Rep Power: 0

Toyota's VVTi seems to be beating Honda's VTEC at their own game... at least in the sub-compact department.

The new Corolla has more horsepower, more torque... and even with all that, it still gets better gas mileage than the Civic too. Damn...

 
Rep Power: 0

it also has a larger engine.

 
Rep Power: 400

One of the cars with at least an ounce of torque?
dude. go back and read my post. and why the S2000 doesnt NEED torque.

WhopSi, sorry, meant no offense.

 
Rep Power: 0

Actually it does...all cars do to move....

 
Rep Power: 0

Umm, if you guys want a good description of how the VTEC system works, check out http://www.howstuffworks.com/question229.htm. There's some cool animated pics too! It's a good read.....you'll appreciate the good design that went into producing our engines .

 
Rep Power: 0

Hahahahaha [IMG]i/expressions/laugh2.gif[/IMG]

 
Rep Power: 0

no prob it happens...

 
Rep Power: 0

if u had no torque u'd have no horsepower. - go back to school.

 
Rep Power: 0

If you ask me VTEC doesn't rule anything, its the second cam. Almost all cars nowadays have multiple cams. Some trucks have quad-cams, becuase they're 'V' engines and two per side. As apposed to our inline engines which only have two. If you look at a dyno chart, you can't see when the VTEC kicks in, all you see is that second cam kicking in.

And yes, torque does rule. Try uphill endurance racing with a s2000 vs a supra, and see who wins. Torque is what is going to get you up that hill fast, not your HP.

 
Rep Power: 400

Dude, I didn't literally mean 0 torque. I meant it doens't need 300lb/ft of it. Figure of speech. Damn you people can be hostile.

By the way... the good old "race a honda up a hill" comment? hehe. time for school.

This was an actual experiment done for a physics project. (the numbers in here aren't exact, and i'm not getting into exact equations)

The amount of force and S2000 produces, when calculated with weight (disregarding drag coefficient), gives it a 1/2 gear acceleration rate of an average of 5.5ft/second*squared. A stick shift LT1 camaro gets about an average of 5.45ft/second*squared. So on a flat surface, from a 20mph roll, both cars produce the same amount of forward momentum, and accelerate at roughly the same rate, varying with the powerband. With weight factored in, both cars produce an equal amount of forward force.

Now, go uphill.

This means both cars must move forward as well as up. The amount of force required to move up is determined by rate of ascent, slope, and the amount of weight being moved.

Since both cars are going up the same hill, the rate of ascent and slope are equal. However, the camaro weighs more.

What this means is that the camaro requires more force taken away from forward momentum to be applied toward upward momentum. What does this all mean? The S2000 now has a greater amount of forward momentum left after removing the amount of force required to move up as well. So the theory behind this was that even though the camaro produced 300lb/ft or so of torque, and the S2000 only 150lb/ft or so, the S2000 would still go uphill faster. Again, this is because the camaro has more weight, and therfore more force required to move up.

We then put this theory to the test in real life. 10 runs were made on a flat surface from 20 to 60mph. All 10 runs neither car really pulled. Now uphill. again 10 runs. EVERY TIME the S2000 slowly pulled on the LT1 camaro.

The amount of force produced by a car whether going uphill or on a level surface is the same. Therefore when two cars producing an equal amount of force and forward rate of acceleration go uphill. The lighter car will accelerate faster since it has less weight to pull up as well as forward.

Want to try this at home? Run up a hill as fast as you can and time yourself. Now catch your breath and get your strength back... go downhill and pick up something heavy... say 20lbs or so. Now run uphill again and time yourself. I gaurantee you it will take longer.

 
Rep Power: 0

our vtec sucks... the 6thgen civics has a better vtec..

 
Rep Power: 0

That would be the horsepower differnce not te vtec and the torque peaks higher up but there isnt more torque.

 
Rep Power: 0

That would be the horsepower differnce not te vtec and the torque peaks higher up but there isnt more torque just hp.

 
Rep Power: 0

In response to this torque x rpm devided by 5252 = hp

 
Rep Power: 280

Welcome back to 2002!!!

Woot 6 year old thread from the dead!

 
Rep Power: 352

^seroiusly hahah wtf is up with that lately?

 
Rep Power: 812

i love teh vtec!

 
Rep Power: 280

Well we have had a rush of new members lately, so old threads are new to them. It's still funny though, they might even check back on the thread to see if the guy from 2002 responds.

 
Rep Power: 280

 
Rep Power: 812

that expression says it all. when it kicks in, the car just flies

 
Rep Power: 305

its cause people started searching yay! I bet he searched for vtec

a few vtec kicks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeQ5i...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxxuw...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms_lY...eature=related

 
Rep Power: 0

what you feel is the torque spike of vtec changing cam lobes keeping torque going up so you can generate more hp with rpms


you feel torque not horsepower


torque is the force

 
Rep Power: 280

 
Rep Power: 277

Welcome to 7thgencivic.com.

 
Rep Power: 238

sorry man...had to do it! lol
its all cool, its a engine with some power but honda tones down to keep the fuel consumption down until YOU decide to hit the throttle Wideopen, then it eats the petro.