1989 Honda CRX Reviews - Page 3 of 8

1989 Honda CRX 1.6 16v from UK and Ireland

Model year1989
Year of manufacture1989
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.6 / 10
Distance when acquired84000 miles
Most recent distance89000 miles
Previous carCitroen ZX

Summary:

The fastest N/A 1.6 ever!!!

Faults:

Nothing much!! Routine maintenance i.e. the distributor cap, rotor arm and spark plugs!

General Comments:

I have only had the car a few months. A cliche yes, but it is the best car I have ever owned, by far! Nothing comes close. Driving my mum's mk4 Golf feels as if it is so disconnected!! Is it dead? You feel everything through the wheel. In the CRX - you are the car!!! New tyres and your arms get tired, you have that much grip!

I consider it the modern classic that you can hammer!!! Give it the punishment and it just rewards you!!! Awesome!

Mine is special, 89K, two owners, and I race the VTECs!! They say it is quicker, and it is, but only marginally, not as much as they say! Up to 140mph, my mate in the VTEC pulled maybe 5m max (extra 20bhp standard and filter and exhaust), (I was on his bumper (draughting)) so wow, is it worth the extra £1000 for the type of condition and engine, I severely doubt it!! The d16a9 has manic top end shove, it is like the VTEC, but cheaper! The VTEC has a gradual 3000rpm shove, yet the 16v has 2000rpm, which is awesome by yourself with no fuel!!! And in today's standard spec, can still have the diesel specs for dead!!! The Golf TDI 130, 150bhp mk4, it eats them, same till 4000rpm, then the Rex just leaves them for dead!!!

REPS beware, you have no idea when it says 1.6 on the back!!!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 17th November, 2005

1989 Honda CRX Si 1.6 from North America

Model year1989
Year of manufacture1989
First year of ownership1990
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.6 Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.8 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance370470 miles
Previous carHonda CRX

Summary:

This is a really great car

Faults:

I purchased this vehicle new as a left-over in Feb of 1990. The timing belt broke at 102,000 miles. At that point, the dealer informed me that the timing belt was a required change at 92,000 miles.

The radiator was replaced at 220,000 miles.

Front brakes are disks, rear are drums. Front brakes were replaced about every 50,000 miles.

Alternator was repaired at 250,000 miles.

After 12 years, the vehicle rusted inside the rear passenger side wheel well. Water would enter the vehicle after driving through large puddles in rain storms. This water would flood the passenger side front and get the computer wet (on 2 occasions). The vehicle would shut down when the computer got wet. However, once the water vacated the computer, the vehicle ran just fine.

The interior cargo cover (which gave the area under the hatchback some privacy), ripped apart at the seams after about 10 years.

The plastic mechanism beneath the heater (rotating) knob had to be replaced twice.

The seat had standard wear of a vehicle that was used heavily everyday for 13 years.

The muffler was replaced twice at 6 and 11 years.

The vehicle started to rust in the sun-roof. However, no water entered the vehicle because of this.

The vehicle began to rust after 12 years behind the rear wheel wells on both sides.

General Comments:

This is the best car I've ever owned. At 370,469.8 miles, I had a near head on collision where the vehicle was totaled. I suffered knee injuries, and a pounding to the chest because the seat belt did it's job - but otherwise I was fine. All this goes to say that this is a very well built car.

With that many miles, the insurance adjuster thought the car would only be worth $200. However, after checking 5 different sources at the time, the average value of the vehicle was $4,500. Yes, that's Four thousand-Five hundred dollars om 2003. This car holds its value well.

I kept the book on fuel fill-ups from the first fill after I purchased the vehicle to the last. This car was rated at 29/33 mpg. I got as high as 39 mpg and as low as 29 mpg. Under normal driving conditions, I got 33 mpg.

This car accelerates well and hold it's own on the highway. One of the best features of this vehicle is that it is easy to find parking because of it's size.

Insurance rates on this car was very favorable.

Although my vehicle was primarily dealer maintained, I did my own oil changes and in the last 100,000 miles, I did the brakes (twice).

This vehicle has the carrying capacity of a small truck. I've had a 16 gallon vacuum cleaner and a size-able pressure washer along with other items in the rear. This vehicle is equipped with a secret storage compartment behind the seats.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 15th September, 2005

29th Aug 2007, 20:11

Thank you for a wonderful write-up. This comment of yours made up my mind about which car to buy next. Only question: would a 6 foot guy fit into one of these little Hondas?

2nd Jul 2010, 10:51

I'm 6'ft and 180lbs. I fit good; there's even about 2.5 inches above my head, and I don't slouch.

Average review marks: 8.4 / 10, based on 31 reviews