9G Type R and emissions

[D_Fizzle]

With all the people talking about how the new Type R will have a compromised engine because of emissions regulations and how a high revving NA engine can't comply.

Now, unless I'm being naive or missing something, it strikes me that it doesn't matter where the redline of an engine is, the emissions test isn't done by a 16 year old joy-rider with lead feet so could easily be done without the engine exceeding 2500 RPM. If the engine is efficient enough in that range then it'll sail through the test and let's face it, the K20 is a bit old now and a few tweaks should see it through. Look at the 1.8, the 9G uses the same engine as the 8G, but is a whole tax bracket lower. Something must have changed.

This leaves the VTEC window right open, even if they stick a turbo charger on there to increase the power, it's not like they don't have experience with the BTCC car (or is VTEC banned from that?) so they should manage to wangle some kind of spritely engine through the test. I, for one, am looking forward to what they come up with, Honda are a great company for innovation and I can't see them releasing a Type R that isn't better than the current one.

Tl;dr? Revs don't matter in the emissions test AFAIK.

[phil99]

emmisio test make me laugh, just been to look at a Octavia VRS diesel, 200bhp and £30 a year road tax

[Foulsmell]

Originally Posted by D_Fizzle

With all the people talking about how the new Type R will have a compromised engine because of emissions regulations and how a high revving NA engine can't comply.

Now, unless I'm being naive or missing something, it strikes me that it doesn't matter where the redline of an engine is, the emissions test isn't done by a 16 year old joy-rider with lead feet so could easily be done without the engine exceeding 2500 RPM. If the engine is efficient enough in that range then it'll sail through the test and let's face it, the K20 is a bit old now and a few tweaks should see it through. Look at the 1.8, the 9G uses the same engine as the 8G, but is a whole tax bracket lower. Something must have changed.

This leaves the VTEC window right open, even if they stick a turbo charger on there to increase the power, it's not like they don't have experience with the BTCC car (or is VTEC banned from that?) so they should manage to wangle some kind of spritely engine through the test. I, for one, am looking forward to what they come up with, Honda are a great company for innovation and I can't see them releasing a Type R that isn't better than the current one.

Tl;dr? Revs don't matter in the emissions test AFAIK.

I hear what you are saying but.
The legislators set an emissions cap averaged over all new vehicles produced by each manufacturer.

Which means that Honda sell loads of cars which means loads of Co2. So it doesn't have room for a high Co2 producing car. Companies like Ferrari sell high Co2 cars but not many of them.

So it's not down to technology its just annoying legislation.

[D_Fizzle]

I think you're missing my point Foulsmell, the car could be set up to be fairly economical in the low rev range, where most of the test time will be spent thus leaving the top 4-5000 RPM untouched and therefore unrestricted.

[delta0]

Originally Posted by D_Fizzle

I think you're missing my point Foulsmell, the car could be set up to be fairly economical in the low rev range, where most of the test time will be spent thus leaving the top 4-5000 RPM untouched and therefore unrestricted.

That's where the turbo should help.

[stoney]

Emissons are not tested on a fixed rpm basis for tax calculations, they are tested on test bed on a combined cycle integrating all driving conditions etc.

On that basis Ferrari could pass their V12s for a low tax band by dropping performance at low revs.

[D_Fizzle]

Originally Posted by stoney

Emissons are not tested on a fixed rpm basis for tax calculations, they are tested on test bed on a combined cycle integrating all driving conditions etc.

On that basis Ferrari could pass their V12s for a low tax band by dropping performance at low revs.

No it couldn't, a V12 with a large capacity will spew out loads of CO2 at low revs because of the amount of fuel needed to fill all the cylinders.

[stoney]

Cylinders are only full at peak torque

They could map their variable cam angle systems to have a sweet spot for emission tests, but because they are combined cycle tests they cannot.


Same way Honda can't work miracles with their new cars

[D_Fizzle]

I think you're going off topic, this is about there not being an upper limit on the RPM due to emissions. So long as it's fine in the normal range then it can rev as high as you like. Just because you have to get up to 63mph in the test doesn't mean you have to red line the engine, or even go over 3000 revs.

[stoney]

Have you evidence that they dont test the whole operating rev range for the test? Because the K20 is designed for high revs and peak BHP im sure this means sacrifices have been made at low rpm in relation to fumes and economy, noise etc, If Honda could make it meet current emission legislation im sure they would.

Most manufacturers now are using small boosted applications for their cars, My moneys on the new Type R ( or similar top line civic) being a turbo'd 1.6 etc.



PS I don't think it was off topic

[D_Fizzle]

No, I don't have evidence, I couldn't find any to suggest they tried the whole rev range, only that they measured it in the same test that's used to measure mpg. Given the mpg figures that come out of the test, you have to presume thy the cars are being driven as frugally as possible.

I don't doubt that in all probability we'll see something like the WTCC 1.6 turbo in the new CTR, but that doesn't mean it won't have the limiter set at 8k revs. That's what I was trying to discuss but I am useless at explaining things

[Relic]

Emission test cycle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Emission test cycle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia (Links)

Wikipedia (Links)

[Foulsmell]

Originally Posted by D_Fizzle

I think you're missing my point Foulsmell, the car could be set up to be fairly economical in the low rev range, where most of the test time will be spent thus leaving the top 4-5000 RPM untouched and therefore unrestricted.

You mean something like er hmm let me see oh .... Vtec!

[delta0]

They do an urban and city type test. This would not involve high revving of the engine. It will be based on achieving x acceleration for a range of speeds in different gears.

[Alsone]

I still think the answer lies in electric assist.

The thing everybody seems to miss with hybrids is that electric motors are more powerful than a conventional engine for any given BHP because they can deliver 100% torque at 0 revs.

An ordinary petrol engine by comparison often has low torque off the mark and max torque high up.

So by fitting a hybrid system you can get a car that's very rapid off the mark.

There's little doubt in my mind that Jaguar have the future solution, a small jet turbine combined with 4 electric motors giving 4 wheel drive, huge power and torque but with the turbine only providing the electrics with power.

After all if Jaguar's engineers reckon they can get 1,000BHP with 20g/km carbon and huge mpg then there's surely something in it.

[D_Fizzle]

Originally Posted by Foulsmell

You mean something like er hmm let me see oh .... Vtec!

Precisely!

[Foulsmell]

Originally Posted by D_Fizzle

Precisely!

But it's already been explained. Tdi have produced a 500bhp turbo fn2. The technology is there and has been for years. Honda can't make one because their average co2 will be over what they are allowed.

[stoney]

Originally Posted by Foulsmell

But it's already been explained. Tdi have produced a 500bhp turbo fn2. The technology is there and has been for years. Honda can't make one because their average co2 will be over what they are allowed.

Plus it needs to be serviced less often, with 3 years warranty, meet noise and emission criteria etc

[delta0]

Honda have a lot of options to utilise.
They can turbo, electric, implement 1.8 i-vtec eco tech and continue to reduce weight. Electric is good but it adds a lot of weight and cost unless they keep the system small like the CRZ system.

[Alsone]

Originally Posted by delta0

Honda have a lot of options to utilise.
They can turbo, electric, implement 1.8 i-vtec eco tech and continue to reduce weight. Electric is good but it adds a lot of weight and cost unless they keep the system small like the CRZ system.

I think that's why Jaguar are looking at using the engine as purely a generator and not a drive unit. That way you can do away with batteries almost entirely (except for start) as then engine just supplies a constant electricity supply for the motors. The weight saving is obviously going to be massive in that case.