Alfa could be back in the US via Fiat, via Chrysler
It might be worth the wait.
Well, that’s what I meant, Keith - Honda would never sell a vehicle that would be rated the worst availble car for safety. So it’s the ratings that prevent it from being made.
The crash standards are, in effect, laws, in that all makers are following them.
There are EU laws regarding pedestrian protection that the CRX wouldn’t meet.
LFFG–how about a Mini Cooper? Some people really like them . . . It’s worth a test drive, especially the turbo.
A golf tdi probably has what you’re looking for in one package, minus the light weight. But it’s near impossible to find a lightweight car in the states.
Allow me to repeat the post that was deleted by stinky vanilla. I’m calling you, cdaquilla.
What do you expect for a car that gets 40 MPG.
Consider a Mazda Speed 3. It has a great weight to power ratio - a little more than 10#/HP. Test drive one and see what you think. You an get a nicely equipped one for about $25,000. It gets 18 MPG city/25 MPG highway, but you gotta pay to play.
just be sure to keep hold of the steering wheel if you drive a speed 3. Just about every review complains about torque steer; while praising the plaid interior of the Golf GTI.
Re - crash ratings
I thought it was interesting that the sticker on the Veloster had “NA” listed next to “Government Crash Test Rating”
Re - Mini Cooper, GTI & Mazda 3
My brother-in-law has the Mini Cooper S (2008 maybe) and reports that it does have the “zip” and slot-car feel that I speak of with the CRX … but he says the gas mileage is not so great (compared to my CRX Si which last week got 38mpg … non-conservative, city driving) and gets no where near what they advertise. The gas mileage is the same issue with the Mazda 3 and the VW GTI .
If I were to throw out the goal of “Gas Mileage, Equivalent to the CRX Si” then there are a number of very excellent choices.
I’m just not good at giving in and settling for less then what the auto industry was able to give us 20 years ago! Sure we’ve added a whole bunch of “stuff” that suck up power and/or add weight … but engineering technology has not been sitting still. That Alpha Romeo I drove is proof of that!
The sad fact is that what is made available to drivers in the US is decided by marketing directors and accountants and NOT by auto enthusiasts. Somewhere out there, “bean counters” have decided that (here in the US) there just isn’t a large enough profit margin for small, sporty, fuel efficient vehicles.
At least that is what I have found so far but I’m not giving up.
I’m in no hurry so I’ll keep my eyes open and keep test driving. You never know, some engineers somewhere may have snuck one past the status-quo police and out onto the showroom floor.
If you think you’ve driven that car I’m hoping you will bring it to our attention here. 
If you find this car, I want one too!
Government regulations would put the kibosh on it if it really did exist.
If Honda built a CRX today that were the same external dimensions as yours with the required safety equipment it would weigh at least 500 pounds more.
As I recall the CRX has the same wheelbase as my first car: the 1975 Civic.
Not the GTI, Golf TDI. You are not going to have the top end power of the GTI. What you get is the same GTI suspension, diesel engine torque, and diesel mileage. That’s about as close to the CRX as it gets.
The new Subaru BRZ (and the corresponding/identical version sold as a Scion) would be closest to what you want - it’ll be out shortly. But no car will get 38 mpg while giving you the performance you want at a low price, safety considerations prevent that.
And while we’re at it, the Miata with the retractable hardtop would be fun, too.
"But no car will …"
This is the premise that I question.
The idea that we are dealing with a situation in which they are simply offering us the cars of 20 years ago with a lot more weight bolted to them, is a sadly widespread and publically accepted misconception.
While cars have become heavier over the past 20 years with all their safety gear, power windows, power EVERYTHING … engines have also become incredibly more efficient and put out more power then their predecessors of 20 years ago. Also, stronger and much lighter building materials have been developed for use in suspensions, chassis and frames.
The MiTo I drove was proof of that. It had all the safety features (airbags, anti-lock brakes) and yet the diesel version I drove got 40 - 60 mpg! Yes, you read that right.
So while I will agree that safe(by whose standards?), small cars with the zip AND gas mileage are not commonly available here in the US … it is CLEARLY not impossible to build them. Cars like this ARE being built. Just not (it would seem) for us.
That’s because most in the US aren’t diesel fans (lots of threads on that, do a search). Some will be coming, but not a lot. Mazda may have some in a couple of years.
This is quite true.
2 months ago you could have counted me at the head of that camp.
I had totally bought into the myth that diesel vehicles were all a bunch of dirty, stinking, noisy, slooooow nightmares. If you had offered me a diesel powered car FREE, I don’t think I would have accepted it.
Ha! Never underestimate the power of marketing.
I wonder how many of those who oppose diesel are exactly like I was just a few short weeks ago? While my personal bias is still for gasoline powered cars … I will no longer automatically discount a diesel vehicle JUST for being a diesel.
I guess maybe you can teach an old dog, new tricks. 
Hmm…lost a post…
I like the new diesels, drove a Fiesta and Fiat Punto in crazy/heavy traffic, they were both great. No ‘diesel’ issues.
I think Whitey’s right. Restore your CRX. Nothing else is going to make you happy. Especially since you seem to have forgotten that the CRX didn’t exactly press you back in your seat without significant modifications either. The best performer sold in the US was the Si, which in your year had 108hp and did 0-60 .4 seconds slower than the Veloster, so unless you’ve modified your CRX. . .
That is interesting actually.
That must speak to either throttle response or where the powerband is or maybe both.
Perhaps the Veloster pours it on above 45mph or it’s coputer controled transmission shifts more accurately than a human. I can simply tell you that I never “felt” any acceleration in that car. Yet, I had my completely unmoded, 150k+ mile, oil leaking, Si out just two hours ago and it presses you back in your seat in 1st & 2nd gear and cruising at 50mph you can floor the gas and it will press you back again.
You need to understand, I really am looking for a “new car” replacement of the CRX and was genuinely disappointed that the Veloster had felt like a limp handshake. Given all it’s other attributes I really wanted it to be the one.
I know that if you have never driven a CRX Si you have to think this is all a load of fanboy hooey and all I can say to that is, if you really enjoy driving I truly hope you get a chance to take one around the block one day. It will make you smile.
No, I believe you. My '83 GTI felt a lot faster than it was, too. Modern cars are VERY fast 0-60 compared to those from the '80s, they just don’t FEEL like it.
While it’s not as “sporty”, my wife and I love our 2008 Honda Fit (base). My nephew has the same year sport, and they like it very much. My neighbor has a 2011 base model Fit as well - no one I know with one has complaints.