Thoughts on the Honda 2.4 liter i-VTC DOHC>?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
209
Location
Grand Rapids, MI, USA
Also, the engines you refer to were likely overrated (as the domestics did back then) and were tested under the old SAE standards. They would likely test out at much nearer to 150hp these days.As stated above, the K24A2 in the Acura TSX makes 205hp, and will still run for 300,000mi. Honda didn't design the K24A8 to be a power monster, they designed it for good fuel efficiency, reliability, and good emissions. It accomplishes this very well. If you want more power, Hondata can accommodate you quite easily (although not yet on the DBW engines). Jon
 
Joined
May 7, 2004
Messages
12,703
Location
Nokesville, VA
Quote:
Also, the engines you refer to were likely overrated (as the domestics did back then) and were tested under the old SAE standards.
Interestingly enough, I have heard of no domestics that were overrating their power in that little debacle a couple of years back. If anything, they were underrating the power. In fact I remember in the discussion on here someone spun that around and complained about how the domestics couldn't even get an accurate power output, apparently missing the point of being conservative with power ratings. (See, people are never ____ when they get more than they're told they're getting, but they do get plenty ____ when they get less than they're told they're getting--and this applies to a lot more than just engines).
 
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
1,563
Location
North Carolina, USA
Quote:
Considering my 1990 Quad-4 2.3L had 180HP and some Oldsmobile variants had 195 HP, that's not saying much for the Honda boys when it comes to output. So getting 170 out of something with more displacement isn't much to brag about. The Ford Duratec 2.5L had 170HP back in the early to mid-90s. Again, output / liter of displacement that is on par with the 2.4L Honda of today, not far behind. So I'd say 168HP out of 2.4 liters today is an average result, not earth shattering.
The problem with the quad-4 was that it would not hold together long enough to put out 170HP. That boat anchor has more design changes to try to get it to hold together than any other engine Gm built. It was a failure in every sense of the word. The Honda's engine isn't earth shattering nor was it meant to be. It will however be puttting out incredible UOA's long after the bad nightmares about quad-4s is a thing of the past. It also has smoothness and fuel economy second to none for an engine in that power range.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
5,229
Location
Great White North.. eh
don't sweat the specs that much.. the 2.4 4 cylinder in the crv is a great machine, especially in a 5 speed. I've never run out of power yet hauling 4 people + 80 pound dog, thule rack with two MTB bikes, and a yakima box. Loads of power under almost *all* conditions and decent mpg. Specs don't hold much water.. I owned an Elantra that had more hp then a civic.. ooohh I should of bought the elantra right? I did, and it was a nightmare. I would of rather had the civic anyday and avoid the 2 dozen trips to the Hyundai dealer
 
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
6,902
Location
Louisiana
I've got this engine in the 2002 CR-V EX RT4WD. Not a barnburner but you could run used lawnmower oil in it and it'd last forever. For the first 10-20k miles it vented a lot more oily vapor than I'm used to seeing but I just kept the air filter changed out a bit more frequently and never had a moment's trouble. My wife's ready to upgrade to an Odyssey but I don't plan of parting with this car any time soon. I blew up the compressor one time by WAAAY overfilling it but otherwise it's been through one set of tires, some air filters and some oil. That's about it.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top