88 Civic DX tranny eligibility

Hi, you may have seen some of my questions on another board, but I'm more confused than ever. I live in Montreal and have just bought a Civic from the old Honda Michelin series they used to run here. It's a 1988 DX hatchback, 6 point chromoly cage, braided steel brake lines, blueprinted 92 hp SOHC 1,5. It's otherwise stock. The thing is, I have an Si tranny. I would like to run the car in IT if possible (on top of the local series here). Before I order a GCR, I want to know if my tranny is legal. Someone said on another board that it isn't because the Si is in another class and that I should run the 4-speed. However, I also understand that you can change the final drive of your transmission in IT. Now my DX came with a 5-speed and, according to my research, all the gears are the same in the DX and Si tranny and only the final drive is different. I'm not sure about the housing. In Canada, there was a 70 hp 4-speed CX, a 92 hp 5-speed DX (what I have) and a 105-108 hp 5-speed Si. I don't know if US models were different, but it would seem to me that I could run the Si tranny on my DX and still be within the rules. Can anybody confirm or disprove my theory? I really like this transmission and would like to be able to have an IT legal car on my small budget. Thanks.

To my knowledge, the only difference between the DX and Si Tranny is, indeed, the final drive ratio.

I would go ahead and run it.

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

Neon,

The 2001 SCCA GCR ITCS lists an '88 Civic in ITC w/ a 4-spd tranny. The only '88 Civic listed in ITA is the CRX Si, not the hatchback version.

Something else that you need to look into, 17.1.4.A Purpose:

Quote:

---

<font face=\"Verdana, Arial\" size=\"2\">Improved Touring classes are intended to provide the membership with the opportunity to compete in low cost cars with limited modifications, suitable for racing competition. To that end, cars will be models, as offered for sale in the US. They will be prepared to mfg's specifications except for modifications permitted by these rules.</font>

---

You need to make sure that there's nothing uniquely 'Canadian' about the car you're buying. I doubt that it will be an issue, but it would be better to find out sooner than later.

For example, a BMW 2002 Tii is eligible in ITA, but a Ti car is not (because they weren't offered for sale in the US).

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI

The DX did have a 5-speed in the US:
http://carpoint.msn.com/Vip/Engines/Honda/.../Civic/1988.asp
How can I let the SCCA know this?

As somebody said on the other thread, you can ask the SCCA to classify the car. I gotta say, I wouldn't hold out much hope for it as the Civic w/ the 4-spd is already classed in ITC.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI

Why is it so hard to get a car like mine classified? There are dozens of these cars in Canada from the Michelin series with roll cages and everything, and none are eligible for IT, even though they're practically stock? Why won't they simply classify the 5-speed version simply because they already classified the 4-speed? The 5-speed is WAY more popular. I've e-mailed SCCA and I'll see what they say.

Maybe it's as simple as "Nobody's ever asked." That gen Civic Si isn't classed either, and there's tons of those that could fit in ITA.

If you do get it classed, I doubt that it will be in C. Those cars with 4-speeds are running well (The Zen car that won ARRC was that gen civic, if I remember correctly) in C, so you'll either get a big weight penalty, or end up in B. And it'd be interesting to see what that car, at the same weight as the C car, could do in B, now that the electronics are opened up (Opened up, and put back together within their stock housings, of course http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/wink.gif ) Hondas at the front of A B and C? The apocalypse is surely upon us.....

I don't have my GCR handy, but I thought that the 88-91 Civic DX & Si were classed as ITA cars. In addition to the DX having the 5-spd., there are obviously other differences between the DX and the CX (aka Civic std. in the US) due to the different power ratings (92 vs. 70 bhp).

Ed.

Dom, IMHO...... getting a competetive Honda product into ITB and 'keeping it there' isn't easy. There is something going on.

1.Accord... it's an ITA car!! (2002). No it's not and everyone knows that.

2.Non-Si 88-91 DX 16 val.... thats an ITA car also. It may not be classified in the ITCS but thats were it would be. If you were to build one, it would go in ITA. Period. Race shops have been asking for that car in ITB for years. Not going to happen!

3.85-87 12 val. CRX and Civic Si....BTW thats and ITA car aswell! Ok.... Honda runs about 90 HP stock, when the 240 Nissan stock has 150 HP???????? 1.5L vs. 2.4L... thats fair.

None of these cars can run with the Nissan 240, 88-91 CRX Si's. They should all be in ITB. But this would open a can of worms for the VW & Volvo guys. Please, if anyone can explain to me why I'm so wrong go ahead and try! Currently (01 GCR) there are 8 going to be nine different Honda classified in ITA. In ITB currently there are 3 Hondas classified and will drop to 2 in the 02 GCR.

I know were a little off the tranny topic, but this gets me crazy. SCCA...." if it's a Honda product with any type of competition potential put the damn thing into ITA"

SCCA will not let one manufacture (Honda) have the 'car to have' in 3 out of the 4 IT main classes. IMHO.

IT "B" stands for anything "B"ut Hondas.

John,

This is exactly why the SCCA needs to come up w/ a set of well-defined guidelines for classifying cars (and setting the spec. weights), w/ a finer level of competition adjustment (than just bumping a car to a different class).

There are obviously other things that go into determining what the spec weight of a car is than just the initial curb weight of the car. While I know VW's, I'm sure the same thing is going on w/ other models. For example, how is an ITA VW Golf 16v 60# lighter than an ITB VW Golf 8v when the 16v car has a higher curb weight? Or how is an '81 - '84 ITB Rabbit 1.7 130# lighter than an '83 - '84 ITB Rabbit GTI 1.8 when the curb weights are w/in 30# of each other?

You talk about the Nissan vs. the Honda and 150hp vs. 90hp. You neglected to add that it was 2530# vs. 1980#. There's a rule of thumb (there's that pesky term again!) that says 100# ~= 10hp. So theoretcially, the Nissan and the Honda are w/in 5hp of each other, on a weight-normalized basis.

And you forgot to mention the ITA '86 - '88 Celica GTS at ~130hp but a portly 2680#. Any wonder why nobody races one of these???

A lot of people have spoken out about how they think weight adjustmenst will 'ruin' [sic] IT. The more I read on this board, the more I feel that not having the afore-mentioned set of guidelines is what is ruining IT. Just look at some of what's going on.

ITA RX7 guys created IT7 because their cars were no longer comepitive in ITA

The guys that build the ITB Accords got boned based on somebody's crystal ball, even though the data show to the contrary

The Honda guys feel that Denver has a hard-on for them and doesn't treat them fairly (I won't go into the VW guys)

People can't get cars classified, or have them classified where it looks like they'll never have a chance (Civic EX in ITS???).

Something needs to be done. Is the formula or ratio that's been associated w/ me the best solution? I highly doubt it. Is it better than not having anything? Without a doubt. Will it work for all cars in all classes? Of course not, but how is that different from where we are now?

I've said it before, the drivers are the reason that the SCCA exists. And the IT drivers represent a large portion of the regional entries (40% - 60% depending on where you're at). There are obviously a lot of drivers that are not happy w/ the current situation. We need to work together to come up w/ a better solution and take it to Denver.

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI