Questions about converting 96 Civic DX to 99-00 spec SI

[antivenom7]

I have been a lurker here for a few months. I work with Mike Spencer who races IT7 here in the southeast, and he recommended this forum. At any rate, I am investigating the possibility of racing in ITS, but don't know if what I would like to do is within the boundaries of the regs.

A little background:
-have a solid 1996 civic DX body/frame
-have a rear collisioned 99 SI.
-would like to essentially convert the 96 DX to 99 SI specs (drivetrain, rear brakes, sway bars, etc)

If I've read correctly there is no longer a VIN requirement for classing a car. The frames are identical from 96 to 99, so despite the year difference they should be identical, so i don't foresee any violation there.

Is there a problem that you guys can foresee with doing this? would I be left out of class in ITE or something wild like that?

A couple of side questions:

How competitive do you think this car would be? the engine packs a stout 160HP but an anemic 111ft/lbs with a 2430lbs class weight. Would I be better off converting to EX specs(or just purchasing an EX outright) and running ITA with 127HP & 107ft/lbs but weighing in at 125lbs less(2305lbs)?

Also, there is something in the regs that confuses me in the regulation notes for this car.

"Roll cage for cars under 2200lbs are acceptable for cars registered with SCCA before 5/1/06"

I understand what it means, but not sure how it applies to a car that should be weighing in above that.

Thanks!!
Josh Munilla

[quadzjr]

We campaigned a 99' SI for a year.. until it met it's ultimate demise at Roebling. We are currently building an EX chassis for ITA.

Competitive.. yes. But the car will not beat a well prepped BMW or RX7.

as for converting the car. The cars.. there is additional differences. The biggest issue that I know of that you didn't mention.. is the subframe, control arms, and uprights on the SI they are considerably "beefier".

You would need to source out these parts off an SI. If you are somewhat local.. We have them here.

There are also smaller changes, but that would get you started.

-The roll cage comment is as you are probalby aware of for grandfathered cages. You would have to build your car to the 2009 GCR specs coming out soon.

[R2 Racing]

Honestly, I'd think more about racing it as an EX in ITA instead of an Si in ITS. It will have a better chance of being "ARRC competitive" in ITA. Personally, I think that on paper at least, those D16Y8 powered Civic EX's at 2305lbs could make for a damn fine ITA car. Even just knowing what a H23 powered ITS Prelude Si makes at 2555lbs, it'll kill that little B16 powered Civic Si in ITS.

Plus, converting it from a DX to an EX should be pretty easy and relatively inexpensive. I imagine the only difference between the two cars is the drivetrain, which could be purchased for a lot less than you could sell that Si drivetrain for. Drop in the Y8 and go racing.

[Xian]

Honestly, I'd think more about racing it as an EX in ITA instead of an Si in ITS. It will have a better chance of being "ARRC competitive" in ITA. Personally, I think that on paper at least, those D16Y8 powered Civic EX's at 2305lbs could make for a damn fine ITA car. Even just knowing what a H23 powered ITS Prelude Si makes at 2555lbs, it'll kill that little B16 powered Civic Si in ITS.

Plus, converting it from a DX to an EX should be pretty easy and relatively inexpensive. I imagine the only difference between the two cars is the drivetrain, which could be purchased for a lot less than you could sell that Si drivetrain for. Drop in the Y8 and go racing.

x2

The EX in ITA seems like a much better option, IMO.

[Knestis]

I'm going to throw a wrench in the gears here, just for fun...

I *think* that the ITAC has received a request to consider the DX from the 92-95 generation for classification in ITB. I have personally believed that it would be a GREAT addition to the class. If it goes, the 96+ model would likely follow.

For consideration.

K

[R2 Racing]

I'm going to throw a wrench in the gears here, just for fun...

I *think* that the ITAC has received a request to consider the DX from the 92-95 generation for classification in ITB. I have personally believed that it would be a GREAT addition to the class. If it goes, the 96+ model would likely follow.

For consideration.

K
If someone sent in that request, it wasn't me. I've been talking about it for a year now, but was going to wait until after the '88-91 DX debacle got settled before sending in the request. If the 92-95 DX gets classed while the 88-91 is still at its weight, I'm assuming that it too will get hammered with too much weight. I was hoping it would get settled in time to get a 92-95 DX classification in before the end of the year too, but that's not going to happen.

[Tom Donnelly]

I'm gonna post another opinion here. Buy an already built Honda and use what you can for spares off those 2 cars. There's quite a few race ready cars out there and you could drive right away. Just my 2 cents. I'd rather drive than build but I've spent a whole lot of time wrenching on cars. Go to the track and ask around, and you'll get pointed towards a good car, most of us will talk cars to anyone who will listen, 'cause our wives and girlfriends get sick of hearing about it.

Here's an example.... (no, its not my car)

http://www.improvedtouring.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24762

Tom

[antivenom7]

thanks for the replies guys. it gives me something to think about. i was looking at some of the result from regional races in the ITA & ITS group. I feel like the car would be more competitive as an EX in ITA.

plus after thinking about what quadzjr posted, i think there might be a lot more components to the swap than i was originally anticipating.

as far as purchasing a car that is already built, i can definitely dig the advantages of this, but am one of those people that likes to know every nut and bolt on the car was turned and torqued by me. i know it will be more time and money in the long run, but i just like the satisfaction of knowing.

thanks again.

also quadzjr, i will keep you guys in mind for any parts i might not be able to locate.

[Knestis]

If someone sent in that request, it wasn't me. I've been talking about it for a year now, but was going to wait until after the '88-91 DX debacle got settled before sending in the request. If the 92-95 DX gets classed while the 88-91 is still at its weight, I'm assuming that it too will get hammered with too much weight. I was hoping it would get settled in time to get a 92-95 DX classification in before the end of the year too, but that's not going to happen.

I'm pretty confident that we've made progress on that question, Kevin. We're knocking them down in a logical order.

Moreover, we are gaining traction on the bigger questions so I'm hopeful that some of our backlog of reviews will shake loose. Watch Fastrack for official word of what the CRB decides.

K

[quadzjr]

also quadzjr, i will keep you guys in mind for any parts i might not be able to locate.

If you have any questions on setup, tuning, sourcing parts, etc.. let me know. If I can't help you I can point you to someone that can.

[Knestis]

Yup - we've got a request on the books to re-examine the '92-95 DX.

For academic discussion purposes, how does the engine technology compare with other Honda products?

K

[Xian]

It's not the same bastard child injection system that the 88-91 DX cars were saddled with. My internet based knowledge of the 92+ cars is that they're all MPFI similar to the 88-91 Si cars. The engine, cam, head, etc, etc are all different from the 88-91 Si cars though.

[R2 Racing]

I'm pretty confident that we've made progress on that question, Kevin. We're knocking them down in a logical order.

Moreover, we are gaining traction on the bigger questions so I'm hopeful that some of our backlog of reviews will shake loose. Watch Fastrack for official word of what the CRB decides.
Excellent. You don't need to convince me that you guys are always working. I personally am anxiously awaiting to see the outcome of those two DX cars. Could be two more fantastic options in an already growing class.

For academic discussion purposes, how does the engine technology compare with other Honda products?

Want me to go into here, send you an email, or should we start a new thread? I can certainly help with some of that info as I've accumulated a bit of it already.

[Knestis]

Go ahead and shoot me an email, if you don't mind Kevin?
Thanks!
K

[R2 Racing]

Go ahead and shoot me an email, if you don't mind Kevin?
Thanks!
K
Kirk, I thought I had your email address, but apparently I was wrong. I tried to find it in your profile, but all I found was this:

"Knestis has not made any friends yet"

:D

Want to PM it to me?

[backformore]

Josh,

If you get a chance, email me at [email protected] I wanted to talk to you about your Si.

Thanks
Rory

[quadzjr]

Josh,

If you get a chance, email me at [email protected] I wanted to talk to you about your Si.

Thanks
Rory

He doesn't have an SI, he has a DX :D

[backformore]

Umm.....Yes, he does have an Si. You might want to read the first post. Thanks for your input though.

[quadzjr]

I assumed his SI that he had was only mentioned for a potential power plant swap. Never really considered it a whole car.

[backformore]

I am actually interested in the wrecked Si. Josh, are you out there?