Originally Posted by
Chip
Danw, your appraisal seems to be of N/A versus turbo (or diesel turbo) rather than vtec versus non vtec. Everything you said applies equally to all non vtec N/A engines as well, just in most cases they dont even have the go when you do rev them either!
Upto 6K there is basically naff all between a vtec and non vtec engine, then from 6K onwards the vtec wins.
Its weird that cause the engine gets massively better at high rpm it makes people not like it at low rpm, where as without that power at high rpm no one seems to mind their cars being gutless low down (ie a normal 2.0 zetec etc)
We all agree that if you want a big surge of midrange torque you need a turbo, or a lot more capacity, there is simply no way to have an N/A engine of small capacity that pulls well at low rpm, the laws of physics totally prevent it.
My appraisal was of the VTEC engines, and the driving characteristics of them in comparison to their competitors. I didn't know the 'rules' of the discussion was that you weren't allowed mention forced induction cars.
I don't like VTEC engines, and I was throwing my four-penneth into a conversation about them, and I stand by my comments.
Ultimately I'd much rather have an N/A where there was a more even spread of power - I've not looked at the dyno graphs but I'd wager that a Clio 182 would make more power at 2K, 3K and 4K than a Civic Type R - or at least it has driving characteristics that I prefer over the Type R.