poison

u konw bout the supras and skylines havin good torque out of an i-6.
and honda is developing the dohc vtec v8 (mf408s) which is a 4.08l and is developing at least 350 hp stock.

why doesn't honda develop an i-6 dohc vtec and throw that in the s2000?
that would be one beast and honda actually having really good torque along with vtec in an i-6...that's serious power goin on.

TurboMiata

The torque in the engines you mentioned is due in part to the turbochargers attached to those engines. For instance, the 2jz engine found in the IS300 isnt a torque monster....... (not that its bad, but you notice a large loose there dont ya? )

Daemione

I don't really see the need for an I6 - especially when they've already got the J-series V6 engines (CL/TL/MDX/Odyssey), which are amazing. I6's present more difficulties with high-rpm operation, and are a lot less space efficient compared to a V6.

Spade

My question is why doesn't Honda make a horizontally opposed 4 banger.
It would make the cars that are built for handling handle a hell of alot better.

GoLowDrew

Why so few make an I6?

Because they are long and not compact like a V6, this would mean making a body with a long nose, which adds weight, etc.

I6 also have a different firing order. This makes the engine not as smooth as a V6, which have sort of a counter-balance effect the I6s don't.

Honda did make a I5 in the Acura Vigor, at a time when a lot of Euros where cranking out I5s too. Many of them still uses it, while Honda did not. The fact that GM decided to develop a brand new 24V DOHC I6 engine (in the new Blazer, Envoy, etc) instead of using a proven 4.3L V6 shows the I's still got it.

GoLowDrew

Because it would mean the transmission would have to sit at the bottom of the engine. The hood would have to be taller. Therefore decreasing the frontal view from the driver seat, which has been a Honda speciality.

I'm not sure if it would increase performance, because all the weight more bundle up. There is someting about mass of weight and etc. If you are thinking about 911s, the transmission actually sit in front of the engine, so it's more spread out. Of course, anything can be corrected with adjustments to springs and horsepower.

A flat 4 is not as efficient as the engine that moves up & down. Therefore, often times, decreasing in fuel economy. It sort of like going against gravatational pull, if it was not sort of going up and down. Also, it has to do with the air/fuel weights in the chamber, and the swirls it makes. To understand that, imagine how an engine would perform if it was up side down. When the spark lights, it has to push up. There are more details that I can't recall, but that's sort of the general that I remember.

Spade

I would think if you could fit the engine lower in the bay then handling would be awesome......does anyone here really care about fuel economy anyway?

Just think if you could fit the tranny behing the engine and have it more centralized.
Lower and more mid center of gravity.....basically take a Subaru drivetrain and give it the looks of a honda.

Caffeine Slug

My mom's 2.5TL has an I5.

976

Inline engines are much wider than vertical. However theroticaly you can produce more power of torque w/ inline pistons. Hondas for the most part are well designed cars, they distrabute their cars' weight evenly; unlike many american made cars...

YodaIsGod

wait a sec...i've always thought I-6 is much smother than a V-6. Hence the reason why BMW uses I-6. The advantage to a inline is more torque that a similar displacement sized "V", AND inlines usually last a lot longer.

I've seen an I-6 from a Jeep wrangler go over 250,00 miles with a rebuild. There is a reason why GM went to and I-6 in the TrailBlazer/Envoy because of the logevity, and inherient torque an inline engine provides.

Inline's are also more turbo 'friendly' than V.....IMO

BTW...Honda & GM have some type of agreement where the new Passport replacement with carry the GM I-6....but i have seen an 'office' announcment from either company.

Caffeine Slug

For those who haven't seen it, you may want to check out this article on "engine smoothness": http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_s...ne/smooth1.htm

Compares various engine configurations (I, V, W, Boxer) for different numbers of cylinders. A quote from the I6 section of the article:
"What about vertical / transverse forces? like 3-cylinder engines, the vertical and transverse forces generated by individual cylinders, no matter first order or second order, are completely balanced by one another. The resultant vibration is nearly zero, thus inline-6 is virtually a perfect configuration. "

It's a very interesting read.

StorminMatt

An inline six is definitely smoother than a V6. Inline sixes also benefit from having a better intake manifold geometry than a V6. With a V6, everything is really crowded together and bends have to be sharp. With an inline six, intake runners can be much straighter. As for high RPM use, inline sixes were in the past quite a poor choice. But recently, several inline sixes have been developed that work quite well at high RPMs. The Nissan RB26DETT and BMW M3 engines are good examples. Weight is not really an issue. So why do so few manufacturers use inline sixes anyore? V6s are easier to package in FWD applications.

Speaking of the 4.2 liter GM I6, there is one simple reason why GM went this route. As you may know, GM has something major against overhead cams. But they knew that overhead cams were the only way to go if they wanted a six cylinder engine with good economy, good emissions, AND the same power as their smaller V8s (I guess even pushrod-loving General Motors knew pushrods would not cut it!). In any case, a DOHC inline six allows the use of only two cams rather than the four cams that a V6 uses. And I guess if you really hate overhead cams (like GM does), two beats four.

As far as Honda using an inline six, dream on. Honda seems bent on using small displacement engines in heavy cars. The only Hondas that even come close to having 1cc per pound are the NSX, Accord V6, and maybe some of the V6 Acuras.

bps2799

GM DOES make DOHC V engines, such as a 3.4L V-6 and the Northstar (4.5 or 4.9L?) V-8, and these really aren't even segregated by model line, despite the extra cost.

I'd say cost is the real issue here, so if people will buy pushrod engines still, why design more sophisticated engines and, more importantly, build them.

For some reason, GM seems to get more torque from their pushrod engines, so a certain subset of their buyers would prefer this (55 and older) to higher powered, but higher reving engines, such as the 3.4L DOHC V-6 they keep trying to replace the 3.8L pushrod V-6 with.

It was well known by some in the 50's and 60's era of performance that I-6s, esp. Chevy and GMC were VERY torque rich (ex., put a Chevy small block V-8 and a Chevy I-6 in high while going uphill at low speed -- the only time the six would walk away from the V-8). Diesel motors are often I-6s for the torque benefits conferred by this configuration.

Lastly, by getting into bed with GM and it engines, which is going to happen (esp. for Honda's new full size pickup), Honda risks making a mistake by sabotaging its driveline quality. GM uses many plastic parts in its transmissions, and these invariably fail after 3-5 years of normal driving.

Urban Business

we already have an killer I5 but no one ever did anything with it b/c their retards.

vtecguy

the i-5 from the vigor wasn't developed by Honda I heard, it was actually developed by Audi.

B18C-EJ1

I can't wait to see the new W6 from VW.

Supposedly it'll have some POWER!

John

S2000s have horizontally opposed motors...

Greyout

wtf no it doesn't. its an inline-4

bps2799

Yeah, the S2000's boxer engine must be why it cleans up on the Boxter.

Or maybe not.

YodaIsGod

the S2000 inline-4 is mounted long ways to drive the rear wheels.

Subaru's H-4 & H-6 are licensed designs from Porche.

bps2799

Why aren't they air-cooled, then?

92sleepR

Inline engines aren't "modular" in that you cant just slap more cylinders on. The firing order and angle of the connecting rod journals need to be considered. Also, the long crank shafts of I6 engines lead to weight and packaging issues. I6's can make great power, even in NA form, look at the BMW 3 series, but Honda already has several great six cylinder engines, they probably didn't think it was worth the effort.

Mike

Urban Business

audi idea, designed and built by honda for vigor. audi did not make that motor for the vigor, honda did