Honda Engine vs GM Engine

Corolla vs. Corvette. I'd take the Corvette.

you are lame if you really believe that analogy!

Like Richard Feynman once said, you can make countless analogies that link one thing to another, but that doesn't mean any of them are meaningful.

what a guy he was...
have u read his book...

good stuff!

GM Engine 2.2L DOHC
140HP/150TQ
Vs
Honda Engine 2.2L DOHC
200HP/156TQ

WOW YOU MAKE ATEH BEST SENSE OF ALL!

want another comparo? how about vans?

GM 3.4L V6 OHV
185HP/210TQ

Honda 3.5L V6 DOHC
255HP/250TQ
------------------------
EDIT! hey GM has a 3.5 for their new uplander van!
GM 3.5L V6 i dunno if its OHV or DOHC or SOHC since it doens't say on the site
200HP/220TQ

this engine still SUCKS ASS
------------------------
the GM engine is PATHETIC, the honda gets way better gas millage


how about TRUCKS!! Gm better %$@#%# win this category

GM 3.5L DOHC (GM Canyon midsized truck)
220HP/225TQ
Towing Capacity 4000lbs

Honda 3.5 DOHC (Honda Ridge line small/midsized Truck) YES a TRUCK! serious
255HP/252TQ
Towing Capacity 5000lbs

WHAT THE #@(@#$@#( the honda even beat it in towing capacity

dont forget there are 500HP civics beating corvettes all day long with 1/3 of the freaking displacement (1.8L B18c engine swap + turbo Vs 5.7L V8) the civic also costs far less has a better stereo even with mods its still WAY under the price of a vette, so yes i would take the vette becuase its WORTH MORE

honda theoretical V8 (ford also did a v12 by throwing 2 V6's together in the GT90)
mate 2 S2000 engines together (2.2L I4)
each 2.2L has 240HP/162TQ
mate them together you get 480HP/324TQ 4.4L V8
Corvette 5.7L V8 400HP/400TQ (the corvette has more than a 1L displacement advantage)

oh and besides the Pentium M is pretty much on par with Athlon64s of the same clock speed

What I mentioned was from his book. The Princeton chapter where the poet came to visit, to be exact.

The Colorado was only designed to tow 4000lbs. GM said that if people were looking to tow more, they bought the full size.

To me the HP/Torque number are fairly meaningless unless you see the graph. A lot of the new lower displacement engines only build their hp at high RPM. On both the Colorado and Ridgeline the hp is developed at about 5600 RPM, but on the Colorado, the torque is reached at 2800 RPM vs 4500 for the Ridgeline. That torque lower in the range means that it much easier to access.

Another thing to point out between the two is the Colorado is rated for 20/27 mpg while the Ridgeline is at 16/21. The Ridgeline's mpg puts it smack dap in the middle of the full size range.

The Colorado starts at $15,000, before the inevitable rebate and the Ridgeline at $27,000. That also puts it into the full size range.

So if you put the Ridgeline in its mpg and price range it gets thoroughly beaten by engines going to 400hp+, and towing capacites far exceeding what the R. is capable of .

While I freely admit that I don't like Honda, I do admit they can make a decent vehicle. Nor do I defend GM all the time, I think it's stupid to make the CSV's, modified off the old vans, and then a few years later come out with a totally different van. (BTW I think the Uplander uses an OHC engine.) Also keep in mind that those 500hp Civics most definitly voided warranty, and that the Vette can be used as a daily driver, not something I see most modified Civics doing.

Oh yeah, I still don't think that the analogy makes any sense. How can the Corvette, for example, be called a gas guzzler when it gets in the high 20's low 30's in mpg?

this thread is stupid

lol, Pyro. You've killed it. I wanted to see how far these truck "comparisons" go.

yeah sometimes the TQ graph sucks ass, sometimes it kicks ass, and with the new i-vtec engines they tend to kick ass



this is the RSX Type S dyno graph the TQ curve looks flatter than the 5.7L graph

if you develope torque early you tend to lose it faster as well ( you also can't rev as high) with the vtec you have 2 cam profiles, 1 for low range torque and gas millage, the other you have high performance but only at high RPMS, (if you switch to the more aggresive profile early the car will idle and run like crap) honda decided just to have both power and gas millage.

anywho i think this thread is done...

Usually on trucks you want the higher torque lower in the rpm range to get loads moving. But since most trucks now are just used for people movers, it really doesn't matter where the power lies, within reason.

Looking at that graph, it appears that the cam switchover occurs between 5 & 6 K RPM. Is that correct?

I agree that this thread is pretty much done.

this thread does in fact suck, and i'd take a jap engine vs a gm (or ford) engine any day.

my 1/2 bro has a 2000 civic....no issues...ever
my dad has a 2002 daewoo leganza (gm 2.4L 136hp I4)......lol....don't get me started