[Smartie]

The big deal right.

In Japan Honda just started selling the Vezel with the new 1.5T instead of the old 1.8 (although I believe JDM cars were using the 1.8 Earth Dreams that we never got IIRC)

The difference between Hondas 1.5 Turbo and old 1.8?

7 hp and 25 ft-lb of torque in favor of the 1.5T, 148 hp and 150 ft-lbs. Enough for the Civic?

 

[RobbJK88]

I don't think so. I'm really hoping that those figures are low just because they're japanese spec commuter cars. Japan doesn't usually require the power we do in america because of our highways and aggressive driving. The fact honda kept repeating over and over how the 1.5T was capable of the 2.4L output with better efficiency makes me think we can expect between 160-180 horsepower from this little engine and maybe between 170-190 torque.

I don't see the marketing point of mentioning over and over what the engine is capable of and then not delivering at least a moderate power bump over the current engine. And that still leaves plenty of potential for tuning the 1.5T up to Si style numbers. The last time honda did a power bump (8th gen) it was roughly 20 horsepower. So expecting at least 160 isn't that farfetched i'd say. BUT. Honda does have a special way of hyping things and then disappointing in a huge way.

I'm hoping that isn't the case with the new civic.

Also, before they had to worry about the base ILX which made 160 horsepower, but now, the ILX has the 2.4 only making 201 horsepower. So they've got quite a gap to fill between the two before they step on ILX toes.

 

[jamis]

The current 1.8L US Civic motor is listed at 143 hp and 129 lb/ft of torque, so I doubt that 148 hp and 150 lb/ft of torque will be correct for the new, larger Civic.

 

[Smartie]

I don't think so. I'm really hoping that those figures are low just because they're japanese spec commuter cars. Japan doesn't usually require the power we do in america because of our highways and aggressive driving. The fact honda kept repeating over and over how the 1.5T was capable of the 2.4L output with better efficiency makes me think we can expect between 160-180 horsepower from this little engine and maybe between 170-190 torque.

I don't see the marketing point of mentioning over and over what the engine is capable of and then not delivering at least a moderate power bump over the current engine. And that still leaves plenty of potential for tuning the 1.5T up to Si style numbers. The last time honda did a power bump (8th gen) it was roughly 20 horsepower. So expecting at least 160 isn't that farfetched i'd say. BUT. Honda does have a special way of hyping things and then disappointing in a huge way.

I'm hoping that isn't the case with the new civic.

Also, before they had to worry about the base ILX which made 160 horsepower, but now, the ILX has the 2.4 only making 201 horsepower. So they've got quite a gap to fill between the two before they step on ILX toes.

I think we're probably going to see the 2.0T in the Si, and a tweaked 2.0T in the CTR...

 

[Smith]

Tuning the 1.5T up to Si levels would be great but that might do more harm than good over the long haul as it could compromise reliability, pushing the 1.5 too hard, harder than it should be.

 

[Smartie]

Tuning the 1.5T up to Si levels would be great but that might do more harm than good over the long haul as it could compromise reliability, pushing the 1.5 too hard, harder than it should be.

Actually the reliability is the one factor I have no concerns about. Honda is notorious for overbuilding everything right down to switchgear. What I would worry about on the 1.5T is fuel econ. Consumption changes with forced induction, especially under heavy load. a Turbo car will actually drink more then a NA car under heavy boost events. Which is interesting because paradoxically cars are getting heavier in the name of safety and less powerful in the name of efficiency, high boost events become common because the motor couldn't do it alone to begin with so the Turbo is always in hyper demand... Its like robbing Peter to pay Paul...

 

[RobbJK88]

Actually the reliability is the one factor I have no concerns about. Honda is notorious for overbuilding everything right down to switchgear. What I would worry about on the 1.5T is fuel econ. Consumption changes with forced induction, especially under heavy load. a Turbo car will actually drink more then a NA car under heavy boost events. Which is interesting because paradoxically cars are getting heavier in the name of safety and less powerful in the name of efficiency, high boost events become common because the motor couldn't do it alone to begin with so the Turbo is always in hyper demand... Its like robbing Peter to pay Paul...

I also feel this way about the new small turbo trend. Chevy and Ford both are getting knocked for their smaller turbo engines because they don't get the advertised fuel econ. My only hope is that Honda has waited this long and tuned their tech enough that it won't be an issue for them, just because they're obsessive like that about things. We might actually see turbo engines that give class leading power AND fuel efficiency without having to necessarily baby them to get the advertised mpg.

 

[jamis]

I've been following the Cruze 1.4L turbo since 2011. I've found several design issues with it compared to the r18 motor in the Civic. The 1.4L motor has overheating, heatsoaking, turbo, oil line coaking, and octane issues. It also has lower EPA mileage and higher EPA emissions than the r18 engine. The turbo and wastegate are built into the exhaust manifold so if there are problems with any of them, it's a total manifold assembly replacement. That's OK if it's under warranty, but if not... For example, if the wastegate pivot pins corrode (and they do), you have to replace the entire exhaust manifold/turbo/wastegate assembly. You can't just replace the pivot pins. Chevy finally just came out with an ECM reprogram to fix some emissions issues at WOT, but nothing has been done to fix the other driveability issues with the engine. Chevy is also replacing the 1.4L turbo motor with a 1.5L turbo motor for the second gen. Cruze in the 2016 MY. Looking to see how well both manufacturers do with these new designs.

 

[Smartie]

Interesting...

Ford is having issues with Ecoboost right now, you can't perform intake side service because the carbon will break off the back of the valves and then take out the turbos. The solution so far has been to replace the entire head when any issues around the valves/intake come up (My Pops, a Master Ford tech, informed me)

I feel the same about the new T's from Honda Robb. Coupled with VTEC Honda should be able to mitigate. Toyota is doing cool stuff with a similar system that swaps between Atkinson and Otto cycles.

 

[RobbJK88]

Everyone knocks honda for being behind the curve when it comes to automotive trends, such as small turbo engines. BUT. The good thing about being behind the curve is letting all the competition deal with the bugs and issues. By looking at the design flaws of chevy and ford and even hyundai/kia, Honda now knows exactly what to do and what not to do to make sure their attempt at turbo is up to their reliability standards as well as meeting the performance and fuel economy needs that other have fallen short on. I just don't see conservative and cautionary honda releasing a product that doesn't work the way they say it does. I just hope they dont get too conservative and ruin the performance potential of the new civics. These new civics need to benchmark the class leaders in terms of not only fuel consumption and emissions, but also straight line speed and handling if they really want to be taken seriously as an enthusiast brand again.

The cars to beat are the Ford focus (handling) the mazda3 (handling and 0-60) VW golf (handling and 0-60) and the kia forte (0-60)

 

[CanGuy]

I don't see Honda as behind the curve, but I also don't see them as cutting edge. I don't think that is a bad thing though. They have a reputation for quality and I think that is probably because they are more conservative than some other brands.

 

[AlwaysHitVTEC]

What I want to know is how much the new 1.5T can be tuned...the tuning angle makes the turbocharger worth having, IMO...

 

[jamis]

Don't mean to threadjack, but did you know that there are 11 car makers lobbying Congress to pass a law that would make it illegal to modify the electronics in your car? Given that all of the new engine designs rely heavily on robust ECU programming to keep them running at the optimal design point, it seems that tuning a newer car may be thing of the past if this law gets enacted. The new engine designs may be very limited as to what tuning can be done.

 

[Smith]

Don't mean to threadjack, but did you know that there are 11 car makers lobbying Congress to pass a law that would make it illegal to modify the electronics in your car? Given that all of the new engine designs rely heavily on robust ECU programming to keep them running at the optimal design point, it seems that tuning a newer car may be thing of the past if this law gets enacted. The new engine designs may be very limited as to what tuning can be done.

Yeah and chances are it will pass since their whole issue is it's software they have the rights to, software that's worked into most parts of the car.

I know mechanics that have decades to go in the industry are going to like this, it means more jobs for them, especially guys at dealerships.

 

[RobbJK88]

I could see that law being pertinent for people who LEASE vehicles that have to return the car, because technically, the dealership and car company (or bank) own the vehicle while you just pay to drive it. But i can't see it being viable for people who own their cars. You bought the car. You own the car. It is now your property, and you should be able to make any (street legal) modifications you want to your property. Once you own that car it's no longer "their" vehicle.

Considering America has always had this romanticized love affair with the open road, cars and driving, as well as racing, America is one of the worst countries to actually drive in. So many restrictions and it's a growing list to the point where eventually it'll be illegal to even drive your own vehicle and computers will do it for you. I hope i'm dead before that ever happens.

 

[Smartie]

I could see that law being pertinent for people who LEASE vehicles that have to return the car, because technically, the dealership and car company (or bank) own the vehicle while you just pay to drive it. But i can't see it being viable for people who own their cars. You bought the car. You own the car. It is now your property, and you should be able to make any (street legal) modifications you want to your property. Once you own that car it's no longer "their" vehicle.

Considering America has always had this romanticized love affair with the open road, cars and driving, as well as racing, America is one of the worst countries to actually drive in. So many restrictions and it's a growing list to the point where eventually it'll be illegal to even drive your own vehicle and computers will do it for you. I hope i'm dead before that ever happens.

They're rhetoric seems to be that you didn't actually buy the car but you bought a licencing agreement to use their proprietary systems for the duration of their lifetime...

What worries me are the consequences that come from GM being able to stake a legitimate claim to 'owning' your vehicle. Will location information, habits, whatever now become totally owned by GM because they own the tool that generates the insights, thus bypassing any legal constraints or concerns?

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/05/20/general-motors-says-owns-your-car-software/

 

[TheVorlon]

The big deal right.

In Japan Honda just started selling the Vezel with the new 1.5T instead of the old 1.8 (although I believe JDM cars were using the 1.8 Earth Dreams that we never got IIRC)

The difference between Hondas 1.5 Turbo and old 1.8?

7 hp and 25 ft-lb of torque in favor of the 1.5T, 148 hp and 150 ft-lbs. Enough for the Civic?

I "assume" the turbo civic 1.5 litre is based on the 1.5 litre non turbo in the new Fit. - That engine makes 130 HP, so another 18 HP from a turbo seems a little light...

Ford gets 181 hp from the 1.5 litre ecotec mini turbo and MIni gets 173 hp from a turbo 1.5 litre 3 cylinder, so I think 148 is a bit low....

 

[Rainz]

The big deal right.

In Japan Honda just started selling the Vezel with the new 1.5T instead of the old 1.8 (although I believe JDM cars were using the 1.8 Earth Dreams that we never got IIRC)

The difference between Hondas 1.5 Turbo and old 1.8?

7 hp and 25 ft-lb of torque in favor of the 1.5T, 148 hp and 150 ft-lbs. Enough for the Civic?

they said 31hp over current gen for the turbo motor and 15 hp added for the new atmospheric motor

 

[Design]

Interesting...

Ford is having issues with Ecoboost right now, you can't perform intake side service because the carbon will break off the back of the valves and then take out the turbos. The solution so far has been to replace the entire head when any issues around the valves/intake come up (My Pops, a Master Ford tech, informed me)

I feel the same about the new T's from Honda Robb. Coupled with VTEC Honda should be able to mitigate. Toyota is doing cool stuff with a similar system that swaps between Atkinson and Otto cycles.

Old post but worth emphasizing. ALL direct injection turbo platforms have this problem over time. BMW, VW, Audi and Mazda's approach is to remove the IM and perform a pressurized cleaning of the intake valves using fine walnut media. The same can technically be done on the EcoBoost, which is technically a tweaked Mazda L3-VDT. This issue always comes down to the following:
1. Car doesn't see the full range of the throttle. Light throttle is more prone to buildup.
2. Using poor quality gasoline and oil. Both have a hand at minimizing carbon deposits on the valves through the use of quality detergents.
3. Extended oil change intervals.

Good read here:
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2015/01/is-carbon-buildup-a-problem-with-direct-injection-engines-.html


EDIT: And another good article on how automakers are minimizing buildup in modern DI motors. I assume Honda has learned a lot from the failures of others:
http://www.edmunds.com/autoobserver-archive/2011/06/direct-injection-fouls-some-early-adopters.html

 

[Smartie]

Old post but worth emphasizing. ALL direct injection turbo platforms have this problem over time. BMW, VW, Audi and Mazda's approach is to remove the IM and perform a pressurized cleaning of the intake valves using fine walnut media. The same can technically be done on the EcoBoost, which is technically a tweaked Mazda L3-VDT. This issue always comes down to the following:
1. Car doesn't see the full range of the throttle. Light throttle is more prone to buildup.
2. Using poor quality gasoline and oil. Both have a hand at minimizing carbon deposits on the valves through the use of quality detergents.
3. Extended oil change intervals.

Good read here:
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2015/01/is-carbon-buildup-a-problem-with-direct-injection-engines-.html


EDIT: And another good article on how automakers are minimizing buildup in modern DI motors. I assume Honda has learned a lot from the failures of others:
http://www.edmunds.com/autoobserver-archive/2011/06/direct-injection-fouls-some-early-adopters.html

Its the throttle thing that really does them in IMO. They get babied because they only ever run in bumper to bumper. They need high RPM events to burn off (even partially) all that guck. Its the same as when people who do no physical activity complain their legs hurt... >