1986 Honda CRX Reviews - Page 2 of 4

1986 Honda CRX Si 1.5 from North America

Year of manufacture1986
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 1.5 Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Dealer Service marks 1 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.6 / 10
Distance when acquired220000 miles
Most recent distance259000 miles
Previous carNissan 300ZX

Summary:

A must have Primary or secondary vehicle

Faults:

Rear hub (passenger) grinding sound at 223,000.

Climate control selector acting faulty 259,000.

General Comments:

This car is extremely fun and reliable.

The engine does not leak a single drop of fluid and it has a original miles of 259,000 with original clutch! that is impressive.

Great fuel economy car. To 8 gallons of gas I get 30 city/ 35 highway.

Loads of aftermarket goodies.

Parts are still plentiful at wrecking yards.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 21st August, 2004

14th Sep 2004, 13:27

Very well written review except for one thing, there are no aftermarket goodies for the 1986 Honda CRX Si.

1986 Honda CRX Si Si from North America

Year of manufacture1986
First year of ownership1990
Most recent year of ownership1997
Engine and transmission Si Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 1 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.0 / 10
Distance when acquired60000 miles
Most recent distance120000 miles
Previous carSubaru Wagon

Summary:

FUN!

Faults:

Routine stuff for a car with like age and mileage: Brakes, rotors, master break cylinder, head gasket, wiper motor, shocks.

General Comments:

This car was a blast to drive, just point and shoot. By far the most fun driving car I have ever owned. Except when traffic on the expressway comes to a sudden halt. The CRX stops on a dime. But sitting there feeling nearly naked parked on the pavement with uncontrollable 6000 pound SUVs bearing down on you is a scary affair. Mechanically the car seemed to be well engineered or rather "value engineered" It seemed like every crease or fold in the body metal, or molding was calculated and resulted in the use of a thinner gauge metal. The paint finish did not hold up well, especially on the plastic fenders and nose which developed stress cracks. Rust was also a problem. A large rust hole developed behind the front edge of the sunroof. Even though the lower body panels looked to be in good shape and did not have visible rust, underneath the skin the car was plagued with rust. Not at all what I would expect from any car in Southern California. The interior was a puzzle of overlapping cheap plastic parts that interlock with non-reusable fasteners that break on removal.

On a few long highway trips we took with this car, we actually got 45 miles per gallon! Although around town, because it so much fun to drive hard, we go closer to 25 mpg.

I found Honda dealership to be generally dishonest. Insisting that the $180 alignment included all four wheels, when the factory authorized service manual that I just happened to access to, clearly stated that there is no adjustment what so ever on the rear wheels. A service manager was unable to explain to me why when the timing belt breaks on a Honda, it results in bent valve stems. I know now that this is common in many cars as the engine design does not allow the valve to raise up one last time after the cam stops turning. The service manager said he didn't know why the valve stems bent and that he had never seen that happen before. Although he knew exactly what to charge to repair it!

An interesting note: I keep a very accurate automotive cost records database, recording every repair, every tank of gas, as well as insurance premiums, etc. Despite the 40 miles per gallon (highway) and the ILLUSION that Hondas are low-maintenance, trouble free, inexpensive to drive cars to drive, The SAAB 900 Turbo that we owned during the same time period, same model year, same mileage, was actually about 2 cents cheaper per mile to drive over that 6 year period than the CRX was!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 24th May, 2004

22nd Aug 2005, 18:27

The reason why the Honda dealership could not perform an alignment on the rear wheels is because the 1984-1987 CRX ,All Models, came with a solid rear axel.

30th Nov 2005, 18:17

The timing belt on ANY HONDA should be replaced EVERY 50,000 miles or you risk destroying the engine when it breaks and it WILL fail eventually. Any driving you do after the 50,000 mile point is gambling with your valves!! Dont risk it, change the belt! It's about a $250.00 job, but cheaper than the 1200.00 job of rebuilding the top end when the belt brakes.

If you own a Honda, just accept the fact that you have to replace the timing belt every 50,000 miles.

Average review marks: 7.6 / 10, based on 14 reviews