VVTi
-
Wipe front to back, that is all.
-
integra_gsr98 wrote:
Wipe front to back, that is all.Damnit, that explains it all!
-
97slowgsx wrote:
besides honda's so stupid...they made a turbo jetski before they made a turbo car.Shhhit Honda has used FI for years..in Japan. 1983 Honda city turbo II bizzo!
http://www.honda.co.jp/factbook/auto/CITY/19831026/ci83-002.html -
wannabe wrote:
thanks man, someone needed to say it!Ever run a decent time? Tune a car? How about a high comp boosted car? Own one?
Didn't think so.
Misinformation spreads when people who have zero knowledge on a subject pretend that they do.EDIT See http://www.honda-tech.com/ for examples.
-
wannabe wrote:
thanks man, someone needed to say it!I wasn't saying so much to be a dick, but to get someones input besides Mr V t ech talking about how it owns all (but funny how few own it?....)
In the real world where people make money for a living and can afford something nicer than a civic, and do not rely on 35mpg to get them through to the next paycheck, makes me wonder what real value V E EE TECH is to me?
Do I like manually rolling up my own windows, lack of a/c on account of my .2 liter increase in displaced motor swap-age, or it must be the fact that every kid under 17 owns one that makes me want V t ehc so bad...
-
99slowGSX wrote:
bumpinjcc- thanks for making the gayest thread ever and then it turned serious. I dont think anyone got the joke in the first post......
Yeah...i don't know what to say
. This thread pisses me off.I figured people would get the joke, but alas people do not understand..
-
2slo50h wrote:
Do I like manually rolling up my own windows, lack of a/c on account of my .2 liter increase in displaced motor swap-age, or it must be the fact that every kid under 17 owns one that makes me want V t ehc so bad...
I would much rather have a POS Honda than a 95 Mustang...mustangs are uber rare y0. -
I never claimed to know everything, I just said it needs to be able to handle a lot of cylinder pressure. What did I say in this thread that was wrong. Correct me if I said anything wrong... and also, if you know SOOO much, why is your 585 wheel HP SUPERcar still running 11's, and 1 ten...
-
wannabe wrote:
I never claimed to know everything, I just said it needs to be able to handle a lot of cylinder pressure. What did I say in this thread that was wrong. Correct me if I said anything wrong... and also, if you know SOOO much, why is your 585 wheel HP SUPERcar still running 11's, and 1 ten...14:1 and boost, it just needs to be built...... Yup, ok!
If you haven't run the times or built the cars then where do you stand in the end??
-
PSiedTSi wrote:
It isn't as much into the build as it is into the TUNING. You aren't going to have a very fun time running 14:1 compression on premium with a supercharger....doesn't matter if the motor is built or not...And also another thing that needs to be added to this, is that not everyone uses premium gas. Even though the car says to run premium, how many people actually do? I know I don't every time. Thing of a higher compression turbo engine running on 87 octane. BOOM.
-
You also cannot guarantee the quality of pump gas either. If a motor is tuned "on the edge" and you get a bad tank of gas, you are done.
-
Someone earlier in the thread suggested that variable valve timing is an economy or emissions thing only. I hope they were trolling
BMWs VANOS technology may have an economy advantage but its cheif utility is to widen the torque band of the engine. BMW likes a slightly horsepower biased engine with a slightly rev-happy cam. VANOS allows more torque to be available at a wider variety of load and RPM conditions than the fixed cam profile would allow. Prepared BMW engines will sometimes have the VANOS unit removed as it may not offer any advantages in racing conditions (but removing the attendant valvetrain mass/complexity may)
VANOS is essentially a cam-phasing technology which can retard or advance the intake cam (single vanos) or both cams independantly (double vanos). The cam phasing in VANOS is "stepless" in the sense that there aren't pre-set cam retard/advance settings.. to the extent that it is mechanically possible the cam phase dilation is a continuous function across its range of motion. An easy way to think of it is - everyone has seen adjustable cam gears where you've got the slot and the lock nut - these allow for any cam position within the slot of adjustment. VANOS is the same concept, except the advance or retard of the cam is controlled by the engine management system and servos, not set by you while the engine is stopped
I beleive that single VANOS first appeared on a production BMW in the USA in 1993, on the M50B25TU engine found in the E34 525i series and E36 325i series.
For many years, no other variable valve timing technology provided variable valve lift as **** did, because I beleive Honda had a patent on variable valve lift.
That patent has either expired or been worked around such that newer systems like BMW Valvetronic and the latest Porsche VarioCam also provide variable lift.
The Valvetronic lift profile is also steplessly variable - the effective lift of the valve can be any value between its minimum and maximu adjustment, with sufficient speed and granularity that Valvetronic engines do not have throttle butterflies. The variable lift in valvetronic is acheived by having an eccentric (sort of like a french curve) on a shaft that runs parallel to the cams. IIRC, there is one eccentric lobe per valve pair, and the shaft doesn't ever make a full revolution - it adjusts forward or backward to increase or decrease the effective shim width between the normal camshaft lobe and the valve itself (at least, that' show i remember it working). Conceptually you are steplessly varying the shim thickness if you had a shim-over-bucket valvetrain.
**** is an effective and ingenius system, but at least in its initial versions, it's little more than stuffing 2 sets of cam lobes onto the same camshaft.
-
When did valvetronic start being used?
VVT started because the manufactures said goodbye to those hairdriers that are plumbed into the exhaust and wanted a better way to reduce emissions at startup.
Yes, as it evolved they are used more and more for performance purposes...I agree. Its just not as effective for adding power as the hondas (referring to stock cars here. Yes, i realize boost owns all)Its also funny when people talking about their VVT 'kicking in'
-
PSI2HI wrote:
14:1 and boost, it just needs to be built...... Yup, ok!If you haven't run the times or built the cars then where do you stand in the end??
When Did I say it JUST NEEDED TO BE BUILT!?!? I never did? I just said it NEEDED to be built. i dont know where you guys are getting this... once again like I said, I never gave any incorrect information in this thread. Why do I need to run a fast time to say something that is obvious?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login