Y Honda is best engine?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Scott_Tucker
Those emissions are not directly comparable to the Honda because they only represent the percentage of pollutants, not the total amount. HC (raw hydrocarbons) is measured in ppm (parts per million). This does not tell you how many millions of 'parts' are emitted. CO (carbon monoxide)is measured in percentage. The Ford engine is over three times larger than the Honda engine therefore it is going to put out more total 'parts'. Emissions tests by the EPA are measured in grams per mile. This gives you a better indication of the total amounts of harmful pollutants coming out of the tailpipe.


Yes but....
grin2.gif


The percentage test pairs the tailpipe sniff data with a pre-programmed set of data on the engine under test to determine a "pass" or "fail." So an even larger engine (say a Viper V10) emitting the exact same percentages as the 5.0 under test might show up as a fail. In other words, there's already a correction factor built in to account for engine size.

But there's another more important factor anyway. New cars have to meet a much more stringent test than the field "pass/fail" test to allow for degradation over time. A new car that emitted like that 5.0 with not catcons wouldn't be acceptable because its already at the bottom of the window allowed for degradation of the systems.
 
I would consider the engine in my Civic to be a good one. It's pretty fuel efficient, smooth enough for a small/medium 4 banger with no balance shafts, and has good power and torque for its displacement and fuel use. No engine problems so far at 50k miles and I expect that to stay true for some time. But, I think that applies to most engines these days.

To my eyes it seems like when Honda's car engine reputation was developed there was a bigger gap between them and their competition. I think the competition has caught up and there are plenty of cars out there with smoother engines that also get good FE and good power.

One thing I do still admire about Honda though, is that in some ways they tend to favor simpler designs but they still end up being competitive. For instance, the base Civic's engine is a 1.8 liter, SOHC engine with VTEC (no continuously variable valve timing) but still makes power and torque in the same ballpark as Ford/Mazda's 2.0 DOHC with VVT while getting the same or better FE. It also has a marginally higher redline and lower torque peak. In the real world though, their performance is comparable so whether Honda's approach is "better" than just upping the displacement a bit and using the same DOHC/VVT tech across the line is up to each individual consumer.
 
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum

And VTEC isn't exactly "variable valve timing" anyway. Its just a mechanism for letting the engine shift from one valve lift profile at low RPM to a different one at high RPM. Newer systems from several other manufacturers actually use more continuously variable valve timing methods that don't have a jump when the shift happens. VTEC is still very simple and reliable- no knock against that.


Depending on which implementation of VTEC we're talking about, it can actually be both. Of course you're right, originally it was just a mechanism for switching between two (or three) lift/timing profiles (different between applications) and it still is just that for some applications. The newer "power" applications like the Civic SI's 2 liter engine have that switchover system, and cam phasing on top of it. To my knowledge there's only cam phasing one one camshaft, not on both like the newer Ford engines have.
 
Originally Posted By: brianl703
Originally Posted By: Scott_Tucker

Where did that information come from?


The EPA:

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/cases/civil/caa/amerhonda.html

This happened almost 12 years ago.


Actually that occurence saved my wife's 96 Civic. She ignored a CEL for two years at finally at 148k her car was stalling after running highway speeds. We took it to dealer unaware of this 14yr/150,000 mile emmisions warranty.

They said good news it is going to be $1800
crazy2.gif
, for two o2 sensors, cat converter, new plugs, cap & rotor. My wife was like what??? And then they said it is all on Honda's dime.
 
Originally Posted By: rationull
I would consider the engine in my Civic to be a good one. It's pretty fuel efficient, smooth enough for a small/medium 4 banger with no balance shafts, and has good power and torque for its displacement and fuel use. No engine problems so far at 50k miles and I expect that to stay true for some time. But, I think that applies to most engines these days.

To my eyes it seems like when Honda's car engine reputation was developed there was a bigger gap between them and their competition. I think the competition has caught up and there are plenty of cars out there with smoother engines that also get good FE and good power.

One thing I do still admire about Honda though, is that in some ways they tend to favor simpler designs but they still end up being competitive. For instance, the base Civic's engine is a 1.8 liter, SOHC engine with VTEC (no continuously variable valve timing) but still makes power and torque in the same ballpark as Ford/Mazda's 2.0 DOHC with VVT while getting the same or better FE. It also has a marginally higher redline and lower torque peak. In the real world though, their performance is comparable so whether Honda's approach is "better" than just upping the displacement a bit and using the same DOHC/VVT tech across the line is up to each individual consumer.


+1 I think their wide variety of engine experience has helped as well, and I'm sure they learned a few things from being an F1 engine supplier for years too.
 
LOL

My whole extended family bought those pieces of junk. They would routinely burn out the valves, headgaskets blew at 30K miles, and the rings were done at 60K. Trade in value was nil since every dealer knew what a pile they were.
Of course they rusted out in 2 years. I can honestly say I learned to avoid imports after my folks bought one for gas mileage in 1978. In the first 2 years of ownership, the headgasket blew, then the cam had to be replaced because Honda didnt know how to heat treat a cam. The front fenders rotted out and were replaced and later it started using oil. The [censored] 2 spd autos in them were even worse than the 5 speeds. Sad part is it was car of the year! LOL

Originally Posted By: Win
Originally Posted By: ClarkB


For example, the original Civic required no catalytic convertor due to it's engine design.

Clark


It was not that great an idea. The CVCC engine I had barely had enough compresion to start after 70K ish miles, and blew smoke like a mosquito fogger when it did.

Honda foggers were pretty common back then.

For that matter, I think I still see more Honda foggers than any other brand.
 
All I can add is that I had a 1986 Civic 1.5 for a couple of years in the mid-1990's. I remember that it liked to rev very much; constant, repeated redline shifts and hard running never phased it in the slightest. Didn't burn much oil at all, either.
 
I was browsing the posts and someone said that they are fun to drive.

Say it out loud, and listen to yourself, and then lol.

A Corvette or a Lambo is fun to drive, not a Civic.

Reliable? Yes.
 
"Best" is a subjective term. Honda is an engine company that just happens to make cars, motorcycles,ATV's, personal Watercraft,Utility equipment,pumps,tillers,snowblowers,lawnmowers,jets, robots,home energy devices, and more. You can't say that about any other "car" company.

I am a Honda engine fan. They had the first string trimmer with a 4 stroke engine. I bought one 10 years ago and it still runs like new. Honda is usually the first company to bring new engine design to market. It is true that other companies have cought up or even surpassed in some areas, but again, they dont do as much with engines for as many markets as Honda.
 
Originally Posted By: hardcore302
I was browsing the posts and someone said that they are fun to drive.

Say it out loud, and listen to yourself, and then lol.

A Corvette or a Lambo is fun to drive, not a Civic.

Reliable? Yes.

You should go to an autocross sometime, you'll probably see 4 times as many hondas as Mustangs, Vettes and Lambos combined. And some guy with a Civic with an engine swap beating almost everything else there.
It's only in the last decade that the other automakers have started making most of their cars handle reasonabley well and honda isn't standing out so much as they used too. But for years they had lightweight cars with double wishbone suspension in all four corners and snappy engines available.
They may not be the fastest cars but if you ever go for a ride in one of the older VTEC cars with the engine uncorked, its pretty neat when it switches cam profiles and the needle dives to the red line...
 
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Originally Posted By: hardcore302
I was browsing the posts and someone said that they are fun to drive.

Say it out loud, and listen to yourself, and then lol.

A Corvette or a Lambo is fun to drive, not a Civic.

Reliable? Yes.

You should go to an autocross sometime, you'll probably see 4 times as many hondas as Mustangs, Vettes and Lambos combined. And some guy with a Civic with an engine swap beating almost everything else there.
It's only in the last decade that the other automakers have started making most of their cars handle reasonabley well and honda isn't standing out so much as they used too. But for years they had lightweight cars with double wishbone suspension in all four corners and snappy engines available.
They may not be the fastest cars but if you ever go for a ride in one of the older VTEC cars with the engine uncorked, its pretty neat when it switches cam profiles and the needle dives to the red line...





Autocross is a good indicator of a fun to drive, cheap to work on/mod car. Not sure it's an absolute indicator of "fun to drive" compared to all else.

Of course it's all subjective.

I wouldn't call any FWD car "fun to drive", but that's personal.
 
Originally Posted By: cchase


I wouldn't call any FWD car "fun to drive", but that's personal.


I'd say that leans more toward "fact" than "opinion."

Oh wait, that's an opinion too...
grin2.gif


Seriously, FWD = practical. RWD = fun. Are there some FWD cars that autocross well? Sure. Neons, Sentra SE-Rs, and a whole bunch of others. But they're not "fun" compared to a RWD where you can steer with the skinny pedal. My story and I'm stickin' to it.
 
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: cchase


I wouldn't call any FWD car "fun to drive", but that's personal.


I'd say that leans more toward "fact" than "opinion."

Oh wait, that's an opinion too...
grin2.gif


Seriously, FWD = practical. RWD = fun. Are there some FWD cars that autocross well? Sure. Neons, Sentra SE-Rs, and a whole bunch of others. But they're not "fun" compared to a RWD where you can steer with the skinny pedal. My story and I'm stickin' to it.


Lets not generalize too much here... rwd is not always better. I suspect if your 440 mopars have anything close to stock suspension and open diffs they might not really steer with the throttle in a "fun" manner, unless driving a 60 ft yacht is fun for you? Sure I'd rather have a balanced responsive rwd car over a fwd given all else equal but those cars aren't really that practical for me.
We have a young guy with 70's mustang with alot of motor work done but nothing else, do our autocross races. He has fun making smoke, and sweet v8 engine noises, but is 10% slower than a well driven base 2001 civic coupe, who is also having fun giving the rest of us fits trying to keep up with him. Both guys are having a blast, but in a different way. I like watching both of them and I wouldn't mind a run in the mustang and a run in the civic, for different reasons though.
I think we can agree though that getting the most out of a car and yourself is fun, whatever wheels are driven, heck they race school buses on ovals, and transport trucks in europe, both which look like fun to me.
19.gif
 
I know what you're trying to get at, but I've driven a few with swaps and turbos, and they just aren't as fun TO ME. To you, maybe, but I'll neverunderstand it. lol.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Nick1994
Best/Worst A/C Performance in a car?
3 4 5
Replies
82
Views
2K
Chris142
AZjeff
A message from John Force
2
Replies
22
Views
970
4WD
P
Any Truth To Honda-Nissan Merger
Replies
5
Views
324
CharBaby
S
Rav4 is globally no. 1 again
2
Replies
34
Views
843
Hermann
JeffKeryk
Honda Giga Casting?
Replies
15
Views
732
JeffKeryk
Back
Top Bottom