Good morning! I hope you all had a good Thanksgiving holiday. (In fact, I hope I did as well; I’m writing this at 10:30 on Thursday morning.) In the spirit of the holiday, I just want to tell you all, dear readers, how thankful I am for all of you. Without you, I’m just some aging nerd blathering about crappy old cars. I’m honored to be a part of your weekday morning routine, so thank you.
We’ve been looking at imports this week, slowly increasing the price cap, and yesterday our focus was on two small stickshift sedans. I thought maybe the Mazda’s propensity to rust and slightly worse condition might give it a disadvantage, but apparently not. You chose the Mazda by a huge margin, despite the Kia’s shiny presentation and flashy color.
I can’t say I disagree. I am a huge fan of Mazda automobiles, having had several of my own. I wasn’t thrilled by the massive, gadget-laden CX-90 crossover I rented recently, but that’s not really Mazda’s kind of car anyway. If you stick to what the brand is best at – small manual vehicles – you won’t often be disappointed by the experience.
The day after Thanksgiving has become known by a terrible name I won’t use here, but the gist of it is rampant consumerism. We’re all supposed to be buying stuff, but as everyone knows, the best stuff of all is toys. In that spirit, I’ve found two very toy-like cars for you to look at. One is refreshingly close to its original specification, and the other is a mashup of two vehicles that may or may not make sense to you. Let’s take a look.
1978 Triumph Spitfire – $7,000
Engine/drivetrain: 1.3-liter twin-rotor Wankel rotary, five-speed manual, RWD
Location: Portland, OR
Odometer reading: 46,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
When you think of malaise-era cars, you typically think of gigantic American beasts, their V8 engines choked down with rudimentary smog controls, their performance a mere shadow of what it had been a few years earlier. But the new regulations of the 1970s were no less strict for imports, and cars that had meager power to begin with especially suffered. The Triumph Spitfire, never a beacon of high performance, was reduced to a mere 53 horsepower by the addition of smog controls. Many have sought to improve that number over the years by various means, up to and including what this car has undergone: a full engine and transmission swap.
Under the flip-forward bonnet of this Spitfire now resides a Mazda 13B rotary engine, breathing through a big Weber side-draft carb and sending power to the rear end through a Mazda five-speed manual, both sourced from an RX-7 and rebuilt. The seller bought it this way, and it had been sitting for a couple years prior. It runs and drives great now, after some care and feeding, and it is reported to be “extremely fast.” I don’t doubt it. Probably too fast for anyone of a sane disposition, I would guess.
It’s a bit of a mixed bag inside, with nice re-covered (and heated!) Miata seats and a ratty-looking original stock wood dash. The seller says some of the switches on the dash are sticky, and it needs a new ignition switch in particular. The part is on order, and I presume it will be included in the sale. The shifter was relocated rearward for the transmission swap, and the lever is awfully close to the handbrake, but I guess there’s enough space to make it work. It just looks weird in the photos.
It’s clean and more or less rust-free outside, with some nice alloy wheels, but it appears to be missing the front bumper overriders. Nobody likes those big rubber blocks sticking out of the front, but to me, the bare brackets look worse. If the overriders aren’t included, I think I’d look for a pair, just to make it look more finished.
1986 Honda Civic CRX Si – $7,500
Engine/drivetrain: 1.5-liter OHC inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Sacramento, CA
Odometer reading: 228,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
The other day, Peter (via the Bishop) wrote about “cranberry-sauce cars:” cars that are not only underappreciated, but have a little extra zing that makes them special. His example was the second-generation Mazda RX-7, which is a great one, but I humbly submit this car for your consideration as well: the first-generation Honda CRX. This little wonder has a combination of attributes we’re unlikely to see again: light weight, low price, a playful demeanor, and bang-on perfect build quality. Even the gas-miser HF models are fun to toss around, but if you’re really looking for fun on the back roads, it’s this one you want: the Si, short for Sport Injection.
As is so often the case, our CRX Si was watered down a bit from the version the rest of the world got. In place of the 1.6-liter twin-cam engine, we got a single-cam displacing 1.5 liters. It’s still fuel-injected, though, and it has a useful bump in power over the carbureted engine in the base model. Nobody buys a Honda Civic of any flavor to let it sit around, and this car has definitely been put to use: it has well over 200,000 miles on it. But it runs and drives “beautifully,” the seller says. Even better, unlike so many old CRXs, it’s completely stock.
I must once again profess my admiration of ’80s Honda interiors; I’m not sure anybody has ever designed anything better. It’s bright and airy, everything is where you want and expect it to be, and it’s made of good-quality stuff. This one looks very clean inside, and my hope would be that those dumb Caterpillar-branded seat covers are only there to protect the stock seats. If so, for my purposes anyway, they’ve done their job and can go away.
It’s in good condition outside as well, and it still has those fantastic 4-hole factory alloy wheels. I do see a little misalignment of the rear bumper, which makes me think that bumper has been used for its intended purpose at some point. It’s not a deal-breaker, but it’s worth a quick look underneath to make sure it’s just the bumper that is crooked. Apart from that, it looks flawless, and photos of the underside in the ad don’t show a speck of rust.
Seven grand feels like a lot to spend on a car, and I don’t think going any higher in price is going to be any more interesting to read or write about, so I think next week I’ll go back to our usual price range. I’ll stick with imports for next week, though. In the meantime, ponder this pair for the weekend, and make your choice. Do you want an overpowered Triumph, or a time-capsule Honda?
As perhaps one of the few here who’s had a Spitfire, from 2020 to 2024, I’ll say that at the supposed 135hp, if google is to be believed, yes, that Spitfire is for the insane.
Later 1500s after the oil crisis got neutered same as everything else here in the US, down 50%(!) on power from the European model, what with its dual carbs and better flowing exhaust, 50hp USDM vs 75hp EDM and while my lovely Spitfire was by no means fast, it was still plenty entertaining despite the handicap. I would have loved to feel what 75hp, or even 100hp in the coupe’s inline 6, was like. But 135hp? With that crash structure eye level with modern fog lights! No thanks
I sold my Spitfire somewhat reluctantly for $3,500 last year. It had a few more issues than this example, though I wouldn’t think its value was divided by half. Crackpipe! Too ratty for that much cheddar!
The Spitfire looks good but a bit ratty and not sure about the drivetrain swap.
That CRX is sweet, definitely my choice. Rare to see them unmolested. It’s almost too nice.
“After untold amounts of dollars and hours on very special improvements to my project car I’ve decided I like it so little that I can’t be bothered to replace the ignition switch, but it comes with lots of extra parts and CAN BE YOURS!”
Yeah,sure. A even less reliable Spitfire sounds like a great idea.. I voted for the CRX.
I went to Texas to look at a 289 powered Spitfire.
Liked it, but it was unfinished.
The flip up hood solves all sorts of space problems in the engine bay.
I don’t think they would let me test drive it.
That dropped my offer.
Drove home.
Rotary Spitfire should be much more mid-engine, with lower center mass.
I already have a breathed-on Spitfire, though mine is all Triumph. So the stock CRX (in the right spec this time) gets my vote.
Mark are you trying to skew the vote? The first sentence of the Honda ad screams I’m a dick and you are going to be miserable dealing with me. No text, no email no questions call me only?
This is a perfect example of the difference between a car fan and a car buyer. We say here we want the true car experience. However a unmodified CRX wins over. A rotary 2 seater British sports car. Don’t say build the unique manual transmission and pick the Corolla. Here we clearly see only 25% of the members are car fans. But we certainly welcome the rest of you appliance driver’s.
Late to the party as usual. I don’t see links to the actual ads. Did they used to have links, are they there and I am just missing it? Anyway, longtime British sports car guy, not a purist, have contemplated and planned engine swaps though I have never pulled the trigger.
I would want to know if the rear end of the Spit has been modified to take the additional power, I looked into buying one to autocross once and from what I read the rear end isn’t up for much fun beyond stock power and loads.
All that said, the CRX looks like a much more pleasant place to be and still plenty fun. I would take the Honda.
I don’t know how to describe it… you have to click on the words just above the description of the individual car.
Got it, thanks
Just click on the picture or go by the description or click on the head line.
I had a CRX Si and my bumper gaps did the same thing. Front fenders, nose cowl, and lower door panels are very fragile plastics, so I’m surprised this car looks great (mine were cracking after a few years).
Otherwise a super fun car to drive!
I hope there’s an air filter for the rotary. Seems like dust would be rough on the apex seals.
A bit pricy but the CRX all day long.
I’ll always admire the lines of a Spitfire. But when it was time to by a British roadster I went with a TR-6 for the engine. Throwing a Rotary in that is such a crazy project I just have to say yes
The answer is neither. Neither is worth $2,500 let alone $7,500.
A STOCK CRX? What voodoo is this? Did we enter a parallel universe, or did Grandpa have a late life crisis?
Drive, hoon, maintain. CRX it is.
(Also, an awkward shifter location ruins the fun of a stick. You’d need a chiropractor on speed dial after driving that thing.)
Grandpa is fine an on his 5th wife and still has a girlfriend. Besides this nice CRX ezample he also has a stock 1993 Mazda RX7. Unfortunately, Grandpa didn’t leave his 1995 Toyota Supra stock but has a window tint applied. Terrible, the neighbors were talking for weeks about it. Parallel universe indeed.
I would have taken the Spitfire but not with the rotary though it sounds fast! CRX it is.
That Truimpfh is so well done that it wins hands down.
CRX but at 1/4th that price.
Only in your dreams, Cheap Bastard
It is an old and slow Honda. $2,000 tops. Find someone else to pay $7,500 for an old CRX when that buys a much nicer newer Civic.
Here’s one on FBM with an ask of $800:
https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/792337116395667/?ref=search&referral_code=null&referral_story_type=post&tracking=browse_serp%3A4bc08f31-0e7c-45ba-a469-4239a3b7822b
Sure its in rougher shape but it runs and its 1/9th the ask of the other one. Perfect for Lemons.
And another for $1800:
https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/792337116395667/?ref=search&referral_code=null&referral_story_type=post&tracking=browse_serp%3A4bc08f31-0e7c-45ba-a469-4239a3b7822b
Parts car for $500:
https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/1088832320122573/?ref=search&referral_code=null&referral_story_type=post&tracking=browse_serp%3A4bc08f31-0e7c-45ba-a469-4239a3b7822b
CRX all day any day. An evil handling Spitfire with too much power is not ever going to leak on my driveway.
Oh yes; BOTH! The CRX will be a weekday joy and a happy part getter while a Wankle Spitfire isn’t overpowered, it’s just tuned to match modern performance tires. The prices seem high, but I say that about EVERYTHING now.
I used to drive a girlfriend’s then new ’75 unmodified Spitfire, and bought a new ’86 CRX Si. I’d take the unmodified CRX. The sunroof/windows gave me about as much fresh air as I wanted, the car actually handled quite well, was fast enough, could carry 4 in a pinch, and nothing failed in 80K miles. I actually relocated myself from east to west coast by filling the back and passenger seat. As far as I was concerned, it was everything a fun car should be. I only got rid of it as I needed something that could handle a trailer.
An unmolested Crixie?
Sign me UP. It’s been one of my favorite models of all time ever since it was introduced, a tiny little personal mobility pod injected with some extra gofast. Fully optioned up it didn’t weigh a whole ton so while the power might not be a lot, it’s plenty for the car.
CRX for me. But, interestingly, Silodrome just posted an auction for a 13B swapped British Roadster today. An MGA though. Australia, $41k AUD.
A CRX that hasn’t been molested? It’s a Bright Friday miracle! The seat covers are an odd choice, but the car’s nickname would become Caterpillar. CATRPLR.