I'm all for the CRX coming back. I owned a 1991 Si and it was an amazing car when it came out. Great little engine and good handling with the front/rear double wishbone suspension.
Truly a classic in my eyes.

 

Nicely done. That looks great.

 

The production model Si will have the same rear wing design, but will sit much lower to the trunk (the posts will probably be gone).

 

[quote name='WestSideBilly' date='Feb 16 2005, 08:20 AM'] The first and second generation CRXs did quite well in the US.

 

hmm.. link me to the other three threads showing this photoshop job??

 

It's not the photoshop job that I'm talking about.

It's the incessant creation of topic upon topic about the same car when there have already been 3 others in the last 10-12 days.

 

I really don't understand the CRX obsession - unless it is insanely lighter than the '06 Si, what would you gain? Minus two seats?
To me, the new Si is the real deal (great looks, 200hp, LSD). Hope it is not over 2800 lbs.

 

It should look very good then, certainly a hell of a lot better than the redesigned RSX does. If it does end up looking like the one pictured, they should should just drop the K20 in it and give the RSX the axe. Anyone one else think it bears a strong (of course more modern though) resemblance to the 1st generation Eagle Talons?

 

The CRX's were lighter, quicker, and shorter than the Civic's of their day and they were a blast to corner or dodge cones with. They were also easier to park and could haul a great deal of stuff. Heck, I even moved twice and was able to carry everything but my bed in my 84 CRX. My crew cab diesel truck is my "family hauler," for my daily driver I don't want or need a back seat. If they could make it 6 to 10 inches shorter and shave 200 pounds with the same power it would be great.

 

Hmmm...but short of the weight savings, what advantage did the old CRX's have over the Civic hatches and Integras of the day (with the seats folded down)?