// 1982 Honda Civic FE - Page 4
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 67
  1. #31

    the battery units lose their

    the battery units lose their warranty after 100k miles the problem is that they cost up to 4k which is the same value of the car

  2. Remove Advertisements

  3. #32

    Actually the early 80's CVCC

    Actually the early 80's CVCC Hondas were about the cleanest carberated cars made not quite a LEV but many times cleaner than the cars of the 70's. My 1984 Accord at 150000 miles was still below 5ppm HC and the CO and NOx and other readings were always very low until I tested it in 2002. It failed until I treated the carb with carb cleaner then it was as low as before. I drove 2500 miles a year at that point and suspect that is one of the reasons the carb gummed up.

  4. #33

    I also bought a 1983 1300FE

    I also bought a 1983 1300FE and found it to be THE BEST CAR I have ever owned. If I could buy another today, I would.

    I kept meticulous records of every fill-up and got 55 mpg on the highway (46 mpg in the city) -- real mpg, not bastardized epa numbers. I cringe when I hear car companies advertizing their fabulous "30 highway-mpg" numbers.

    When I went to get my emmisions tested (mid 80s), the person testing the car told me that I had to turn my engine on and let it idle. It was on. The emmisions were so low the tester could not believe the car was running!!

    It was, in fact, the safest car in its class when I bought it. The fact that it loses in safety to the Abrhams tanks being driven around today is not a poor reflection on it, rather on a short-sighted society who will be pining in the not too distant future, "Where is my cheap gas? Why isn't the government doing something to get me cheap gas? I want, I want, I want..."

    Yes, I too had to help push it uphill, but it was worth it -- to me, to America, to the world.

  5. #34

    My friend had a Civic FE

    My friend had a Civic FE back in the mid 80's . I had a Nissan Stanza, he loved it got way better fuel economy than I did. By the way he could also chirp his tires when shifting from first to second. The car was fun and I would buy one today if I could.

  6. #35

    I also had the very same

    I also had the very same Honda Civic. It was awesome! I remember only filling up once a month. As far as power, you could jack rabbit that sucker with now problem. It was a lot of fun. I drove it to Florida doing a cool 75 miles per hour with no issue. Steady and smooth. Its a Honda! Great through the Mountains. It was a five speed and 0 to 60 was no problem. It is close to the power of a current Civic LX. They companies have us so snowed that even I forgot about the amazing gas mileage and performance of that car. I now drive an Infiniti that gets 25 miles per gallon, what a waste.

    I have to agree that this was one of the best cars I have ever owned as well.

    I only wish that today's auto makers could come up with something with those high of standards.

  7. #36

    This thread reminds of an

    This thread reminds of an article I just recently wrote for the Examiner.
    My friend Kyle is the author of the site and I occasionally write some articles for him.
    Read on..
    I’m sure this subject has been covered by others with much more educated minds than mine, but with the price of gas I want to throw in my two cents.

    Thirty-six years ago in 1972 Honda released its first small car here in the U.S. market. The Honda Civic with its 1169cc four-cylinder engine that put out roughly 50 horsepower in a car that weighed about 1500 lbs. These cars were regularly getting 40 miles per gallon.

    In 1985 Honda also released the CRX HF (High Fuel Economy) version with a 1500cc engine with 58 horsepower that was getting 52 mpg.

    Let’s also throw in a few other “classic” cars from the same era that were pulling down some fairly comparable mpg figures. Do you remember the Mazda GLC, Dodge Colt and the Ford Fiesta? They were all listed as getting in the low 40 mpg range (all gas engine cars, no diesels).

    Now for 2008, the Honda Civic is listed as achieving 34 mpg with an 1800cc engine that puts out 140 horsepower. There is quite a large handful of other cars (Scion XD, Pontiac Vibe, Kia Rio, Hyundai Accent and Ford Focus to name a few) that are listed as achieving mpg numbers in the low to mid 30’s with engines from 1.6 to 2.0 liter and horsepower figures from 110 -140 range. It seems that if we want a car with mpg numbers in the 40’s we have to look at purchasing one of the new hybrid automobiles.

    Automotive technology has come a long way since 1972, especially if you look at the horsepower numbers of the current automobiles and don’t take this wrong, horsepower is nice - there is still a thrill to be had in a sprint from 0 – 60 in 7 seconds or less.

    Automobile manufacturers have invested a ton of money and time to get this type of performance from today’s engines. They also have had to meet much stricter emission standards so it is obvious that the technology advances must be incredible.

    So, with that being said, why is it that we had cars reaching 40 plus mpg thirty-six years ago and now to get that kind of gas mileage in your car you have to buy a hybrid? You would think that with the amount of technology available today that higher fuel economy is achievable without having to go hybrid?

    If the fuel economy numbers would have advanced at the same rate as horsepower figures have, we could conceivably have cars that would be getting around 80 mpg. What are manufacturers doing to help increase the economy of their cars? Where will we be in the next 30 years?

    At today’s fuel prices would you be willing to forgo having a little 4-cylinder engine in your car cranking out 140 horsepower, for a car that gets even 60 mpg?

    I welcome your comments or car questions at my auto web site: www.DriveTheBestBook.com.

  8. #37

    I had an 82 civic FE and I

    I had an 82 civic FE and I drove it like I stole it. It always got 40mpg. Sure it didn't have alot of power but it was enough to go anywhere. It was alot stonger than my 66 bug with it's 30hp engine.

  9. #38

    Have you ever owned one? I

    Have you ever owned one? I have an 83 civic S It moves nimble and fast to 50 mph cruises 75-80 easy on the hwy..

  10. #39

    I had an 1982 Civic FE, I

    I had an 1982 Civic FE, I did 57mpg on highway. Was a great car. Top speed 83mph on the 5th speed but 98mph on the 4th speed. Acceleration was ok and i still not understand why 26 yeard later i can't find a gas car like the FE???? Was too good????

  11. #40

    I still have an 83 FE that I

    I still have an 83 FE that I have owned for five years. I worked on a construction project at Crater Lake a couple of years ago and would make the 400 mile trip from corvallis weekly. I am surprised to see the reports saying it was a slug. It has a great cruising speed of 75 to 80mph. Mine has 221,000 miles and I usually drive like hell and get about 50 mpg on the hwy. I got over forty while trying a hypermile experiment in mixed city/hwy conditions.

    My only beef is in its climbing power; I can do 55 up nearly any hill, but it has me doing it in 3rd gear winding the engine well beyond the gas saving zone. I will drive this car until it pukes and then step away satisfied that I bought it used years eariler for $500.00

    I think someone hit it on the head when they talked about the crash test results being a primary factor in Honda not producing more like this excellent little car.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts