NSX production to end
07-22-2005, 09:44 AM
#51
Free Autographed Pictures
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: PRC
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Aoshi Shinomori
Ok, I'm not teh best at explaining things. To the best of my knowledge, VVT only alters the cam timing, but VTEC allows for changing valve duration and lift as well. I'd say just from numbers that Honda's system is better. 240 out of 2 liters as opposed to 180 out of 1.8. Maybe someone else can explain better 
07-22-2005, 10:58 AM
#52
1.3L is enough 4 anybody
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rotarian_SC
Yes, but isn't VTEC just an excuse to not to use a racing cam on the whole rev range? I would like just a plain racing cam, like the one that is switched to for VTEC, to run for all the rev range, and put that as an option. It should be less expensive than VTEC to do that too.
07-22-2005, 11:47 AM
#53
Free Autographed Pictures
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: PRC
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RevTo9K
I think that the idea is to offer low-end driveability with the milder cam lobes.
07-22-2005, 11:49 AM
#54
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RX-Hachi
Highly unlikely that it will be that light with a V10. 1280kg is about the weight of the old FD RX-7. The current NSX with a V6 weighs in at 3153 lbs. About 150 lbs more than the RX-8.
If Mazda does come out with a 4th gen RX-7 to battle with the new Supra, GT-R, and NSX, it won't match them in raw HP, but it will surely be the lightest of the group.
If Mazda does come out with a 4th gen RX-7 to battle with the new Supra, GT-R, and NSX, it won't match them in raw HP, but it will surely be the lightest of the group.
07-22-2005, 02:14 PM
#55
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 1,266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mazinkaiser1001
The NSX weighs around 1270kg, due to it's aluminium construction. Is the RX-8 lighter than that or weighs around that?
07-22-2005, 07:29 PM
#57
Bummed, but bring on OU!
Originally Posted by Aoshi Shinomori
Ok, I'm not teh best at explaining things. To the best of my knowledge, VVT only alters the cam timing, but VTEC allows for changing valve duration and lift as well. I'd say just from numbers that Honda's system is better. 240 out of 2 liters as opposed to 180 out of 1.8. Maybe someone else can explain better
Toyota's VVTLi also adjusts lift and duration. Ferrari (i know i know) uses 3D cam profiles and just shifts the cam forward for more performance. Honda's 240 comes from revs, but the upper cam allows them to run in those revs. Toyota made 180 horses with their 1.8L but only rev'd to 7600. Had the engine been designed to run at 9000rpm they too could probably make 120hp/L. But 9000rpm piston engines for a mass market car is asking for trouble. It works for a niche car, because those who buy them will generally take care of them properly.
http://www.corollaperformance.com/TechInfo/VVTLi.html
07-24-2005, 08:45 PM
#58
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: PNW
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rotarian_SC
Yeah, I can understand the low end gas milage and driveability, on an Accord. At least make the full racing cam an option for those who aren't that concerned about the low end driveability.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Racingjunkie
Series I Wheels, Tires, Brakes & Suspension
2
09-29-2015 05:05 PM
