Ian - there is no VTEC kick in the 1.8. The VTEC is in normal mode all the time, except when at mid revs and light throttle when it VTECs into economy cruise mode. Total opposite to the R! VTEC - Civinfo WikiI have driven a loan 1.8 vtec and didn't feel it really gave as good as I was expecting, even on the vtec it just made more noise and didn't seem to go anywhere faster.No matter how hard you rev'd it, the vtec kick just isn't there like I'd expect it to be in a TypeR.
The 2.2 revs less, but has more torque, but the torque is multiplied less by different gearing, which is geared for changes at different speeds. Much easier to analyse power (which has revs dialled out). At high revs the 1.8 has a bit less power, but at mid revs the 2.2 has more power.Sure the diesal has more torque so it can pull harder in each gear but as the power is available in a shorter band it has to change gear alot sooner than the petrol therefore the petrol can stay in lower gears for longer.
Think the 1.8 can do 60-65 in 2nd. This means that although the petrol has alot less torque it can apply it for longer in each gear almost evening up the performance figures.
I havnt even googled it but i thought torque*revs=power or something to that effect.
Both the 1.8 and 2.2 on 17s are not as stable as they should be - I suspect that most of this is down to the slightly basic McPherson strut coupled with the very basic rear suspension. I have found both to be very road surface susceptible, with just small ridges causing "exciting" handling....but when pushed really hard, handled like a pig.
Everytime on the car I drove, when asked to slow down under extremely heavy braking, it would not follow a straight line and filled me with apprehension. Also seemed unwilling to change direction quickly without complaint. Is it because it is much heavier up front?
But the 1.8 isn't quicker to 60. 8.9 secs to 62mph as compared to the diesel's 8.6 secs.I agree that we can't compare a diesel 2.2 with turbo, with a petrol 1.8. Even so, the petrol is faster getting from 0 to 60 miles. The diesel is smoother getting up ...
And with 140 HP, the 140 kilos difference are important ...
I don't think the defference betweenn them is so big ... I've a diesel ...
Ah ha, thanks matey. Now I got it.Fuel of Satan
The 1.8 only has a single CAM so no kickAh ha, thanks matey. Now I got it.
I've heard that before.
Ah, I see now but the change in cams is supposed to increase power essentially but as the 1.8 is ultimatly not as powerful as the TypeR you just dont feel it as much.
In any case it just felt a little flat compared to my Diesel when I was expecting a slightly more noticable change as it switched cams.
You are missing the point, Honda sell both a 1.8 petrol and a 2.2 diesel with a turbo (and intercooler) with the same trim levels (so leaving the type R out of the equation), comparisons are going to be drawn. They both have circa 140 hp, making the comparisons even more likely.Anyway if they put a turbo in the 1.8, the diesel wouldn't see it for dust. Its not a fair comparison in my view. Both engines should be either normally aspirated or turbocharged.
completely agree with that!!!Anyway if they put a turbo in the 1.8, the diesel wouldn't see it for dust. Its not a fair comparison in my view. Both engines should be either normally aspirated or turbocharged.