I recently got a 2001 Honda Civic EX, and have noticed that the engine seems to need to rev higher for highway cruising speed than my old 1992 Honda Civic DX. The engine noise is significantly louder than road and air noise if I get up around 70 (which is what it does at 3500 RPM), it was loud enough that the first night I drove it I kept feeling like maybe I was in the wrong gear, though I wasn’t. I’m guessing the gear ratios were different in my DX (though it didn’t have tach) because it feels like the shift from 4th to 5th in it was substantially bigger, and I didn’t feel like the engine was working too hard going 80 or 85 in it.
So look up the gear ratios. That’s what the manual is there for…
3500 RPM for Honda at 70 is about right.
I’m fairly certain that the power band of your new Honda is a little higher up on the RPM band. You’re 2001 Honda has a much higher rev limit too, and probably breathes beter at higher RPM, and/or has more valves per cylinder.
I would say that your engine “makes a living” at 3500 RPM, and is probaly right in the middle of the meat of the power band between 3000-4000 RPM.
Sounds about right. If your driving an automatic, just double-check that there isn’t a “overdive” button near the shifter that is switched to “off”. If it’ a manual, it’s pretty simple to figure out what gear you’re in.
But, 3500 rpm sounds about right.
Or…go buy a car with a V-8 and cruise at 70 at 1800 rpm. 
I drive a '94 Saturn SL with a 5 speed. At 3,000
I am doing 75 MPH. I don’t often drive faster than this and when I do I usually pay more attention to the road than the tach. On my drive home today maybe I will check for you.
John
The new Civic EX also comes with Honda’s VTEC engine and is designed to rev higher. In 92, the only VTEC engines were in the Acura NSX, I believe. In 93 they made it onto some honda Preludes, in 94 onto some Civic Del Sols and theon onto the Accords and normal Civics.
I have a 2000 Saturn LS1 (2.2L DOHC 137 hp)and I think that it would go about 80-85 mph at 3500 rpms.
Because of the VTEC, rev the car to about 5400 rpm ( after the break in period) and feel the power change. I used to have a non vtec prelude, but I drove a friend’s vtec, and it is really amazing.
Slight hijack.
Did the Honda Civic CRX ever make it to the US? I believe they were available with V-Tecs as early as 1992 or 1993.
I’m no fan of Japanese cars, but the Civic CRX kicks ass. Too bad they attract a very questionable crowd, at least here in Europe.
The CRX’s last year in the US was 91, I think. They were replaced with the targa topped 2 seater Civic del Sol in 93, but I don’t think that the del Sol and the CRX ever shared a model year in the US. I know for a fact that in the US the del Sol was first available with a VTEC in 94, because my wife has a 93 del Sol Si, and that was the highest trim level available in 93. 1994 production of the del Sol had 3 available trim levels: S, Si and VTEC, but 1993 only had 2 : S or Si.
In the US, the first available Honda VTEC was the 1993 Prelude. I had a 1994 Prelude Si, so I took an interest, and Preludes were first avaialble with VTECs in 1993. I think that that was also the first model year with 4 wheel steering on them.
Was there a large design change (i.e. removable top) in the European CRX around 92 or 93? Maybe they called it a CRX over there, but a del Sol over here. I’m really not sure about non-US hondas.
This is the third series Civic CRX, at least in Europe. Is that a “Del Sol” in the US?
In any case, the second series CRX (see link in my last post) was available with a V-Tec during its final one or two production years. They’re sought after cars these days, as the series II is a much better handling car then the series III (your Del Sol, presumably).
Yep, that’s it.
It would be a better handling car. The series III/del Sol has a lot more body flex due to the targa top. We had to put some strut tower bars in ours to stiffen up the handling. It’s still a nice little car to have in the spring and fall, for cruising around with the top off (in the trunk). A VTEC series II/CRX would be one sweet item to have, though.
Ignorance fought, across the continents 
I do feel kind of obliged to answer the OP now. So here we go, Badtz.
My car, a 1996 Peugeot 306 1.4 (this one is unfortunately not mine, although it is the same colour), will travel at about 120 km/h (on the speedo) @3500RPM.
Coldy, yup, thats a Honda del Sol in the USA (Japanese car, named in Spanish (for Mexicans?), sold in America).
And FYI, they aren’t considered a very sporty car in general here, more or less a feminine vehicle if I were judging. They probably fall into the same market segment as a Escort, or an Cavalier convertable. Here in the states that 2-seater had better have some balls, and spare me the turbo charger, a real engine doesn’t need it.
Re the OP: I’ve never made it to 3500 RPM in my Alero GLS, I cruise at about 80 MPH at 2800 RPM. Hondas have very low displacement 4 bangers, and are designed to rev high. The advantage to this is a cheaper, lighter engine that makes good gas milage at mid-speeds. The downsides as you noticed are alot of engine noise, increased wear, and a shallow power curve. Its just the way their made.
Coldy, the CRX attracted a crowd in the states as well, typically I wouldn’t call it “questionable” but they’d sure like you to think they were. A dropped CRX, with ground effects and a pounding system were the labels of the North American Suburban Upper Class Poser. Basically its the kids spending alot of mom and dads money to add gaudy plastic accessories to the cheap first car they got for their 16th B-Day. Gotta love those Rice Boys, these are the people who will drive through your lawn, cut you off in traffic, drive behind you with the high-beam Xenon headlights, and impregnate your rebelling daughters. Pretty much harmless, but very distinctive.
BTW, what is with you Europeans and your crappy little hatchback fetish?
That’s the questionable crowd I was referring too, more or less 
Crappy hatchback fetish? Feh. With an American car, a full tank will be the equivalent of the GDP of Equatorial Guinnea over here. Think about THAT
Plus, in the European innercities, a five-meter-plus long Lincoln Towncar is considered quite unparkable.
Then there’s the handling. While the ultimate car is of course rear wheel driven, mid-engined, and featherlight (cough Lotus Elise cough), the “budget” alternative of a nice handling hot hatch is appealing as well. Hence the snazzy li’l Peugeot.
I have a 99 Civic Si. This car has a special engine that redlines at 8000 rpm and it can do about 125 MPH top speed. This is with no turbo - just a normal 1.6 engine with VTEC and dual overhead cams. I think that it does about 4000 rpm for 80 MPH on the highway. Honda can get more horsepower out of a small enigine than anyone else. The S2000 sports car gets 240 HP out of just a 2 liter engine. In case you haven’t noticed a Honda powered car has won the last 5 CART titles (Indy style race cars)
Coldy, a Lincoln Towncar is unparkable everywhere, except maybe Texas. And have you ever had the pleasure of strapping into a Vette, popping the clutch and leaving a 200 yard trail of foul smelling tire-smoke? That rumble beats the hell out of a turbo-charged whine anyday. Maybe you should write your legislators about invading one of those Middle East nations and see if you can arrnage a solution to that gas price thing.
kpm, well those Honda engines in CART are aluminum turbo-charged V-8s. It doesn’t have a damn thing to do with whats in your Civic, and you’ll notice that they’re using a V-8, not a small emgine by any means. I think its pretty well understood that bigger is better when talking about performance. Gas milage is a factor, but its sure as hell no damn fun.
kpmThe S2000 redlines at something obscene, like 12,000 or 14,000 rpms. If you’ve ever heard one idling, it sounds like a sewing machine, what with the sound of all the valves tapping. I think the difference between your Civic Si and the OP’s Civic EX is that the Si has the DOHC VTEC that makes ~160 hp, whereas the Civic EX has the SOHC VTEC-e (economical? environmental? ecological?) that makes ~127 hp.
I think it’s been linked to before, but on the subject of the questionable crowd, I’d like to submit this link for the amusement and/or horror of all: http://www.riceboypage.com/ The only thing that I have to say about most of the cars at this site is WHY, DEAR GOD, WHY?!?
I was a tad surprised by those statistics, as I have a 2000 Honda Civic Ex.
3000~=67MPH
3500~=77MPH
4000~=89MPH
I am right around 120mph @3500rpm
Mhm. And how many MPG do you get with today’s $1.50 or greater prices?
Granted, my little Civic strained to hit 115 when I tried, but there is pretty much no situation in which I would ever have to move that fast.
Amen…2500 rpm @ 70 mph, 3500 rpm @ 97 mph…That’s with 3.31 axles and a non-lockup, non-OD automatic. Disregarding air resistance (that’s a very big thing to leave out), it’ll do 137 mph (@ 5000 rpm redline)!
I do a little under 2000 RPM at 70mph. Oddly, my car, a '93 Ford Thunderbird LX, manages to do this with a V6. Think it turns about 1500@45-50mph, and around 1950@70.
Of course, if I want to accelerate, I have to kick it out of overdrive, but even then (70mph, “3rd gear”) it’s only turning around 3000 or so–dead center in the powerband. However, you have to consider that my redline is 5000 RPM. Obviously, unlike those of you who own Hondas, I get loads of low-end punch, but precious little power at high RPMs–215 ft-lb of torque, but only 140hp! It’s a joy to drive the darn thing in wet weather–it likes to break the rear wheels loose under acceleration. Wheee.
And my gas mileage, even highway, is only in the low to mid 20’s. But, when you’re driving a 2-door living room, you can’t really expect much for either fuel efficiency or acceleration.