Honda 4cyl Engines

Messages
3,894
Location
missouri usa
i personally prefer my 1.9 dohc saturn over any civic engine or accord. my buddy has a 98 civic its a good car but honda engines just sound ticky....idk how to say it probably best put as has a lack of man jewels. lol it is only a 1.6 but its a pooch.
 
Messages
5,628
Location
London, ON, Canada
Originally Posted By: chevyboy14
i personally prefer my 1.9 dohc saturn over any civic engine or accord. my buddy has a 98 civic its a good car but honda engines just sound ticky....idk how to say it probably best put as has a lack of man jewels. lol it is only a 1.6 but its a pooch.
I love the Saturn DOHC too.. Hope to get another one day...
 
Messages
3,566
Location
Somewhere
Originally Posted By: SLCraig
They are not overrated, they really do make an excellent 4 cyl engine. They are not only reliable, but they are fun to drive and love to rev. Until you've driven something with proper VTEC you probably would not understand. 9000 RPM on the S2000 is amazing. Truly awesome.
Why on Earth would I want a gutless 4 cyl that you have to wind up to get it to go anywhere? Which is pretty much what most years of the S2000 were. I don't get the allure of winding up an engine. I'll take the smooth power of, say a V8 that may not rev but there is power just about wherever in the rev band you happen to be. Or even the mesa-flat torque curve of my Ecoboost 3.5. That's truly awesome where I can be in 6th gear and pass someone on the highway without kicking down. Or tooling around and town having tons of power no matter the gear. That's awesome, not some screaming engine.
 
Messages
5,133
Location
chicago, Illinois
Originally Posted By: buster
Japan has destroyed the domestics over the last 30 years when it comes to 4cyl engines. It's only been until recently that the domestics have made some good 4cyl engines.
It's comical that anyone has the gall to argue with this statement. If you count the US market specifically, the Japanese MURDERED the domestic brands when it came to good 4 cylinder engines. Yep, the Japanese wiped the floor with GM, Ford, and Chrysler. You can't count the European Ford and GM units because they did NOT sell them here regretfully. But instead ponied up mostly [censored] from the mid 70s until the late 90s.
 
Messages
3,566
Location
Somewhere
Originally Posted By: buster
You have to be kidding? Japan has destroyed the domestics over the last 30 years when it comes to 4cyl engines. It's only been until recently that the domestics have made some good 4cyl engines.
Define destroy. Longevity? Power? Reliability, what? Cause here are a few 70's and 80's domestic 4 bangers that have proven to be reliable. Ford Lima 2.0/2.3/2.5 OHC 4 banger. Made its debut in the Pinto and powered plenty of Mustangs, Rangers, LTD2's, etc, all the way to 2003. Turbocharge it and it lived in Tuebo Coupes and made around 200 HP. You can still buy this engine from Ford Power Products for industrial applications. Not the best HP but a good amount of torque and drop dead reliable. I beat the you know what of it and at 175k it still started on the first time and idled smooth. Ford CVH 1.6/1.9/2.0. Powered millions of Escorts and Focuses throughout 20 or so years. Not a smooth engine at all but quite reliable and tunable if you followed the maintenance. That was the key with this one - don't overheat it, keep up with oil changes and timing belt changes. You could turbo it and it would put out over 200 HP. I drove one of these in an Escort and it was a fine engine at 120k or so when I traded it off. GM 2.5 Iron Duke. If you got one without the plastic timing gears it was quite a reliable engine. Powered many FWD GM cars over the years and did a stint behind some S10's and Blazers. You can still get this one from GM Power as a Marine and Industrial engine. Chrysler 2.2/2.5. K Car staple and was a decent engine. Don't know much other than a friend had a one in an Omni and the body went before the engine. Sorry, but I don't worship at the Altar of Honda. Their cars have always been average in reliability, average in build quality, but slightly above average in handling. Yes, they build a high revving 4 cyl engine that is smooth but that's about it. And many of us really don't care to rev the bejeezus out of an engine - it's tiring and annoying.
 
Messages
3,566
Location
Somewhere
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
It's comical that anyone has the gall to argue with this statement.
Separate the engines from the cars. The cars sucked but many of the engines were fine.
 
Messages
3,566
Location
Somewhere
Lets compare Honda Engines of the 80's to Domestics: Honda CVCC 1.4L (81-83 Civic) - 63 hp (47 kW) @ 5000 rpm and 77 lb·ft (104 N·m) @ 3000 rpm. Ford CVH 1.6 (81-85 Escort) - 69 hp (51 kW) and 86 ft·lbf (117 N·m) GM 1.8 OHV (82 Cavalier) - 88hp, can't find torque. Honda A18A 1.8L from the Accord - 88 hp (66 kW) @ 6000 rpm, 91 lb·ft (123 N·m) torque @ 3500 rpm Honda A20A3 and A20A4 - 120 hp (89 kW) @ 5500 rpm & 122 lb·ft (165 N·m) @ 4000 rpm (12 valve) Ford CVH 1.9L - 86 hp (64 kW) and 100 ft·lbf (140 N·m) Ford 2.3L Lima - 88hp, 118lb-ft So where is this murder? The engines seem to be close in power....
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,164
Location
Fresno, CA
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: buster
You have to be kidding? Japan has destroyed the domestics over the last 30 years when it comes to 4cyl engines. It's only been until recently that the domestics have made some good 4cyl engines.
Sorry, but I don't worship at the Altar of Honda. Their cars have always been average in reliability, average in build quality, but slightly above average in handling. Yes, they build a high revving 4 cyl engine that is smooth but that's about it. And many of us really don't care to rev the bejeezus out of an engine - it's tiring and annoying.
I've only owned 1 4cyl Honda (CR-V) and it was more than up to the task. I've owned several 4 cyl domestics (Ranger, Focus, Maverick, Luv, Pinto, etc.) and was not impressed (not reliable at all). I don't worship at the Honda Altar either but I will not hesitate in driving/owning one. Or a Subaru. Or a Toyota.
 

Win

Messages
4,705
Location
Arkansas
Originally Posted By: buster
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
I don't understand what's so special about Honda engines?
Nothing - they are overrated just like their cars. I could list a few domestic 4 bangers that are just as reliable and can easily make it to 200k.
You have to be kidding? Japan has destroyed the domestics over the last 30 years when it comes to 4cyl engines. It's only been until recently that the domestics have made some good 4cyl engines.
The only 4 banger Honda I owned, and I bought it new in '79, was shot by 73K, and it smoked like a mosquito fogger for quite a while before that. The Civic used a manual choke. Like my lawnmower, except my lawnmower didn't smoke like a house on fire and always had enough compression to start. The Honda was replaced with an '83 Turbo T-Bird, also bought new, with a 2.3 litre four that was vastly superior in every way to the gutless CVCC wheezer. The Ford used the EEC-IV EFI system that was highly sophisticated for the time. GM's DOHC came out in the late 80's. I'm sure there are others but four bangers never interested me much. When did Honda finally fuel inject an engine? 2000? Honda may make OK engines now, but they were low grade junk once, and to say that the domestics have only just now made good four pots is ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,439
Originally Posted By: Win
Originally Posted By: buster
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
I don't understand what's so special about Honda engines?
Nothing - they are overrated just like their cars. I could list a few domestic 4 bangers that are just as reliable and can easily make it to 200k.
You have to be kidding? Japan has destroyed the domestics over the last 30 years when it comes to 4cyl engines. It's only been until recently that the domestics have made some good 4cyl engines.
The only 4 banger Honda I owned, and I bought it new in '79, was shot by 73K, and it smoked like a mosquito fogger for quite a while before that. The Civic used a manual choke. Like my lawnmower, except my lawnmower didn't smoke like a house on fire and always had enough compression to start. The Honda was replaced with an '83 Turbo T-Bird, also bought new, with a 2.3 litre four that was vastly superior in every way to the gutless CVCC wheezer. The Ford used the EEC-IV EFI system that was highly sophisticated for the time. GM's DOHC came out in the late 80's. I'm sure there are others but four bangers never interested me much. When did Honda finally fuel inject an engine? 2000? Honda may make OK engines now, but they were low grade junk once, and to say that the domestics have only just now made good four pots is ridiculous.
Actually the first Honda/Acura PGM-FI car was the 1984 Accord, far before 2000. An engine can be bad based on design, but any neglected engine will fail before others, Honda has built up this reputation on stories of super neglected motors still going, I guess that means reliability?? I'm just enjoying the power to weight ratio, killer MPG, and ease of repair.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Messages
60
Location
NE TN
I have owned two of these engines you put up against Honda. The 1.6L in a 1981 Escort. This was the engine that turned me into a shade tree mechanic. The most troublesome, worked on car I have ever had! The other a 2.3L in a 1981 Mercury Capri. This slug of a car wouldn't fall out of a tree and had to be rebuilt before it reached 100,000 miles. All of the Honda cars I've owned have been ultra reliable and, quick for what they are. My current work car is a 1990 Integra. It has 245,000 miles and has never had any kind of engine work, only routine maintenance. When comparing apples to apples, there is no comparison.
 
Messages
1,664
Location
louisville ky
Same here I have a Honda Accord with the 2.4 with 175,000. No problems with it and it does not burn oil.... My Chrysler 2.2 and 2.5 both needed head gaskets before 70,000 and had a loud piston slap in both of the motors.... also much much much better MPG with the Honda and it has a chain not a belt like the other two Chrysler engins did....
 
Messages
1,673
Location
new jersey
Yup, the 2.2L 4 Cyl without VTEC in my fathers 97' Accord has 224k miles on it, and barely burns any oil in 7500 miles (not a measurable amount). Believe it or not, this sucker still has the original timing belt. I want to see how long it can go before the belt breaks and ruins a good motor.
 
Messages
9,560
Location
Boston, MA
How many 4 bangers has GM designed and abandoned over the years, starting with the linerless Vega disaster? The quad 4, the iron duke, the half bleep Pontiac V8 cut in half? They said they bought SAAB to get "advanced" 4 cylinder technology. What happened there? Opel probably builds a pretty good motor, where is it?
 
Messages
6,902
Location
Louisiana
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
How many 4 bangers has GM designed and abandoned over the years, starting with the linerless Vega disaster? The quad 4, the iron duke, the half bleep Pontiac V8 cut in half? They said they bought SAAB to get "advanced" 4 cylinder technology. What happened there? Opel probably builds a pretty good motor, where is it?
Saab gave them all the turbo tech they poorly utilized until recently. The k series are great engines in most forms. My cr-v's k24a1 has seen all sorts of abuse in its 10 years and ticks along without complaint. In the last 3 or so, it's gotten 1-2 time per year oil changes. The k24z7 in the new Si, which is practically identical to the newest tsx engine, afaik, is giving the aftermarket folks fits, so far. The head only has one exhaust outlet so there's no opportunity for improvement via a header as in past engines. The new Si gets knock for not being an 8k revving beast but the broader torque band is really the only reason I considered it. It's great to drop down a gear or two and toast all but the most determined drivers on the daily commute. But I don't really think of them as special...they just "work." Reliably, I guess...
 
Messages
7,256
Location
USA
My memories of GM 4 cylinder in my dad's Buick Century and a Sonoma. I just don't think 4 cylinders were Detroit's forte in pre mid 2000's.
 
Messages
1,768
Location
NE
Yes those CVCC stratified charge Honda engines from late 70's thru early 80's where complete junk. I changed tons of camshafts in em, along with head gaskets etc. They also had bad rings and a awesome 2 spd auto in the early ones. Everyone in my family made the mistake of buying one, Accords. Had [censored] Mikunoi carbs on em which were a PITA to tune. I agree, low TOurque Hi RPM gutless complex engines I certainly wouldnt be bragging about. I ran my 2.5 Turbo in my shadow to 300K miles, got 32 Mpg and was so much easier to work on than any honda of the same vintage.
Originally Posted By: Win
Originally Posted By: buster
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
I don't understand what's so special about Honda engines?
Nothing - they are overrated just like their cars. I could list a few domestic 4 bangers that are just as reliable and can easily make it to 200k.
You have to be kidding? Japan has destroyed the domestics over the last 30 years when it comes to 4cyl engines. It's only been until recently that the domestics have made some good 4cyl engines.
The only 4 banger Honda I owned, and I bought it new in '79, was shot by 73K, and it smoked like a mosquito fogger for quite a while before that. The Civic used a manual choke. Like my lawnmower, except my lawnmower didn't smoke like a house on fire and always had enough compression to start. The Honda was replaced with an '83 Turbo T-Bird, also bought new, with a 2.3 litre four that was vastly superior in every way to the gutless CVCC wheezer. The Ford used the EEC-IV EFI system that was highly sophisticated for the time. GM's DOHC came out in the late 80's. I'm sure there are others but four bangers never interested me much. When did Honda finally fuel inject an engine? 2000? Honda may make OK engines now, but they were low grade junk once, and to say that the domestics have only just now made good four pots is ridiculous.
 
Messages
14,505
Location
Top of Virginia
My wife and I just returned from an 800 mile trip in our CR-V to Virginia and the mountains of North Carolina celebrating our 10th wedding anniversary. I plan to post car pictures and more in a different thread, but funny this one came up. I am more impressed with the K24 in our CR-V every time I drive it. Even with only 166 horsepower saddled to a 3,500 pound SUV, it performed just fine in the mountains. We toured over 100 miles on the Blue Ridge Parkway and did many hundreds of miles going up and down on I-77 and I-81 in Virginia and on I-26 and I-40 in North Carolina. It has to downshift to 4th to climb many hills, but that's a non-issue to me. It maintains speed on every hill, and the engine is quiet enough even at 3,500 rpm that it's simply not a bother. And it STILL returned 27.2 mpg on the entire trip. From an AWD SUV. Honda is an engine builder. That's at the heart of most of their business segments. It shows in most of their products. None of them are perfect, but most of them just WORK, and are fun to use to boot.
 
Top