|
Its more to do with the fact sales have been poor, and honda are not prepared to invest (not much) in making it Euro V compliant.
|
|
I am not sure of my facts, as usual, but might the Atom be exempt from EU V on the grounds of limited production? I don't think they have to be crash tested either, on that basis.
|
Honda have been abandoning the racy image for a more staid and "green" one. No doubt there will be a faster one if there is demand but to be honest the lack of torque from this engine made it feel decidedly limp unless you were birching the hell out of it and it could not hold a candle to the turbo opposition for everyday usability. Plus the Type R enthusiasts didn't think it was as good as it's multilink equipped forerunner.
If you want an edgy screamer for less money get a Clio Cup: more power (just) cheaper, better handling and revs almost as high (well 7800rpm)/
|
>> edgy screamer for less money get a Clio Cup
A friend just collected his the other day. Cracking bit of kit for the money.
|
IMHO, these torque-deficient screamer engines just don't work in modern, heavy cars. It was OK when Honda could make a Civic weigh 1000kg, but saddled with 1300kg of modern, NCAP friendly bodyshell there's just too much neck-wringing involved to make progress.
I also blame the advances in turbocharging. There's still a throttle response penalty with forced induction, but modern engine management and variable geometry turbines have made it so small that most people will never notice it. Not only that, but a good modern turbo engine is delivering near maximum torque from 2000 RPM upwards, sometimes less. A VTEC needs three times that.
|
>> VTEC needs three times that.
Agree, it's a shame though because they sound amazing. Same mate that bought the new Clio 200 cup chopped in an Integra Type-R. What a machine that was. Redline was up around 9.5k rpm i think. What a noise. Just a shame there were only 4 cyls.
|
|
The lack of accessible performance (from torque) compared with turbo rivals certainly out-weighs the pleasure derived from the screaming engine for me, coupled with the unacceptable ride the car was always compromised imho. However, it's still a brave design and a stunning shape - roomy if a little impractical in day to day driving.
|
As mentioned by myself in the "Honda" thread about a week ago Honda do appear to being left behind a bit - I hope that Hondas geeks are currently working on small displacement VTEC-turbo petrols.
If they think petrol-electric hybrids are going to be the winners over the next 3-5 years they will lose.
Likewise if they think H2 fuel cells will power personal automotive transport any time before nuclear fusion is harnessed for electricity generation, or we go back to making 'town gas' from hydrolysing water over coal/coke.
The Top Gear morons really should use their neurone(s?) before backing hydrogen as the 'saviour' of cars - the vast amount of energy required to electrolyse water to hydrogen makes this a tad unlikely.
|
Direct injection and turbo charging probably relegate VTEC into the history file. I doubt there will be any use for it in conjunction with turbo charged, direct injection engines -- which definitely are the trend just now.
This is a shame, but it's undeniably progress in most ways.
|
I agree.
Plus of course the camless valvetrains which are no doubt coming once the technology is perfected. Truly infinitely variable valve timing and lift, and with the ability to do away with a throttle plate as per Fiat's MultiAir system, and throttle the engine entirely through valve lift control.
The technology is dogged by problems at the moment, but I wouldn't bet against it appearing in due course as things move on. Who'd have thought we'd have fuel injectors capable of delivering five accurately metered pulses of fuel per cycle 20 years ago?
Last edited by: DP on Wed 11 Aug 10 at 16:29
|
"Not only that, but a good modern turbo engine is delivering near maximum torque from 2000 RPM upwards, sometimes less. A VTEC needs three times that."
Can I ask a question?
Maximum torque at 6000 rpm suggests to me that when it comes to getting a car up a hill, you are going need to get a good run at it if you have a VTEC engine. Is that correct? Or, to put it another way, does that mean that a Honda with a VTEC engine would probably struggle more than a comparable car going up a hill starting from stationary?
|
> when it comes to getting a car up a hill
It just means in the VTEC you'll be in a lower gear (and so revving higher) than say a turbo diesel, when both cars are going up the hill at the same speed.
But if it was a race to the top, the VTEC would win. Similar torque to a garden variety turbo diesel, but it's at the top of the rev range rather than the bottom - so much much more power.
|
Ahhh, right. Thanks for that.
But while the VTEC will win, the turbo-diesel driver will feel more relaxed as he gets to the top?
;-)
|
>> But while the VTEC will win, the turbo-diesel driver will feel more relaxed as he gets to the top?
Haha only if he's in a suitably spacious vehicle. Berlingo would be a good bet i'd think ;-)
Could have the best of both worlds, a berlingo with a VTEC lump mounted in the rear.
|
The important thing to remember about the quoted power output on a car is that it's only a peak figure quoted. It tells you nothing about how an engine delivers its power throughout the rev range. A VTEC engine, rather like a modern motorbike engine makes a lot of power because it sustains its useful work (torque) into very high revs. Power = work done / time taken. It does the same amount of work as any other engine of comparable size, but can do it a lot quicker than most. So it is more powerful.
A turbodiesel is the opposite. It can usually do significantly more work than a petrol engine of equivalent size, but can only do that work at a fairly slow rate. So it is often less powerful. A petrol turbo engine has the best of both worlds, and is therefore usually the most powerful of all.
|
|
But you must always remember that diesel is much heavier than benzin by volume and I believe has around 20% more energy.
|
>> But if it was a race to the top, the VTEC would win. Similar torque
>> to a garden variety turbo diesel, but it's at the top of the rev range
>> rather than the bottom - so much much more power.
>>
Have the VTEC engines really come on that much ?
Last time I looked they were rated at 214Nm @ over 5000rpm. A run of the mill 1.6TD produces 240 @ 1700, 2.0TD engines are running 340Nm.
|
"Berlingo would be a good bet i'd think ;-)
Could have the best of both worlds, a berlingo with a VTEC lump mounted in the rear."
:-)
Or even a Berlingo with a petrol turbo engine, which apparently would be better. No doubt someone will be along in a minute to recommend a Roomster with a TSI engine.
"Have the VTEC engines really come on that much ?
Last time I looked they were rated at 214Nm @ over 5000rpm. A run of the mill 1.6TD produces 240 @ 1700, 2.0TD engines are running 340Nm."
Ahhh. So are there two issues - a) the amount of torque a VTEC engine will produce, and b) the number of revs that it will produce it at? My petrol Berlingo will produce a maximum of about 145 Nm @ roughly 4500 rpm. But even at 2500 it's still producing about 135 Nm, according to the manufacturer. What does the torque curve of a VTEC engine look like?
|
>> What does the torque curve of a VTEC engine look like?
>>
It's pretty flat from 3k to 6k, then a step up before trailing away at around 7800.
|
>> Last time I looked they were rated at 214Nm @ over 5000rpm.
Yeah that's about right. It's the @over 5000rpm bit that's key for VTEC, they keep going, so peak torque would be around 7000rpm, it kind of plateau's so peak power will be just before it starts dropping, maybe around 8000rpm (say for a K20A in an integra type r). Redline at 8500rpm.
>> A run of the mill 1.6TD produces 240 @ 1700, 2.0TD engines are running 340Nm.
Hmmm, garden variety would probably be something like a Ford Mondeo 2.0td to my mind? They were the duratorq engines back when the VTEC K series was current, so ~280nm i think?
>> Roomster with a TSI engine.
Could choose worse ;-)
>> a) the amount of torque a VTEC engine will produce, and b) the number of revs that it will produce it at?
Yeah, to be fair, they're the key factors for all engines.
If you make peak torque of 145nm at 4500rpm, the engine is putting out ~91bhp. If you can somehow shift that peak up the rev range (VTEC) to say 145nm @ 7000rpm = ~143bhp.
Same torque, but totally different power output and delivery of power. Acceleration will be much improved in the VTEC case (although to be fair that's as much to do with the fuel type as it is the engine) and top end speed will be much higher.
|
No reason variable valve systems can't run in series with forced induction.
The Ariel Atom can be specced with a supercharged Civic Type-R engine I believe- 300bhp or so.
My Forester turbo has variable valve timing (only acts on intake valves - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCS ) in addition to the blower.
With the improvements in fuelling and ignition over the past 20 years I think this will be the way to go, meshing VVT (VTEC/AVCS/whatever) with turbocharging +/- supercharging for low rev torque, especially as there is no sign of the biggest markets (US and China) really being that keen on diesel.
A lot depends upon tax regimes of course...
Last edited by: Lygonos on Thu 12 Aug 10 at 16:49
|
Honda Civic Type R II - Latest casualty in Euro V emissions requirements - Zero
