88-91 CRX DX, which IT class?

Kinda curious where a 88-91 CRX DX goes. I see civic hatch DX goes in ITC. But I dont see any specific mention of 88-91 CRX DX. Is it ITC or ITA?

[This message has been edited by Tyson (edited October 24, 2001).]

I believe 88-91 CRX DX is also in ITC!
I think you have to contact SCCA for permission for the classification.
"Something like that"?

In the Southeast region, the 88-91 CRX DX has been classified as ITA. This lumps it into the same class as the Si. Just curious, how could a DX compete with an Si?

I think you all have the wrong Honda Civic in ITC. The classification is for the 88-91 Honda Civic base model, not the DX. The base model has the same 1497cc motor as the DX but 72 instead of 90 some HP. Both are a 16valve SOHC model with the same valve sizes. One would have to assume that the block is the same, considering the displacments (bore and stroke) are the same and the Compression Ratios are the same.

On the 88-89 Honda Civic Base models it uses Throttle Body Injection (TBI) and on the 90-91 it was changed to MultiPort, same as the Si's. This is also true for the DX model. And, the base model uses the same brakes as the SI model

So, where is the HP difference created at. My guess is the DX has a hotter cam and computer and a 5 speed tranny. Regardless, I doubt the SCCA will classify the hotter DX along with the base model in ITC and I think the DX my be too potent for ITB also, in either flavor (Civic or CRX) The nice thing is that the majority of parts that fit onto a ITA CRX fit onto the ITC base Civic. I would expect to see more of these, especially now with computer programing allowed.

------------------
Brent Breon
Cendiv ITA #26
www.360racing.com

So in which class is the 88 Civic DX hatchback then?

I think you guys should press SCCA into re-classifying the CRX DX into ITB. It is not a contender in ITA, but could do some damage in ITB. (especially when there are no Hondas in ITB anymore)

I tried to get the Civic Dx classified in ITB before I had the Accord classified. The Comp Board simply said "potential". They also said that the DX would be almost as fast as the SI. You already know what happened to the Accord.

So what CRX races in ITC? Lord please dont tell me HF... I thought I've seen CRX's race in ITC... maybe I am wrong. I'm actually talking only 2nd gen CRXs.

I am still curious also?
So really the 88-91 CRX DX has not even been classed?
Can you put the Si motor in the DX and run ITA?

I'd like to know if one of the hotter motors can be put in the Civic (not CRX) DX HB and still keep it in its specified class?

Thanks!

------------------
--
97 Dakar M3/4, sharked, xbraced

If you don't have a copy of the SCCA GCR (rule book), you can get a quick overview of car classifications at...

http://toyota.shults.com/cgi-bin/scca/scca.cgi

Recent additions are not provided here and none of the specs (e.g. race weight) are offered but it is a good place to start.

The rule of thumb is that you may update/backdate assemblies among years/models listed on one line of the GCR. Generally, if you are thinking that you can put a hotter engine in a given model, you probably can't, to either make a car more competitive in its class or to move it to another class - that would be too easy!

I am just getting this Honda stuff figured out but, for what it is worth, the 92-95 Civic DX (102 hp) seems to have been recently classified in ITA. It is probably easiest to get a classification of a new model/year if something with the same specs has already been listed. (My guess, not any kind of assurance!)

Kirk

Would that classification have any bearing on a 90 Civic DX HB?


-matt


------------------
--
97 Dakar M3/4, sharked, xbraced

Hey, Matt. Did you follow up on that '90 DX hatch? The '02 GCR confirms that it is eligible for ITA, at 2225 pounds. My math says that it is a REAL underdog but I thought I should check and see what your current plans are.

I'm going to be helping out at the NASA event on 16 February, at VIR. If you are going to be there, we can make plans to say hello.

Kirk