VTec Engines Overrated?

JHMEG

LIGHTNING wrote: »

If you want to play the making stuff up game I'm up for it.

You're doing a good enough job:D;):p

ZiabR

LOL :P

Of course he could . I mean the boys at Couture Auto with their Evo putting out in excess of 700+ BHP with Performane Octane fuel wouldnt stand a chance :P.

Sure tell ya what, i will be at Mondello for the March races and they will have their evo there. Bring your Mazda along and show them how its done

JHMEG

My apologies, didn't realise you were talking about *basic* 1.6 Civics. ie the ~100bhp family cars. I thought you were implying the performance oriented DOHC variety.

E92

How about LIGHTNING you drive these cars that you say you can outrun, and then we'll know if VTEC is any good or not:p?

ZiabR

LIGHTNING wrote: »

Well that was my original point! I have no problem with the high performance Type R variants but most of the muppets on the roads have the lower power models with every badge on the planet stuck to them.

That i will 100% agree with. Apologies also for my outburst.

ZiabR

LIGHTNING wrote: »

Well then we are all in agreement, once we can get all those idiots cars crushed then we wont have a problem

If only , we can dream i suppose

JHMEG

I don't understand Lightning what being quicker around the track in one family car vs another family car has got to do with vtec? Are you claiming your family mazda would be quicker in your hands than *any* 1.6 vtec, or just the sohc ones. Your original post didn't make a distinction.

Senna

every boyracer thinks their car is better than X,Y and Z. Its just that there are so many of the VTEC engined cars around that we here more rubbish about them. They are quick, but its the same exaggerations that was said 20 years ago with the GTE, SRI, RS etc.
I think Honda have produced an excellent engine, providing an excellent reliability, fuel economy and performance combination.



But my 1ltr micra pis*'s on all your cars:D:D:D:D:D

kona

LIGHTNING wrote: »

As I said above most of the people I what rant on about VTEC`s usually have the lower power versions but think they are the quickest things ever. You know the type the ones with the base model but have type R stickers everywhere and large bore exhausts that you can put your foot into! I have no problem with the type R civics or integra`s they are very quick motors. That was my point

can YOU tell whats under the bonnet of a car??? just from the outside???
usually you can have a good idea from little clues but never 100%
and most those cars dont have a large bore exhaust, they just have a back-box, sure large bore exhausts actually decrease performance.

and so wat if they brag that their car is fast, compared to their previous form of transport(a 100euro supermarket bike) a nissan serena would be like a drag car!!!!!
tbh any car that can top a ton is fast, and most cars these days can do this quite easy!

just for the record not one v-tec engine has been returned for a manufacturing defect according to honda so they are reliable, and a dohc is going to be quick.

so no v-tecs are not over rated, they get the praise they deserve.

VeVeX

logik wrote: »

My Integra Tyre R is coming in at about 235 BHP.

I can say that when the Vtec kicks in at 6000 rpm right the way to 9000rpm (with a proper exhaust, the Vtec SCREAMS!!!), i am at 180kph in 3rd gear.

Thats power. And i still have 3 gear changes to go :P.

I am a super fan of Honda and their engines and no matter what people say, Vtec's are super fun, drive one and then come back here .

You reckon your integra does 113 mph (old money) in third?

Masada

you really need to drive a DOHC VTEC to know what its all about but i do agree that a lot of idiots go on about it like as if it turns into a fighter jey after 4500 but their usually the kind of people that wound put NOS in a micra., though to have an opinion on them ya really have to have driven the DOHC VTEC like the old VTi's, SIRs, EK9s, DC2s etc and the power is brilliant., those SOHC engines dont compare at all and the amount of power they can get out of an engine of that size is shocking concidering its an NA engine.,

Green Hornet

JHMEG wrote: »

It actually is, a pent roof hemi to be exact...

You should only really comment on stuff you're qualified to comment on.

Ooooohhhh! I'm just an ordinary Joe driving a VTEC and get fed up of the VTEC gang comparing them to rocket ships. I'm not an engineer and was just trying to be humourous. Apologies if I offended.;)

Mayshine

I'm fairly sure my S2000 won't do more than 95-100 in third, so that integra remark is a load of cock

Biro

Green Hornet wrote: »

Ooooohhhh! I'm just an ordinary Joe driving a VTEC and get fed up of the VTEC gang comparing them to rocket ships. I'm not an engineer and was just trying to be humourous. Apologies if I offended.;)

The point is you're driving the wrong v-tec. It's like someone asking "What is it with diesels? I don't get the hype, mine is grand, but nothing special". You could be driving a 1.9 TDi Golf, and it would be just OK, where as the people raving on about their diesels could be driving a 335d...

You can get the 96 - 01 model 3dr Civic in a 1.6 vti, which has 160bhp, that's more than your 2 litre v-tec, also you can get it in a type R, (jap only, from 98 methinks), with 180bhp. You can also get a 1.5 v-tec in those with 90bhp. So you can see, you need to compare like with like.

what_car

vtec wrote: »

you really need to drive a DOHC VTEC to know what its all about but i do agree that a lot of idiots go on about it like as if it turns into a fighter jey after 4500 but their usually the kind of people that wound put NOS in a micra., though to have an opinion on them ya really have to have driven the DOHC VTEC like the old VTi's, SIRs, EK9s, DC2s etc and the power is brilliant., those SOHC engines dont compare at all and the amount of power they can get out of an engine of that size is shocking concidering its an NA engine.,

do you mean the ivtec dohc 2.0 in the accord type s and accord exec?

or the dohc accord euro R engine?

Gumbo

Biro wrote: »

The point is you're driving the wrong v-tec. It's like someone asking "What is it with diesels? I don't get the hype, mine is grand, but nothing special". You could be driving a 1.9 TDi Golf, and it would be just OK, where as the people raving on about their diesels could be driving a 335d...

You can get the 96 - 01 model 3dr Civic in a 1.6 vti, which has 160bhp, that's more than your 2 litre v-tec, also you can get it in a type R, (jap only, from 98 methinks), with 180bhp. You can also get a 1.5 v-tec in those with 90bhp. So you can see, you need to compare like with like.

exactly the way people should be looking at this thread, dont compare your SOHC vtec with a DOHC vtec.

Steve

kceire wrote: »

no where close to vtec imo
mivec engines regulary fail to produce their quoted bhp when rolling roaded, where nearly every honda will meet its quoted figure.

and just incase you think im biased, i had a lancer for 2 years so im not just badgering on the honda side of the plate.

Mivec is Mitsi's DOHC performance valve timing control.
Vtec is a general term Honda use for any of their variable valve timing systems - including the non performance ones, as is Toyotas VVTi etc..

I don't know where your statement about Mivecs not performing came from - there is lots of rolling road data saying it does e.g. here:
http://www.fto-ireland.com/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1219

Bear in mind that the Mivec cars tested are 10 yrs old and still producing pretty much what they did when new. Not many other engines can boast that.

Green Hornet

kceire wrote: »

exactly the way people should be looking at this thread, dont compare your SOHC vtec with a DOHC vtec.

I guess you are right but there are many people out there who have only SOHC and still rave on about the performance.

Incidentally, from the point of view of comparison, do the SOHC VTEC compare favourably to equivalent 1.8L or 2.0L cars from other manufacturers. Is a 1.8L VTEC a better performer than say a 1.8L Mondeo?

Gumbo

Green Hornet wrote: »

I guess you are right but there are many people out there who have only SOHC and still rave on about the performance.

Incidentally, from the point of view of comparison, do the SOHC VTEC compare favourably to equivalent 1.8L or 2.0L cars from other manufacturers. Is a 1.8L VTEC a better performer than say a 1.8L Mondeo?

thats fair enough, for someone with a SOHC vtec engine, they have no performance ground to stand on!

the 1.6 sohc vtec civic (2004 shape) has 110bhp and i think the new shape 1.8 vtec (SOHC) has circa 140 bhp..... correct me if im wrong?

compare that to the 1.8 moneo that has 125bhp so not a whole lot of difference to be honest.

Gumbo

stevec wrote: »

Mivec is Mitsi's DOHC performance valve timing control.
Vtec is a general term Honda use for any of their variable valve timing systems - including the non performance ones, as is Toyotas VVTi etc..

I don't know where your statement about Mivecs not performing came from - there is lots of rolling road data saying it does e.g. here:
http://www.fto-ireland.com/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1219

Bear in mind that the Mivec cars tested are 10 yrs old and still producing pretty much what they did when new. Not many other engines can boast that.

as i said, its my opinion that mivecs are no where close to vtec performance.
put a 1.6 mivec colt/lance against a 1.6 vtec civic / integra and i guarantee that the honda will out perfrom it everytime.

its just my opinion, but i do agree that the mivec system is great too, much the same as the vtec system, and vvti etc etc

E92

SOHC VTEC is nothing to write home about in the power per litre department. As mentioned already, the SOHC i-VTEC in the Civic has 140 bhp, same as an Opel 1.8 engine these days, and the new Dual VVTi 1.8 engine from Toyota would have similar levels of power too.

The Mondeo is a 1.6, and in the UK is available in 123 bhp guise. BMWs 1.6 engine has 122 bhp these days too. Their 2.0 has 170 bhp(143 bhp version is also available)

DOHC VTEC is a different story, as the S2000 can show:D, but is heavy on fuel.

Steve

kceire wrote: »

as i said, its my opinion that mivecs are no where close to vtec performance.
put a 1.6 mivec colt/lance against a 1.6 vtec civic / integra and i guarantee that the honda will out perfrom it everytime.

its just my opinion, but i do agree that the mivec system is great too, much the same as the vtec system, and vvti etc etc

I don't know much about the 1.6 engines - A quick google returned this:
The Mitsi 4G92 1597cc Mivec is listed as 175hp
Honda B16A2 1.6 VTEC is listed as 158hp.

If what you're saying is true then the Mivec must be under-performing by at least 10% / 17hp

ZiabR

Also another thing to note is that all of the BHP being quoted by companies is the BHP at the Fly Wheel and NOT the BHP at the wheels.

So the amount of power being put to the wheels is less than what the car actually quotes.

You will lose BHP on a "per wheel drive". 4WD loses quite alot as the Fly Wheel has to put power onto all 4 wheels as opposed to 2WD.

Figures per wheel is somewhere between 15 and 25BHP per wheel.

C_Breeze

VTEC albeit good engineering and technology is a bit pointless imho.

I've owned one and driven many (DOHC VTEC's) - great engines, reliability and all that jazz but just not my cup of tea.

I fail to see the point.

Lets use a 1.6 VTI 1997 for example...

Firstly its way overpriced to buy because of that stupid YO I GOT VTEKKK !!!!111one mentality

Secondly yes they are powerfull - but this is only relative to its engine size (1600cc) - why do people place so much emphasis on this? ... if you want power why not buy a bigger engine???

Some guy i know drove a 97 VTI ... as usual paid an overpriced amount of money for it and obviously got raped by insurance...

sold it and bought himself an e36 320i .... Bigger engine , more power (although admitedly not as fast because it isnt made out of recycled sardine cans:rolleyes: ) much nicer car, much nicer power delivery and spanked any VTI once it got going on a motorway - Also CHEAPER to insure

So the only real advantage of the vti was the engine size ... but the main advantage of small cc is obviously cheaper insurance - but it doesnt make a difference with insurance in this case because DOHC VTECS get loaded anyway.

The premium he paid for the BMW Tax and petrol could easily have been offset by the saving he made on insurance - and he is driving a much nicer car, with 6 cyinders, more power and better image.

He admited that VTEC is just a gimick and the novelty wears off quite quickly .... unlike a 6cylinder RWD for the same price.

...With that said , at the end of the day it all comes down to whatever floats your boat - but YES ... VTEC is definitely overrated.

what_car

E92 wrote: »

SOHC VTEC is nothing to write home about in the power per litre department. As mentioned already, the SOHC i-VTEC in the Civic has 140 bhp, same as an Opel 1.8 engine these days, and the new Dual VVTi 1.8 engine from Toyota would have similar levels of power too.

The Mondeo is a 1.6, and in the UK is available in 123 bhp guise. BMWs 1.6 engine has 122 bhp these days too. Their 2.0 has 170 bhp(143 bhp version is also available)

DOHC VTEC is a different story, as the S2000 can show:D, but is heavy on fuel.

both the accord type s and exec have the DOHC ivtec 2.0 Engine!
which is a different one than in the euro accord..

Gumbo

stevec wrote: »

I don't know much about the 1.6 engines - A quick google returned this:
The Mitsi 4G92 1597cc Mivec is listed as 175hp
Honda B16A2 1.6 VTEC is listed as 158hp.

If what you're saying is true then the Mivec must be under-performing by at least 10% / 17hp

Thats what im saying, i have never seen a 1.6 mivec reach its quoted power figures of 175bhp!

a figure of 145-150bhp is normall recorded in the cars i have seen rolling roaded but of course thats just my experience with them.

ZiabR

Yeah but no one buys a VTI to use on a Motorway. No one doubts that a 320i BMW would be nicer to drive on a Motorway but thats not the point of a Vtec imho. They are really not mileage engines and more for our other roads in Ireland.

E92

The whole point of DOHC VTEC is to get a lot of power from a small engine. Of course you don't have the torque of a bigger engine though.

A 1.6 DOHC VTEC engine will have a shade more torque than a normal 1.6 engine, but the power of say a 2.0 or a 2.2.

In Japan tax was done on engine size, hence why the Japs created VVT, MIVEC etc, and it's also a big reason why people like it here, because you can get something with a lot more power than a standard engine of similar size, but the insurance(though I don't believe this to be true) and tax of a standard engine of similar engine size.

Steve

logik wrote: »

Yeah but no one buys a VTI to use on a Motorway. No one doubts that a 320i BMW would be nicer to drive on a Motorway but thats not the point of a Vtec imho. They are really not mileage engines and more for our other roads in Ireland.

+1
320i = armchair on the motorway (yawn)
Any VTEC performance car is a pain in the ass to drive on a motorway - it's not what they were designed for.
Get onto a nice twisty road and who'll have the most fun. Add a some rain and see if the 320 can keep pace (or even stay pointing the right direction).

JHMEG

Mayshine wrote: »

I'm fairly sure my S2000 won't do more than 95-100 in third, so that integra remark is a load of cock

More powerful cars have shorter gears. My 1.6 105bhp Civic would do a tad over 100mph in 3rd. My 1.6 160bhp Integra would do no more than 80mph. I'd be surprised and disappointed if 3rd was as long as 95mph in the S2000.