Old argument but an interesting webpage :

http://www.v8914.com/Horsepower-v-torque.htm

No real conclusions (as its all theoretical) but IMo says whichever the car has been designed for is ok...and of course your personal preference.

 

I agree with his points, and they are backed up with some pretty easy to understand figures. However the comment he makes at the end doesn't apply to an NA rotatry engine.

The NA rotary engine produces near maximum torque across two thirds of its rev range, compared to the small high revving engine he uses in his example. The Honda S2000 engine also has a larger area of torque than his example engine due to its VVT.

Therefore to extend his theory, it is probably the volume of the area beneath the torque curve that is important, when comparing disimmilar engine types.

 

Here is an interesting site about much better (still slow to RX-8 buyers) Camry 4 cyl.-like acceleration, coming from Toyota
(about a 2 second improvement to mid 10 sec.s in 0 - 62 mph times), where torque same as before for engine and H.P. max. up a tad (6) but more for System (12) at vehicle speed 85 kph vs. 120 in the old.

This is the high voltage system coming to the RX330, with an additional motor driving rear wheels. But in this system we are dealing with a 1.5 L engine.

http://www.toyota.co.jp/IRweb/specia...II/ths2_1.html

Although the Max. torque for the Motor is 400 N-m or 40.8 kg m
for rpms anywhere from 0 - 1,200, you have to look to last section on Drive shaft output (kW) to see how new System compares with old.

The 50 to 80 km/h Acceleration is 4.3 sec.s approx.

 

yes, this was Rich's old favourite site... a pretty good summary.

...if you haven't read it, basically it says "horsepower is a better way of determining how strong an engine is, as it accounts for rpm: torque and rpm are equally as effective at motivating something because of gearing".

 

Actually, the site I always linked was
this one, but Rob's is excellent.

Thanks for the link.

 

HP sells cars, torque wins races

 

Where's the :rolleyes emoticon when you need it?

 

( ') ( ')
. o
------

Will this do?:D

 

gord boyd,

I don't know if I mentioned this elsewhere on the forum. If I have, and anyone noticed, I apologized for repeating myself.

Anyway, my mechanic has a theory that hybrid systems will be the performance mod of the future. The current hybrids are all attempts to get 20% or better gas mileage improvements while minimizing any performance reduction. He thinks the way for Toyota or Honda make the technology profitable is to take, say, a Celica or a Civic SI and put the hybrid system in place without reducing the standard engine. If they can get 20% better mileage with a slight performance hit, maybe they can get 10% or even 15% better performance without affecting mileage.

Even if it would work, I'm sure it's years away. But I think the idea is interesting.

 

you mean something like this honda dualnote concept

 

....Oh. :p I guess it's already been done.

I'll take one!

 

I neglected to say that while reducing acceleration times by 2 seconds (0-62 mph), and perhaps bettering overtaking times vs. RX-8, mileage improved 15%, emmissions are down 30% from current Prius, and new platform at .26 Cd promises much quieter
highway sppeds. The savings of 66% the gasoline purchases
still don't make up for the driving pleasures lost from a finely
balanced chassis for most people, but who says this modular technology won't be shoehorned into a nice driving package.
They call this "Torque On Demand".

And who said Japanese lagged in creativity, or original research?
Not in the Auto industry.

 

Yep - hybrids should do well over the next 10-20 years while we wait for a hydrogen infrastructure to be built. I am replacing my Acura MDX (real world 19mpg, ULEV, 0-60 in 8 secs, carry 7 people etc) with a Lexus RX330 hybrid (due out at the end of 2004) which should give similar performance (0-60 in under 8 secs) but do over 30mpg and be even cleaner.

 

People on the Acura boards strongly believe the next NSX will be using DualNote to improve power/performance from the ubiquitous V6 (Honda refuses to build a V8 for various reasons).

 

Interesting that they won't build a V-8. I hadn't noticed that until you pointed it out.

A properly massaged V-6 can be very powerful and lots of fun... but I would think Honda loses a lot of sales from their lack of an available V-8.

 

Absolutely - have you seen the sales of the $45k Acura RL with it's FWD and V6 that's weaker than a TL. I can understand Honda prefering a tuned V6 to a V8, but why no RWD (except for NSX and S2000 which just show they can do RWD well)? Sticking with only FWD is killing them in the $30k+ market for Acura (CL recently killed, TL sales slowing, RL very weak - only MDX is doing well above $30k, and RSX/TSX below $30k). I have heard that some future Acura vehicles (e.g. new RL) might be AWD...

 

Boo!!
Honda - VTEC
Toyota - VVTi

:p

I'm also dissapointed by Honda's reluctance to build more RWD cars with a V6, V8 or perhaps a straight 5/6..
Does anyone remember the Vigor? It had an inline 5 but was it RWD?
I think Honda refuses to go V8 mostly for the weight savings which we all can appreciate but if you are going to market and price the NSX as an everyday supercar, a V6 with 300hp will not do. Shrug.

 

It will if that V6 puts out an impressive amount of power (ie, BMWs 3.2 I6 with 333 horses in the M3), and manages to keep the weight down.

 

Well the NSX is already at 290hp.. so yes if this power was increased to around 340-360hp while keeping the weight similar the NSX would be in supercar performance territory. Imo I don't disagree with Honda that V8 engines are not totally necessary.. I'd rather have a 3000lb car with a 300hp V6 than a 4000lb car with a V8.. but if they are going to put out heavier cars like the bigger Acuras, Honda will have to up the hp ante somehow..

 

Honda doesn't *have* to do anything... they sell an obscene amount of cars because they know what the hell they are doing... they market their cars properly and effectively and thus far even in the States, where we are all horsepower junkies, they sell exceedingly well.

I disagree they *have* to up the ante.... Honda has a plan and while I've never been much a fan of their products (except for the RSX, Prelude, and S2000), I have to admit that they build a quality product and offer it for the right price.

Building that 'supercar' is just an image thing that really... is inapplicable to Honda. When you think of BMW, you think M3, M5, etc.

When you think of Honda, you think Accord or Civic. That branding leads itself to being a great selling car regardless of the power they are putting out. They have reliability, clean design, and good value. And that's the image they will continue to send out. The S2000 is just an example of them making a car that's obscenely fun to drive.

 

yeah, obviously that's true, but a V8 won't add 1000lbs, maybe something like 100-200 (if it's a really awful design)...

i think that Honda should get off their asses and make an ACTUALLY FAST supercar, something with the go to justify that kind of sticker price... even a "value priced" supercar?? say, a 450hp 3.0L-3.5L V10 (use F1 for direct advertisments) for a little more than what the NSX is at now??

 

do a search on the honda dualnote i posted about it just yesterday so it shouldn't be hard to find. it's a hybrid. gas mid(in the back)engine driving the rear with electrics driving the front. 400hp. it's just a concept but i think it show the direction their headed for more HP and fuel economy.

 

True but Honda is in a dangerous territory imo. Judging from the feedback in our club, many people in the 18-30 category, and even me at 32 find the new Honda products bland and just plain boring and are NOT getting a Honda as their next car.. Sure they are great commuters, reliable and reasonably cheap.. but if you lose touch with the younger market that demands the "fun factor" in a vehicle that will eventually catch up to you.

I see Mazda now as Honda was in the late 80's/early 90's..
Back then the Civic although cheap was a very fun car to drive with the all independent double wishbone suspension and smooth revving, great little 4 banger engines. The CRX was a great little car, almost gokart like, light with 100hp and great handling.. The Prelude was the top of the line car that showcased Honda technology like 4ws and VTEC, etc.. It was a very fun car to drive, the 5th gen (mine) was billed as the best handling FWD vehicle under $30K US.. Nowadays the Prelude is gone, Civic, at least in North America is NOT fun anymore.. RSX type S has some potential but the styling leaves much to be desired imo.. The car enthusiast in me is dissapointed with Honda and like many others in my club, I'm looking elsewhere. The S2000 is a little too impractical for me, especially in the winter.. Honda needs to bring back the Prelude with RWD and a 4 cylinder 200-240hp engine.. shrug.

Mazda right now is making some very fun cars, Protege, RX-8, 6.. If the reliability stays up there Mazda has the potential to take a big chunk of the "fun crowd" away from others.. which should turn into future older customers..

 

Honda won't build a V8 (crossplane crankshaft) engine because it is morally against piece of **** engines.

The crossplank crank V8 is the lowest performance engine on the market. It edges out Inline 5 and V10s and also the boxing 4.

The V8 was an improvement over inline 8's of the pre WW2 era. Those I8's were effectively 2 inline 4 cylinder running simultaneously to counter the inherrent second order force imbalance of inline 4's. (How come they didn't want to use the Lancaster balance shafts for an inline4)

But the firing order of the V8 is it biggest weakness L R L L R L R R repeat
http://www.summitracing.com/tech/cha...ts_firing.htm#

The irregular firing is what give the V8 its characteristic sound. That is the sound of innefficiency.

 

My current Vigor has 295k miles. You've got the engine right, but it is front wheel drive. Everyone car hear my CV joints announce this fact at every turn. I NEED my 8 ASAP!

As also a prior owner of the CRX, the GREATEST Honda ever made (mine had 300K miles when I was forced to sell it against my will), I too am leaving the Honda fold after 5 EXCELLENT Honda cars. This is all due to the lack of "fun/excitment" in their more practicle cars. If I had an extra $100k laying around, sure I'd love an NSX. But I need a daily driver now.