Civic ed3 d15b4 dual carbs

All is explained, you have an EG Civic made from October 1991 up to 1995. The ED Civic is a different beast, no ECU, no electronics, no red lights. Just a mysterious black box designated 36000-PM4-004/87. About ten vacuum lines enter and depart from this box to unknown destinations for unknown purpose. The carburetor depends on all operation from this evil scheme. I even think the carby's are somewhat altered between variants. There seems no manual for the ED3 version in Australia, Honda sat on it for service monopoly. Techron 5000 is still the answer to fuel blockages, irrespective, beyond that it is the junk yard, which was the USA opinion in the 90's. Far too expensive to repair.
Good luck Bobval

I am so cruel, so cruel.....Little honda laughs at me no more. I have crushed its evil black heart and it now idles. Well to be accurate, it no longer stalls.

It took some garden watering system tee pieces and an old vacuum gauge. To explain......There are two vacuum operated throttle controllers on these carbs (like vac advance units on a dizzy). One turns vacuum into a command to increase revs. The other turns vacuum into a command to decrease revs. How handy!!!! What I needed was the ability to turn a dying vacuum into a command to increase revs. So, with gardening watering stuff in hand I rewired the vacuum line to this controller (honda call it the Throttle Controller) directly to manifold vacuum, rather than hose 22 from the depths of hell black box. Then I attacked the throttle controller and sternly said to it, if the manifold vacuum drops below 16 inches of mercury, give the throttle shafts a blip. Thats where the vac gauge came in handy.

And now, when it tries to die, for whatever reason, my dear Throttle Controller gives the carbs a mighty shove up the buttocks. Like, turn on the aircon, lights on, and stand back.......Some poltergeist hops in the car and blips the throttle every five seconds. Revs to 3000 rpm, almost dies, revs to 3000, almost dies......Its pee your pants funny to watch. Aircon off and all seems placid and normal, idle at 1200 rpm.

I'm not game yet to show the car to poor daughter. I think just not mentioning what I've done is the best option here, and hope she never needs to use the aircon. I do think there's a reason not to let engineers loose on something they are not trained on......

I won.....

MKRS

MKRS
See what a little analytical thinking can do, this is the USA solution, disconnect the whole bloody thing and turn it back into a carburetor engine, not an antipollution device. California demanded and got annual or bi annual inspection of the full anti pollution circuit, called smog reduction planning. The Greens would be over the moon in OZ if we still demanded Government green slips every year, with the CO2 police torturing those found to have interfered with Honda's revolutionary unworkable, expensive and virtually non repairable weirdo concept. CVCC was once coupled to a three barrel Keihin carburetor, the third tiny barrel charged a separate combustion chamber in the head which in turn fired off the main ignition from a vortex modified inlet fuel mixture running around 20:1. All of this coupled to the weirdo carburetor and fed into a catalystic converter might have reduced carbon emissions by 0.0001%. No other manufacturer bothered to emulate Honda having seen the labour costs involved in endless ongoing service. Honda may have designed a mathematical marvel but their engineers had no concept of real world labour costs. Slavery had by this time ceased in the western world and car owners demanded fully qualified TAFE trained mechanics who do not come cheap. India and the Philippines along with China and all of Asia in the 1980's was still a dollar a day workforce. In my desperation prior to Techron 5000 discovery, I had contemplated much the same thing, it was listed on a USA web site. Now all you must do is continue with diagnosis and realize that disconnection of vacuum lines is not really the ideal solution, the solution is to discover where and why the vacuum lines are not doing as intended and that will invariably be due to blocked jets disrupting vacuum creation. (or something like this, I do not have a Honda degree in advanced math nor design philosophy) Like Honda did by 1995, they ceased manufacture and retention of a nightmare system that had the now rapidly concerned car buyer looking elsewhere. Vtech cams linked to Keihin's with CVCC heads became even worse as far as reliability and service was concerned. All new cars are great for the first hundred thousand kilometers, no self respecting buyer holds one over 60,000 anyway so who cared, not Honda, their cars were designed for the crusher at 100,000 miles. Second hand buyers do not rate. iVtech is a bit of an over statement, most city or suburban cars will rarely invoke the throttle demand necessary to switch to iTech high lift cams. For fuel economy buy a gutless 1.3 lt box, for performance and torque at 6000+RPM do the right thing and get a car designed to provide that, all from a big 6 cylinders, preferably normally aspirated, no supercharger or turbo induction that costs even more to run and maintain for useless power output at revs one will never see. Porches can do 180 Kph, so can speed camera's and low flying highway patrol Cessna 210 aircraft, either way the days of speed are over other than in the hands of race drivers.
Good Luck, I get more anti Honda daily, Honda sales are collapsing world wide due to high service costs and overly involved technology, drivers now want a return to simple low maintenance cost vehicles with reasonable fuel economy not the smell of an oily rag turbo rev boxes that must soon have combination locked bonnets as there is nothing under there even remotely serviceable outside of a specialized dealership. Toyota saw the light, GM and Ford also, keep the cost and frequency of service and maintenance down and the world will beat a path to your door (something to do with mousetraps or Henry Ford I am sure)
Bobval

Hi Bobval, i tried to do a post yesterday but it was quarantined by the word watcher I think. Never mind. Looks like we have divergent views on automotive technology. I'm an ardent fan of Direct Injection turbo petrol, and oddly, hybrids. I hope Honda jump on board the DI-turbo petrol bandwagon, have a look what powers the little A class Merc called the A45. 265kW from two litres. VW are also masters of this technology, and its becoming the new standard in performance with high fuel efficiency. ( Sorry, the engineer comes out again) I know honda are masters of hybrids. Sort of...

Finally, and this might be my last post unless the civic does something really bizarre, my two cents on hybrid cars.

Hybrids are still built the wrong way round. They are basically a petrol car with electric assist. It helps, a lot, but its still pussyfooting. These hybrids, fuel economy wise, are barely better than a well sorted turbo diesel, and the DI-turbo petrols are catching up. What the hybrids need is a reversal of priority in the drive train. If you make the hybrid cars electric drive BUT with onboard power generation from an efficient fuel engine, you will get the best of both worlds. For exampl, a hybrid camry would be able to do open road speeds and get better than 100mpg, because the little engine charging the batteries would only run at its peak efficiency, putting out what is the Average power needs of the car. And at 100kph, reasonably slippery cars use less than 10kW. All the technology is out there already. The MKRS approach would be to modularise the onboard charger and battery systems, so a buyer could pick the best options for their needs. Want a bigger charger sir?, certainly. The 20kW charger option will reduce your average fuel economy a little, but Sir would be able to get from Melb to Sydney two hours faster.

Ok, ok, its just a pet idea I've had since the 80's.

All the best everyone.

MKRS

MKRS
I do agree with the concept of hydbrids, though I think it is the battery weight that is determining the choice of main power unit. I note from reading that some manufacturers do indeed vary the dual unit output choices. Did a bit of research on the internet description of Civic 1987-91 ED3 and the Civic 91-93 EG. Different engine, Yep both are 4 cylinder and ruled by the Keihin dual barrell carby but much else is quite different. I will attempt to send a picture of the ED3 D15B4 instalation. Perusal will reveal only the left carby has a choke vacuum operated diaphram. As there is no ECU, nothing relating to carby operation could be similar for both engines. The Poms had a variant in 1990, seemingly much the same as a D15B4 except that it was a D14B2. Once Vtech and injectors were installed everything went out the door. The AU variants were very much a parts bin job, no one else ever got the combination of engine crap we we given. The Yanks had only injection from late 1987, no carby ever to disgrace the Honda name again, The UK followed suit in late 1990. I still consider techno zap turbo motor bike engine cars pushing out massive revs to get any sort of torque as irrelevant. Mercedes have indeed developed these engines, though for what use I cannot understand. An A 160 will suit the suburbs nicely thank you. Cars under 1300 Kilograms do not need more. Now racing cars! that' different. My posts are all about 72 KW Honda Civics, nowdays the 72KW has gone up to 88KW for the Jazz which is about 100Kilo more than the poor old ED3 at 1026Kgs. Power to weight difference is less than the 16 KW increase. Torque in the low to mid rev range is much higher, that is the main improvement. Thing is 72KW for the ED3 D15B4 is at 6200 Rpm, Torque is at 4300rpm. Now who is going to rev up to 6200 or higher on a public suburban street? I can hold 100 Kmph at 3100 rpm in 5th gear which is the highway limit. A short burst to 4000 rpm gives me 110KMPH + for overtaking Murray's interstate bus. Hopeless at this inet stuff so maybe no picture.
Bobval

Bobval. i wasn't going to drift away from the core subject any more but your few words on turbo petrol high revving engines just deserved a response. These new tech engines are phenomenal by virtue of their resistance to detonation. They run impossibly high compression ratios, impossibly high boost pressures and are anything but all or nothing high revvers. I think the flag carrier of this technology is the entry level Golf. I have a personal issue with such small capacity petrol engines but the world loves them.

So, come on Bobval, be nice to them. We are too old to service them ourselves anyways.

Your comment on battery weights in hybrids is valid. I did some hybrid surfing after my little rant above and feel a little sheepish. OK, the Volt is the sort of vehicle I'm talking about. BUT. BUT. Whats the go with such a powerful on-board charger?? (63kW) Be braaaaaave. Put in less powerful charging, improve efficiency with a turbo on that DI petrol engine, lighten the thing up 200kgs. I don't know, maybe people just lurve the idea of zero MPG, using just electrons. I still maintain my recipe will give better economy, if you can get away from plugging the thing in every night. No more on hybrids, I promise.

The Civic got a run at the hands of my dear P plater daughter. Man I love that car. I call my mod to the carbs "stall arrest". If she does a crappe take off and lets the clutch out too fast for the revs, the poltergeist jumps in and shoves the throttle down. And off the car goes. Idles a bit fast and with a miss, but I'll sort that out in time.

I'm off. Back to dreaming about what engine to slot into the 240 zed. Cheers!

MKRS

MKRS
I think we had best kill this discussion, I guess the moderator is getting pissed off. The turbo tech zap screamers all of 1 litre running at near 12:1 compression, 20,000 rpm in the turbo at boost pressure equal to a bomb are also virtually impossible to service or maintain in Australia. The cost of maintenance is horrific, if a skilled reliable technician can be found. The general rule is to chuck out the original of anything and stick in a new one, no one can fix it economically. None of these new contraptions have hit 10 years old as yet, then it will be a different story. A ferrari is bad enough, Canberra owners send them to Ferrari in Sydney for service. There a plenty of Ferrari models in Canberra. Very few new car buyers will touch the turbo zaps, sales are negligible. Me! I once had a 4.1 lt big 6 old Ford Falcon, slow revving, big on torque, low on output , lousy on fuel but never, ever, needed service beyond oil and plugs. Cost nothing to run, that is the sort of car needed for OZ, still plenty of them doing the suburban run here. Fuel costs are irrelevant in a country area, no slow traffic, no stop/starts, fewer traffic lights, and much shorter daily journeys. I average less than 200km a month, a 6.2 lt V8 would not matter and neither does it matter to many others, V8s are common here also, even with 91 RON at $1.57. Now a friend has a hydbrid Toyota, very impressed, so quite I thought it had no engine, what shove from 10-50 kmph. He has taken it to Tasmania twice, fuel economy around 4ts per 100kms to nothing to charge the battery and run up a hill. I would consider buying one of these if I needed a new car. Though the lighter the car the more uncomfortable, in the bush, impractically so! Keep working on the Civic EG, you will discover the vacuum leak soon enough for it is now certain to be both fuel and air passage blockages plus, a, or several, vacuum line leaks, at the connections I guess and invariably deteriorated rubber hoses underneath the screw clip where it can not be readily seen and makes you thing the hose is OK. No hose is OK until a vacuum gauge says so. I have the full diagrams showing the procedures. I actually did what you have done to the EG on an older 1980 single carb Accord, put a ball bearing in one vacuum line, connected the other to the vacuum advance, ran an auto idle throttle advance, worked in a fashion. Look up the ED3 D15B4 under the English web site for Honda, the workshop manual is listed in part for a version as 1.6 or 1.4 both had the Keihin dual carby and the vacuum tests are illustrated. Good luck and so long! Bobval

Lol wtf

Hi all. Just a quick note to report that the daughters problem with the twin carbs has been fixed. The carbs were rebuilt here in Adelaide, not by me, but by a mechanic who knew about these carbs.

Its never run so smoothly in its life. They even fixed the too-fast cold idle. Hate to think what it cost to rebuild.

Thats all. Cheers Bobval.

MKRS

MKRS
Congratulations! There are many things in this world best left to the experts, ie one who actually does have experience and detailed knowledge of work to be undertaken. The strip, clean, rebuild was really only ever going to be the answer. During the course of the rebuild, vacuum lines, needle valve settings and a plethora of associated fault inducing items would have been fixed. Hope the EF has another 100,000 Ks left in it. I have since examined all vacuum lines and looked inside the black box, the ED3 is different from the latter EF, I have a three solinoid vacuum controller in place of your system, all is AOK and looks new, never been left in the open, temperature controlled. no rust, tarnish or signs of corrosion.
Bobval