The Powerful Japanese V6

[Thorn]

I believe we may be overanalyzing the reasons why the Japanese offer relatively high hp engines in their near-luxury sport coupes and sedans.

They don't have a history of producing large, muscle-bound V8s like we do in America. They get caught up in the horsepower wars like every other manufacturer (if they want to survive), and they resort to what they do best to compete, which is to build tech-oriented four and six cylinders.

 

[Colby]

The Lexus IS350 3.5 V6 is direct and port injected, with over 12:1 compression. It makes 306 HP and 277 lb ft.

 

[Winston]

Most of the newer Japanese V6's have pretty flat (nice) torque curves. They get flat torque curves through the use of VVT technology. An exception is the Infinity/Nissan 3.5L engine. It does not have VVT.

 

[ekpolk]

Quote:

---

Toyota Tundra 4.7 V8 - 271hp
Buick Enclave 3.6 V6 - 275hp

Do you see how useless these comparisons are. You can't compare different vehicles in different classes that are aimed at different buyers. Of course an old school northstar in a buick isn't going to be a tuned as a weekend racer. They're supposed to be smooth and quiet. Thats what a buick owner wants, not the highest peak hp.

---

Apologies for veering a tad O/T here, but how is a Northstar an "oldschool" engine? Aluminum block and head, DOHC, VVT, etc. -- this is a very modern engine.

 

[Max_Wander]

^ i think he meant 'been around for a while' oldskool

My little 94' 2.5L V6 has no VVT but it uses a 3-mode Helmholtz Resonator Intake Manifold to boost torque at various RPMs. 220HP + 2300lb car = teh fun

 

[Laminar Lou]

Quote:

---

I believe we may be overanalyzing the reasons why the Japanese offer relatively high hp engines in their near-luxury sport coupes and sedans.

They don't have a history of producing large, muscle-bound V8s like we do in America. They get caught up in the horsepower wars like every other manufacturer (if they want to survive), and they resort to what they do best to compete, which is to build tech-oriented four and six cylinders.

---

Also remember that in Japan the engine displacement is directly linked to taxes. The larger the displacement, the higher the tax. It has been said that one of the reasons the rotary engine is still being built by Mazda is for this reason.

A lot of R&D goes into small displacement/high output motors in Japan. Are they better? I don't know. But I can tell you they focus more on this than the American manufacturers because it is practically all they do (with the exception of the big Truck motors they make.) I'll also add that my 4.7L V8 Tundra engine doesn't seem to be very efficient in terms of MPG in comparison to the American brand trucks that produce more power.

 

[97tbird]

my 4.6L Tbird_ reaches 205 hp @ 3000 rpm, and 280 lb-ft around 2500-3000 rpm, I think. now those are rpm's that one can achieve and use practically in daily driving...most japanese cars have to reach not very practical high(er) rpm's to achieve a lot of their hp and torque, like 6-7-8k...who does such constant high rpm driving everyday? so their max hp and torques is just for the book...and for the occasional show-off moment...

 

[4esorselrahc]

Yeah. The V6 in the new Odyssey is quite impressive at a rated 244 hp. But it seems to be even more powerful than that to me. It out performs the V6 that was in an old Taurus SHO (225 hp) from the early 90's that I used to drive. Granted the Odyssey is about 2000 lbs. heavier than the Taurus though, but the Honda engine is very peppy IMO.

 

[ThirdeYe]

My engine definitely doesn't feel like 142hp, that's for sure

Feels a lot quicker than that. Especially after you hit the 3k mark, it realllly takes off.

 

[thrace]

Quote:

---

Odyssey is quite impressive at a rated 244 hp. But it seems to be even more powerful than that to me

---

Quite a low MPG van too. MPG not better than my old Tahoe V8. Should have kept the Tahoe instead.

 

[98LSC32V]

Quote:

---

Most of the newer Japanese V6's have pretty flat (nice) torque curves. They get flat torque curves through the use of VVT technology. An exception is the Infinity/Nissan 3.5L engine. It does not have VVT.

---

No, all G35 motors have VVT on the intake side and starting in 05 the manual transmission motors (rev up) have VVT on both intake and exhaust and the 07 motors have VVT on both intake and exhaust on both auto and manual versions of the car.

 

[4esorselrahc]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Odyssey is quite impressive at a rated 244 hp. But it seems to be even more powerful than that to me

---

Quite a low MPG van too. MPG not better than my old Tahoe V8. Should have kept the Tahoe instead.

---

Not in my case at all. I've been seeing 20-22 mpg mixed and 26-27 mpg highway. I'd say that's outstanding really. Much better than a Tahoe or Suburban (15-20 mpg).

 

[Merkurwwu]

I think another good example is our 2001 Focus Zetec 2.0 versus our 2006 Focus with the Duratec 2.0. The old engine was torquier, pulled away from stop lights quite nicely but really felt like it ran out of breath after 4000rpm. The new Duratec engine is definately missing some of the low-end grunt that the Zetec had, however the top end really is alot more fun and it doesn't run out of breath until after 5000. What does this do for us in fuel economy? In mixed driving the Zetec got better mileage (31mpg vs 29mpg) because it wasn't getting reved as high. But on the highway, when the car was putting along at the speed limit, the new engine gets a pretty consistent 35mpg when the best the Zetec would do was around 33 (it was funny, we used to comment that the old Focus could idle all night and still get 30mpg, no matter what we did we would almost always get 30-32mpg!). Both of these engines were rated at 130 horsepower and both have the same torque. They are even geared similarly so it's all about combustion chamber, intake, cam profile and computer control design. Horsepower really doesn't mean anything in terms of driveability and acceleration numbers.

 

[Warlord]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Toyota Tundra 4.7 V8 - 271hp
Buick Enclave 3.6 V6 - 275hp

Do you see how useless these comparisons are. You can't compare different vehicles in different classes that are aimed at different buyers. Of course an old school northstar in a buick isn't going to be a tuned as a weekend racer. They're supposed to be smooth and quiet. Thats what a buick owner wants, not the highest peak hp.

---

Apologies for veering a tad O/T here, but how is a Northstar an "oldschool" engine? Aluminum block and head, DOHC, VVT, etc. -- this is a very modern engine.

---

As Max said, by old school I mean age wise, not the technology it uses. A 4.6 designed for the 2008 model year would likely have more power but still use the same features like 4 valves/cyl, vvt, aluminum etc.

 

[JHZR2]

Quote:

---

Also remember that in Japan the engine displacement is directly linked to taxes. The larger the displacement, the higher the tax. It has been said that one of the reasons the rotary engine is still being built by Mazda is for this reason.

---

I wonder how many of the engines we have here are actually used there in quantity. Kind of like the fact that in Europe, 4-cyl engines are found in vehicles that here we consider barely 6-cyl material, and generally prefer 8-cyl. engines in.

The engines that are 'standard' in these cars very well may be the engines sold in the more limited distribution "highline" versions of these cars, with a much smaller, less powerful engine being the norm.

JMH

 

[The Critic]

I'm not understanding how an archaic GM 3.8L V6 is comparable to the Toyota 3.5L V6, aside from the two engines being used in vehicles in the same class. Many import V6 engines may have their peak torque at a higher RPM than their domestic counterparts, but in actual practice, the difference isn't nearly as drastic as one would think. While the GM 3.8L V6 may deliver its peak torque at a lower RPM on paper, in daily driving, the Toyota 3.5L feels much, much stronger according to the reviews without sacrificing economy. Edmunds just finished a Detroit to Southern California road trip in their 2007 Camry V6 long-term fleet vehicle and averaged between 30-33 mpg during the course of the trip. The 6-speed Automatic really helps with maximizing efficiency. After all, how many set-ups can you find where the engine will run at 1900 rpm (in 6th gear) at 70 mph?

 

[rpn453]

Quote:

---

Horsepower really doesn't mean anything in terms of driveability and acceleration numbers.

---

It doesn't mean anything in terms of acceleration numbers? I'll give you driveability if you have an auto or don't like using higher revs, but acceleration? A Mazda RX-8 has 159 lb-ft of torque and does 0-60 mph in 6.5 seconds with a 5-60 mph street start of 7.5 seconds and a 1/4-mile of 15.0 seconds at 93 mph. Please name a car with under 160 hp that can match those numbers.

I don't know why horsepower is getting cut down so much. I enjoy an engine that revs smoothly at >7000 rpm. Higher displacement, higher-revs, and forced induction can all be good ways to make an engine better. Even my friend with an '02 Trans Am Firehawk enjoyed the RX-8's engine when we test drove it.

 

[Merkurwwu]

Quote:

---

Please name a car with under 160 hp that can match those numbers.

---

A Lotus Elise... Actually, it's a heck of alot faster. (yes it's significantly lighter but you weren't THAT specific

)

But you're missing the point. Load that RX-8 up with a car full of people and all their stuff and then see how fast it is. Just like my semi-truck example, the RX8 can do a small amount of work VERY quickly. Good for it. The average Buick driver doesn't want to wind up to 7000 rpm, even if they do want to accelerate quickly. Neither do I in the Focus where fuel economy is more important to me than high horsepower.

The reason horsepower gets a bad name is becuase, as was said before, it's virtually meaniningless in AVERAGE, EVERYDAY driving situations. Unless you race a guy down an onramp everyday, it's a relatively poor measure of performance. Not to mention how much gearing has a huge impact, the size of the tires, the weight of the vehicle, all that...

 

[Adam4356]

Certainly over the years the asian automakers have figured out a way to achieve respectable peak hp.
Really need a dyno curve to analyze how good or bad those engines listed are. AUC is what really matters.

Besides the AUC for the motor, weight and gearing also should be analyzed.
All means to the same end.

 

[Dominic]

Also you all should keep in mind that the smaller the engine displacement, the less fuel is used under normal driving (highway cruising) due to internal frictional losses. Peak hp isn't everything

I owned a 3800 in my camaro, tons of torque - so much so I broke the 5-speed in it twice and had to trade the car! gm makes great engines but they still need to make better quality cars for them to be put into.