why do people who dont like vtec ... dont like vtec?

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

ok most critics quote the lack of low end torque, but vtec doesnt neccesarily hurt low speed torque, on the contrary it has the same if not more torque then engiens of similar specifications which dont have vtec (or a similar system)

the reason why most vtec cars have crappy ass low end torque is the fact those engines are designed with high power high rpm operations in mind (where vtec gives the most gains) meaning large bore and short stroke, the short stroke is what hurts low end torque, not the vtec system itself

now i ask again why do people who dont like vtec ... not like it ?? i cant think of any possible reason ...

[The_Canuck]

Umm i like Vtec but its because of fanboys that some other people might not like Vtec.

[coolieman1220]

v-tec is just a name, many car manufactors have it just diffenre names. double vanos, vvti. its simple proces of moving cams. honda has a good system of it. but it sucks at low RPM, its loud and it won't work in a heavy car. also yeah the fanboys

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

v-tec is just a name, many car manufactors have it just diffenre names. double vanos, vvti. its simple proces of moving cams. honda has a good system of it. but it sucks at low RPM, its loud and it won't work in a heavy car. also yeah the fanboys

vtec and vvti-L are the only systems which combine cam phasing and cam changing in one system

all others are one or the other

as my first post says, vtec DOESNT suck at low rpm, the whole point of variable valve timing systems and changing the cam profiles is you can have a regular profile at low rpm to improve low speed breathing and mixing for torque, and a profile for high rpm with high lift, long duration, and large overlap
the reason why most vtec engines dont have low speed punch is cuz they have a small stroke which allows higher redline rpms, this has the effect of lowering torque, but due to a larger rev range you can make each gear shorter which increases torque at the wheels

[teatako]

the problem with vtec is that its like a switch instead of being infintely variable like say, porsche´s variocam plus. but then they are selling it on civics and stuff so its gotta be cheaper. that said, i would always take any engine with any variable valve timing system than one without

[Slicks]

the problem with vtec is that its like a switch instead of being infintely variable like say, porsche´s variocam plus.

Bingo.
That and the fanboys. Also seems like a wasted technology using it on little 4 bangers. 180hp-240hp is 180hp-240hp no matter how many liters its coming from.

[bmwpower]

Bingo.
That and the fanboys. Also seems like a wasted technology using it on little 4 bangers. 180hp-240hp is 180hp-240hp no matter how many liters its coming from.

not necessarily...higher engine size tends to have more weight and fuel consumption. I know because Vtecs have high revs may not neccarily be true but if ur not racing keep them at low revs and ur good.

[clutch-monkey]

i hate it because i don't have it

[fpv_gtho]

Also seems like a wasted technology using it on little 4 bangers. .

Thats a bit ignorant dont you think?

[2ndclasscitizen]

the reason why most vtec cars have crappy ass low end torque is the fact those engines are designed with high power high rpm operations in mind (where vtec gives the most gains) meaning large bore and short stroke, the short stroke is what hurts low end torque, not the vtec system itself

Large bore/short stroke is not just associated with VTEC engines, but most small 4cyl engines. 2 reasons. 1) Manufacturers know that they aren't going to ever get a massive amount of torque out a small 4cyl, and if they give it a big stroke, it'll lose out in power. So they go a large bore/short stroke to give it more power, which is also something they can advertise. 2) Packaging. In a 4cyl, FWD car, the engine is already compromising handling by being quite far foward, so having a shorter stroke means that the engine will be a bit shorter, keeping weight lower down.

[Rockefella]

Bingo.
That and the fanboys. Also seems like a wasted technology using it on little 4 bangers. 180hp-240hp is 180hp-240hp no matter how many liters its coming from.

You do understand that not everyone is looking for a late 90's American 'muscle-car' carrying 300+hp out of a blown V8 right?

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

the problem with vtec is that its like a switch instead of being infintely variable like say, porsche´s variocam plus. but then they are selling it on civics and stuff so its gotta be cheaper. that said, i would always take any engine with any variable valve timing system than one without

porsche's variocam plus is comprable to honda's i-vtec and toyota's vvtl-i
all 3 systems offer continuously variable cam phasing and 2 or 3 stage cam changing
furthermore, porsche's variocam plus is only applied to the intake side same as honda's i-vtec on the rsx type R (which has regular vtec on the exhaust)

that being said, you're right, the regular vtec is like a switch, either a 2 stage or 3 stage switch, but you have to remember that honda's the only manufacturer that offers cam changing systems on even their lowliest cars, and most models in honda's lineup have i-vtec now they're not as performance biased as the one in the type R, but they are being fitted to civics and accords

the point i'm trying to get across is, vtec (and all other variable valve timing and cam changing systems) doesnt have much if any detrimental effects on a car, so why do so many people knock it ??

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

Large bore/short stroke is not just associated with VTEC engines, but most small 4cyl engines. 2 reasons. 1) Manufacturers know that they aren't going to ever get a massive amount of torque out a small 4cyl, and if they give it a big stroke, it'll lose out in power. So they go a large bore/short stroke to give it more power, which is also something they can advertise. 2) Packaging. In a 4cyl, FWD car, the engine is already compromising handling by being quite far foward, so having a shorter stroke means that the engine will be a bit shorter, keeping weight lower down.

1) be that as it may, honda's engines tend to have smaller strokes and larger bores compared with similarily sized engines from competitors, which is the reason why their engines rev so much higher
2) a couple mm less stroke isnt going to drop the CoG by any significant amount, you could easily get the same effect as this by angling the engine a bit farther back or using say an aluminum bonnet, making the engine run with optimum specs is of far greater importance

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

Bingo.
That and the fanboys. Also seems like a wasted technology using it on little 4 bangers. 180hp-240hp is 180hp-240hp no matter how many liters its coming from.

the number of cylinders has little effect on power output, i can easily name some 4 cylinder engines that put out more power then v6s or even some v8s

and specific output DOES matter, if you're into racing, the class you're in is often dictaed by engine size, so a 200hp 2L engine is much better then a 200hp 3L engine, and a smaller engine can be placed in a smaller vehicle which means lower weight, a crucial factor in performance

this is why an s2000 which only has 240hp can outperform say a 350z which has 40more horses

you could argue that well the engines are so small their potential is far below that of a bigger displacement engine with less techy stuff. and you'd be right, displacement is king when you're talking about ultimate power, but i'd still rather have an engine which already has vtec, and 4 valves per cylinder, then a big block v8 which doesnt, as you can easily increase displacment by boring the engine, or going for forced induction, but it's nearly impossible to add a variable timing system or 4 valves per cylinder onto an engine which wasnt designed with it

[Gtek-i]

Honda has done a very good job of perfecting its VTEC system..but i-VTEC is better. It's efficient, provides excellent fuel economy, makes the engine very revvy, and most of all, it can pump out 200hp from a 2.0L engine (Si, Type-R).