis fitted to play with the suspension. I used to fling it onto a local roundabout to get it to drift & couldn't...the 205's wouldn't help.

I recognise that silver CRX (mark II) its a well kitted out 1.5 afaik & the owner is a walking database on CRX's. I met him in Dublin
Dublin

RicardoSmith

My CRX had the stock wheels and suspension, and would drift on occasion. Not very predictably either. Had a few butt clenching moments in it!!!