assume everything else is the same such as weight, trans, is a 140 HP vtec better than a 140 HP non-vtec?

 

What kind of question is that?

The only thing that would be better about the vtec engine would be fuel consumption.

The non-vtec would be better, theoretically, of course. Because it's power range would span the entire rpm scale, instead of just from 4500 rpm (or whatever the f&^k it is).

Just my thoughts. I'm sure someone else will chime in saying that vtec would be better because it makes a cool sound. :rolls eyes:

 

you need to be more specific.................................

What VTEC engine and which non-VTEC engine?

 

theoretically, what would be better

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by carolinaACCORD &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">What kind of question is that?

The non-vtec would be better, theoretically, of course. Because it's power range would span the entire rpm scale, instead of just from 4500 rpm (or whatever the f&^k it is).

</TD></TR></TABLE>

?

you think a 2.2l with no variable valve timing is going to make more power down low than one with it?

there would be/is no difference

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Nick M &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

?

you think a 2.2l with no variable valve timing is going to make more power down low than one with it?

there would be/is no difference </TD></TR></TABLE>

i would assume that since you had vtec the lo and hi cam profiles would allow to have better power throughout the rpm range. with a non vtec the cam profile there is a compromise, with vtec you can be more aggressive. you may make the same peak power, but the area under the curve should be better.

 

Well, nevermind. Now that I've re-read and thought about the original question, it doesn't matter.

The question is too broad.

And, not to be rude, but who the hell cares? They're both gonna be slow.