V8 vs Inline four???

[Dp351zcar]

F1 engines are 3L from what I know. They were lowered down from 3.5L a couple of years ago.

A 750cc superbike fitted to the rules is about 160hp and motoGP bikes are 200-220 from under 1L. The motoGP bikes are limited by the tires and what they can handle.

 

Don

[Guest Damn Cracker]

F1 motors are a tad different than what "powers" hondas. And one part that bugs me about these engine and manufactureer comparisons is the whole power/displacement thing. saying your motor is better than someone elses becouse it makes 25% more power per liter id retarded. yay, a honda can make twice as much power per liter than a chevy, but the chevy is three times as big. in a power contest, you can have your 100 hp per liter b16, i'll gladly take a 300 hp ls1. in the real world, arguments like "if my motor were twice the size it is, i would kick your ass" are worthless.

[Pop N Wood]

Why do people feel that unless it is DOHC with 4 valves per cylinder it is low tech/old tech? Production engines fitting that description existed in the 1910's (almost 100 years ago now).

 

Honda is forced to build small displacement engines because of the realities of their markets and Japanese laws. If they want performance, they have to go to such extremes. A lot of that is changing now that Honda's is starting to build more classically American vehicles. These vehicles are using larger displacement V6's. Kinda like GM.

 

There are a lot of different factors that go into engineering. Cost, reliabilty and ease of manufacturing are among the more challanging constraints. In that sense, building an unnecessarily complicated engine is poor engineering. Push rod V8's will exist for the forseable future because it is a great design and gets the job done. I heard the same nonsense about the death of such engines back in the 70's .

 

And F1 engines are Honda's only because they pay for them. Chevy's rulled Cart some years ago, only because they bought the English company that made them. Neither engine had much in common with the Camaro or Accord engines.

 

GM could build small displacement, high reving, whinny, no low RPM torque engines also. But why bother when you can put in a big brute of a V8 and have a more streetable engine?

[Moridin]

Honda's motor designs have basically been a motorcycle type since their beginning. The S2000 is a great example of that. As a culture, I also believe the Japanese value efficiency. If I recall correctly, one of the best engineering schools in the country (and maybe the world) is run by Honda.

 

Anywho, it all depends on taste. Do you like running the motor sky high, or sacrificing rev range for some grunt on the low end.

[Dp351zcar]

Ok then why is it toyotas (I personally know this) and hondas can go 300k with only timing belts or chains being required and I have never seen a domestic do that?

No flames please.

It's just when I took my head off to change the timing chain on my 22RE I could still see the hone marks all the way up the cylinder wall. Ok maybe they faded a bit where the top ring parks but I was impressed and that was at 170K. That and other toyotas my wife and I have owned have impressed me with how tough they are.

 

Don

[Guest Damn Cracker]

my experiences have shown that american manufactered cars can last a hell of a lot longer than any honda. I realize other poeple have experienced otherwise, but i know 4 pepole who have needed to replace the motors in their hondas before 150,000 miles, and they weren't beaters either. one guys civic's motor block cracked, a friends prelude overheated to the point where it trashed everything, etc. one of my dad's employees has an 80 somthing ford truck with 350,000 miles on it, same motor, no rebuilds or anything, and it still starts everyday. in fact, its the only car he owns. and he beats the crap out of it. so i hear alot about how peoples imports go past 200,000 and still perform great, are more reliable, yadayada, but since i've seen otherwise, i'd have to say that in general, domestics and imports are close enough in terms o reliability to render that argument moot.

[johnc]

We can all come up with anecdotes to support the longevity of pretty much any vehicle. Hell, I know a woman who has 210,000 miles on the first year Yugo and the motor still runs fine.

 

If you look at the numbers compiled over a large sample of vehicles over many years the Japanese manufacturers engineer and produce vehciles of higher reliability then the American or European manufacturers.

 

But, again, that doesn't mean American Car 1 will not last longer then Japanese Car 2. Individual samples will vary from the norm for the whole group. There are lemon Japanese cars and gold star American cars. As a purchaser the odds of buying a gold star vehicle are better if you buy from a Japanese manufacturer.

 

Those odds get that way through better design and manufacture.

[Pop N Wood]

My brother once put over 100,000 miles on a Vega engine. When he told a group of guys at work this they threatened to beat him up for telling such unbelievable crap.

 

I just got an letter from Toyota concerning oil "gelling" in my minivan engine. Seems like certain Toyota V6's are sludging up and burning out the engine before the first oil change. Do a google search.

 

The Japanese have their moments also.

 

BTW, a lot of these issues are marketing related, not engineering. Engineers do what they can, but it is ultimately a management decision whether something sees production or not.

[Dayz]

Ok guys, lets stop the anecdotes!! This is a really good tread and we have to keep it.

The american philosophy isn't the same as the japaneses. American develop their cars to be real cheap (in price), and the japanese, to build reliable cars at a more expensive cost.

 

We cant compare oranges and bananas!! They both have different objectives for their final product. After talking to some CEO of toyota, he told me that the only reason american cars were surviving is because of their prices....0.1% interest rate while jap cars are at 6%. This is from founded souce.

 

Technologie: I'm not saying that american engineers are not as good as the jap... but they have different objective. One builds cheap hp/economical engine and the other one, push the technologie at the limit. Yes the japanese car are better, but more expensive. It depends what you want and willing to pay !!

 

If you look at v8 from japan, they are making pretty good hp/liter. sc 430 for exemple, even the six banger as the skyline or supras. Master of the turbos. If you look at the developping cost, jap have a lot more R&D.

 

All in all, they don't have the same objectives and yes I think jap cars are better but not willing to pay the price, so they buy cheap/reliable cars.

Two concepts that works!!

 

Any question!!!

[Guest Nic-Rebel450CA]

I have one word for all of you...

 

"variables"

 

That is what this is all about, why does eng A last longer than eng B?

Variables.

Why does eng A produce more power than eng B?

Variables.

Why will questions like this never be answered?

Variables.

 

Unless you can take two engines and compare them under exactly the same variables then you will never have a scientific answer.

 

I hope this server has lots of space because we are bound to keep chasing our tails on this one...

[Dp351zcar]

Yes it will go on forever. Some people would start the tail chase by turning to the left and going forever claiming that they were correct. Then the other would go right and claim they were right.

 

Don

[Guest Chris240turbo]

I just wish a manufacturer from any country built a reasonably priced, new car that I would be interested in purchasing as a daily driver, with the death of the f body GM, we are pretty much forced to buy a mustang as a fun, reasonably quick, rear drive car, or pay mucho dinero for an S2000, C-5, M-3, etc. or settle for 2 seats, a la 350z, pardon my cynicism, I've been new car shopping for a month, and there isn't anything out there, with the exception of the mustang, that appears fun to drive, has enough power to get out of it's own way, doesn't cost a mint, and is rear wheel drive, and holds more than two occupants, I guess I'll go buy a truck to drive to work...

[johnc]

I just wish a manufacturer from any country built a reasonably priced, new car that I would be interested in purchasing as a daily driver

 

Why limit your choice to a new vehicle? There a many great used BMW 3 series that fit your criteria exactly.

[Guest Damn Cracker]

if you were in australia, i think almost all of Holden's lineup meets your criteria

[Guest DaneL24]

Something I would like to add to the Japanese' reasoning for building smaller motors and such...you must consider that unlike the United States, Japan doesn't have very much land area, and as a result not as many natural resources as the United States. They have to buy a lot of their metals from other countries, which the U.S.A. doesn't have to do as much...so it isn't very cost effective to build big V8s over in Japan. This also helps explain why they build smaller cars using thinner metal...instead of big Caddie cars like us.

[Guest rick458]

GM is putting Honda engines in the pontiac Vue

but it is a product swap Honda want 65,000

Duramax deisels for a heavy truck they are building

BTW the Duramax puts out like 505 ft/lbs torque

[Guest Damn Cracker]

At about 2000 rpm. And its redline is what, 4000? deisles are weird...

[DavyZ]

Something I would like to add to the Japanese' reasoning for building smaller motors and such...you must consider that unlike the United States, Japan doesn't have very much land area, and as a result not as many natural resources as the United States. They have to buy a lot of their metals from other countries, which the U.S.A. doesn't have to do as much...so it isn't very cost effective to build big V8s over in Japan. This also helps explain why they build smaller cars using thinner metal...instead of big Caddie cars like us.

 

That is partially correct---they have fuel costs of over $5.00 per gallon. Also (but I'm not sure) they may (I say MAY) be taxed on the size of the motor, like they are in most parts of Europe. That and the fuel costs keeps engine size down in many parts of the world. Makes me think of what would have happened if there were no such restrictions anywhere...

 

Davy

[Pop N Wood]

Something I would like to add to the Japanese' reasoning for building smaller motors and such...you must consider that unlike the United States' date=' Japan doesn't have very much land area, and as a result not as many natural resources as the United States. They have to buy a lot of their metals from other countries, which the U.S.A. doesn't have to do as much...so it isn't very cost effective to build big V8s over in Japan. This also helps explain why they build smaller cars using thinner metal...instead of big Caddie cars like us.[/quote']

 

That is partially correct---they have fuel costs of over $5.00 per gallon. Also (but I'm not sure) they may (I say MAY) be taxed on the size of the motor, like they are in most parts of Europe. That and the fuel costs keeps engine size down in many parts of the world. Makes me think of what would have happened if there were no such restrictions anywhere...

 

Davy

 

Japan fought a world war in part due to their lack of natural resources.

 

Japanese cars are heavily taxed based on displacement, or at least they use to be. That is why so many Preludes had 2 litre motors.

[Michael]

This brings up an interesting point: we typically compare engine efficiency in terms of power produced vs. cylinder volume displaced, or overall vehicle efficiency in terms of miles per gallon. But we know that vehicle acceleration depends mainly on power to weight ratio, and that for performance cars, a large part of overall vehicle weight is the engine and its supporting systems.

 

So why don’t we normally compare engines in terms of power to engine weight?

 

Large-displacement engines are not necessarily very heavy, while small-displacement engines aren’t necessarily light. Broadly speaking, you get more cubic inches per pound, so to speak, from a huge V8 than from a tiny L4. A 400 cubic inch engine probably won’t be 4 times heavier than a 100 cubic inch engine – in fact, the ratio may be closer to 2:1. So in terms of engine power to weight ratio, that lumbering low-tech cast-iron V8 doesn’t look so bad any more.

 

I’m baffled by the concept of taxing displacement in addition to (or instead of) taxing fuel. Is a temperamental, high-revving small-displacement engine – making 20 mpg in vehicle XYZ – any more environmentally friendly than an engine in a lower state of tune, that displaces another liter or two, but weighs the same and gets the same mpg? Taxing displacement drives manufacturers to more complex designs, raising costs and reducing reliability. I wonder how things would have been different if Toyota and Honda built cast-iron, pushrod V8’s with 4500 rpm redlines. Those things would run for maybe 2 million miles, and go 100,000 miles between oil changes.