So, the story behind this post is that me and some friends were talking. Nothing unusual until one of the friends who recently got themselves a Toyota Celica says something about how her car is better than my CRX. How on earth can someone come to the conclusion that a Celica would be better than a CRX?
To answer any questions that might arise about what I said in response to her; I said nothing. I shook my head and and put my face in my hands.
i test drove a 95 celica auto nice looking car really but honestly...the car was the slowest thing ive driven(and i owned a olds bravada suv),granted it was auto but so is my rex and even the rex is faster. so i say CRX>Celica
1994 ford ranger XLT extended cab,2WD,2.3 L 4cyl/5spd 1990 honda civic hatch,LS b18a1/LS trans(in progress),coil over suspension,header,custom exhaust,front lip,integra seats and front brakes ,14" steelies If at first you dont succede,open a beer or 4,f*ck it,it'll get done some day
Probably the GT four all trac models but i would still pick a crx over a celica anyday except maybe the 1970 celica. But seriously the only other car i would put over top the crx would be the trueno. Faster doesn't mean better its all about how much fun your getting out of your ride.
Unless I'm mistaken it's a 7th gen. Celica and it's not GT I don't think. Not to mention the car is slower than sin. The only thing that I would honestly consider better between the two cars is mine is 23 years old and is decently speedy. Hers is five or six and has a new paint job and isn't in need of a few changes to the old parts.
CRXCommunity.com is not affiliated with, supported, sponsored, or endorsed by American Honda Motor Company. Any and all trademarks are property of their respective owners. Copyright/trademark/sales mark infringements are neither intended or implied.