Why do (most) vtec owners....
12 November 2003, 01:33 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bradford
Posts: 13,720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...think that vtec technology is so 'pure' and is an 'art-form' and that anything else is 'crude' and 'cheating'!! Sure vtec is great but in reality its a fairly straightforward system!!! Why is turbo-charging or big capacity cheating in these people's minds??? 
Its sort of like they think vtec is the Ferrero Rocher of part treats where After 8's are clearly better 
What are they smoking?
Its sort of like they think vtec is the Ferrero Rocher of part treats where After 8's are clearly better What are they smoking?
12 November 2003, 01:41 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bradford
Posts: 13,720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did say most, not all 
Read the type-r forum and in particular ANY thread that mentions turbo cars (particularly scoobys). Its the big line of defence, 'yeah but you've got 300hp from a turbo, my 197bhp type-r is pure power, etc, etc
Read the type-r forum and in particular ANY thread that mentions turbo cars (particularly scoobys). Its the big line of defence, 'yeah but you've got 300hp from a turbo, my 197bhp type-r is pure power, etc, etc
12 November 2003, 02:17 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is kinda true tho mate.....a turbo, NOS etc is kinda like an athleate(sp) takin steriods to win.....lol where as "Vtec-ing" is lets say natural as is V6 or V8 power.....no need for a 'blower'.....LOL
Juss my 2p's worth..........
Juss my 2p's worth..........
12 November 2003, 02:35 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oh and you can 'rev the nuts' off a Vtec (esp the type-r's) until the mooooooo's come home......also unlike a turbooooooo there is NO laaaaaaaaaaag.......
...actually the more and more I think about it....the more and more and more + points I'm findin...would you like them listed????
...actually the more and more I think about it....the more and more and more + points I'm findin...would you like them listed????
Trending Topics
12 November 2003, 02:54 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have an ATR and can say that the honda hasn't got lag but the engine change when vtec kicks in is similar to the turbo lag of other cars. If when driving you want the vtec you need to go down a few gears. I suspect that turbo drivers have to do this if they dont't want to wait for the lag, or do you still have to wait for the exhaust gases to build up?
Horses for courses.
Horses for courses.
12 November 2003, 02:54 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VTEC misconceptions...
I'm glad I caught this thread quite early because it might grow to stupid proportions within 24 hours!
VTEC is NOT, by street or profession racing bodies a power adder! It is not considered as forced induction, nor artificial displacement. A supercharger/turbocharger by all accounts IS.
VTEC is MORE than just variable valve timing. It is considerably more advanced than the Porsche Variocam and the BMW Vanos/Double Vanos systems, and has been in production cars a decade before them.
When an engine builder is faced with building a high output engine with given engine size, to make power, you will need to maximise torque and volumetric efficiency at higher RPMs - to make more power. One way of making more torque/power is increased air flow into the cylinders by lifting the valves higher and for longer. A high lift, long duration cam for high RPMs is used.
The problem an engine builder faces with this problem is using high lift long duration cams robs torque levels at lower engine speeds - especially at idle. This is not something you want on a road car. On the cicruit, you will be spending 95% of the time in the RPM range where the race cam is at its peak operation, so how little power you make at idle is not an issue.
VTEC addresses this mutual exclusion. It can switch cam profile and timing from a specific RPM. A low lift, short duration cam profile for lower engine speeds, and high lift long duration perfect for 6000 + RPM.
A non VVT 2.0 litre can make 240 - 250 HP easily, but it won't have a flat torque curve that matches the 2 litre engine from the S2000.
12 November 2003, 03:11 PM
#12
BANNED
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Your home is worthless.You can't afford to run your car.Your job is on the line.Schadenfreude rules.
Posts: 4,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With over 3000 posts you should know that scoobynet gets far more **** than this.
12 November 2003, 03:27 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Lancs, UK
Posts: 1,818
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rich D
How CAN YOU have a preference over two things that YOU have never experienced or have knowledge of?
How CAN YOU have a preference over two things that YOU have never experienced or have knowledge of?
I said I don't OWN either a 200bhp turbo'd car or a 200bhp VTEC car, but I have driven various examples of these cars, plus I've owned turbo'd cars and also quick normally aspirated cars myself, so I made comments based on my experiences.
I never said a powerful VTEC like the CTR lacked torque, it doesn't for a normally aspirated engine, in fact it's a superb engine, but compared to a 200bhp engine with forced induction it does lack torque.
All I said was that personally I'd prefer the turbo'd option!
Stick to your 1.6i max power show boat.
Dunno what car you think I have but it aint a 1.6?!
Who the hell do you think you are anyway?!
This is a PUBLIC forum and everyone is entitled to an opinion, but you see fit to have a pop at me for no know reason?!
Grow up pr!ck...
12 November 2003, 03:37 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I prefer a car with torque rather than one that sounds like a demented bumble bee!
I think its a crap design to be honest, 15,000,000 rpm just to get the bloody thing moving & planning my route to avoid hills
If VTec is so great why does everyone who race Hondas strip the VTEC system from the engine....
I think its a crap design to be honest, 15,000,000 rpm just to get the bloody thing moving & planning my route to avoid hills
If VTec is so great why does everyone who race Hondas strip the VTEC system from the engine....
12 November 2003, 04:03 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Lots of different places! (Thank you Mr. Lambert)
Posts: 3,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I have at my disposal an ITR and an STI so I probably am qualified to comment up to a point.
I will say this though - I don't really care how the power in a car is produced as long as I enjoy driving it.
The ITR is pretty manic and it does take time to get used to thrashing it to get the best from it. Once you have learned that it becomes rather rewarding and I rather like the noise of the VTEC on full chat.
The STI is much more lesiurely to drive and a very different beast in some ways, but again I love driving it.
So for me I don;t give a stuff about all this purity nonsense etc. etc. as long as whatever method employed to produce power does it well.
I do think that the Honda engineers deserve a pat on the back for developing such a robust and well designed system. Maybe BMW with their ailing VANOS should get over to Japan and take a look as to how it should be done.
tiggers.
I will say this though - I don't really care how the power in a car is produced as long as I enjoy driving it.
The ITR is pretty manic and it does take time to get used to thrashing it to get the best from it. Once you have learned that it becomes rather rewarding and I rather like the noise of the VTEC on full chat.
The STI is much more lesiurely to drive and a very different beast in some ways, but again I love driving it.
So for me I don;t give a stuff about all this purity nonsense etc. etc. as long as whatever method employed to produce power does it well.
I do think that the Honda engineers deserve a pat on the back for developing such a robust and well designed system. Maybe BMW with their ailing VANOS should get over to Japan and take a look as to how it should be done.
tiggers.
12 November 2003, 04:35 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: up a bit, left a bit, down a bit, to the right no left ahhh just there
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Twisties ... real-world driving conditions ... FWD vs 4WD ... etc etc
12 November 2003, 04:36 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Here and there
Posts: 8,353
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You lot would make crap fish !! far too easy to reel in.
Still i suppose it puts another pointless thread to the top.
Keep the drivel flowing it makes great entertainment
Still i suppose it puts another pointless thread to the top.
Keep the drivel flowing it makes great entertainment
12 November 2003, 05:03 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I prefer the VTEC engine in my current Civic Type R to the turbocharged one in my old MY99 UK Scoob. It's not about torque - if you want that (or you want an engine without a throttle) then get a diesel. It's about throttle response; it's so nice not to have to wait for half a second before the car accelerates when you're cruising along on the motorway.
However, they've both got their downsides. You can't be lazy with the Honda - if you're in 4th at 4,000rpm then you'll need to drop down a couple of gears if you want proper pace. What you really need is a great big normally aspirated engine, so you get the torque and the throttle response. To me the VTEC is closer to this ideal - the larger engine fleshes out the torque curve at lower revs to make the car much easier to drive lazily.
However, they've both got their downsides. You can't be lazy with the Honda - if you're in 4th at 4,000rpm then you'll need to drop down a couple of gears if you want proper pace. What you really need is a great big normally aspirated engine, so you get the torque and the throttle response. To me the VTEC is closer to this ideal - the larger engine fleshes out the torque curve at lower revs to make the car much easier to drive lazily.
12 November 2003, 05:03 PM
#28
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: From where I am standing I can see your house
Posts: 6,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No doubt when overhead valves were introduced someone complained that sidevalves were the true power and that OHVs were cheating.
Does it matter what technology your car is using, surely the primary objective is to enjoy what you drive, if you don't then change it, don't complain about or criticise what someone else likes.
Right now I like my turbo, but tomorrow it could be a diesel (Nah, thats stretching it a bit far )
Does it matter what technology your car is using, surely the primary objective is to enjoy what you drive, if you don't then change it, don't complain about or criticise what someone else likes.
Right now I like my turbo, but tomorrow it could be a diesel (Nah, thats stretching it a bit far
)
12 November 2003, 05:15 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bradford
Posts: 13,720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Honda do make nice lawnmowers though
I will say this though - I don't really care how the power in a car is produced as long as I enjoy driving it.
Its almost like the vtec fans if I can call them that think that the key to good engineering is to find a really hard solution to a problem and make it work. Its like saying a bic biro is cr@p because its not as nice and complex as a nice metal parker with a retractable rollerball nib - so fvcking what they both write just the same 