So i havent seen many people mention this...
 

i just registered but have been following the forum for quite some time now. NOW before i get any hate id like to point out i originally was one of the people that thought the car needed 300+ hp, NOW ive realized toyota's intentions with the ft and am super excited for a ~220 hp 2700 lb car.

the other day i remembered the s2000. On another thread (cant recall which) someone had mentioned that the boxer 4's wouldnt really be able to hit >200hp
(assuming ~2000cc). the s2k runs a 2.2 inline 4 with about 230 bhp?

My point: what would keep a boxer from performing like the vtec? i mean hey, if we can get more power (not that 200bhp isnt enough) id gladly take it :thanks:

dClutch

i dont care if its 200hp or 300 hp...i just want decent torque figures

subaru has avls, its not as good as vtec though i dont think

I'm sorry i've also been lurking here for a while and i need to clear up a few of your facts.
1. S2K's F20 and F22 is rated 240-250bhp
2. The work that went into getting that HP out of it makes aftermarket support cost an arm and a leg($1000 exhaust). And the baseline price insanely high.
3. vtec is not a motor(Civic boy?). Nearly every car maker has some sort of vale timing technology. And they are discussing valve tech in another thread.

I'd much prefer a forced induction motor then some NA high revving one. Take a look at the Honda S2000 for an example. 4cyl, lightweight, high revving, NA, 18/24mpg! That's awful for a 4 cyl! My 03 Cobra with a supercharged V8 making 450hp to the wheels gets that mileage! The best route they could go would be to put in a motor similar to the Cobalt SS's LNF turbo engine.

True but my roommate gets a little better then that but he almost never 4500 rpm. And my Z gets about 19-20 depending on how sunny it is (i hate driving in the rain)

Cobalt SS? Ha! It's like Neon SRT4, there's no space to do anything. One thing break, can't fix it cuz you gotta remove the damn engine to get to it

Was it really that bad or are you over exaggerating?

I had to fix my friend's GF's Neon SRT4 (serpentine belt broke), I thought I was going to kill myself. They freaking hide that damn serpentine belt, I had to take out so much crap out of it to replace it.

Same goes w Cobalt SS. One guy I know (kinda) had Cobalt SS w SC kit (new have TC) and SC is taking up 2/3 of engine bay that can't see anything under that or near that SC!

I just google a pic of Cobalt SS engine bay so you can see what I'm talking bout
http://image.motortrend.com/f/854335...ngine_View.jpg

& this is 90% exactly how it looked like on that guy (except this pic is way cleaner).

Now, am I sound like over exaggeratin... I'll let you be the judge

I think It was that bad. Remember a friend got so sick of his SRT because of something similar mention. He went and bought a Civic Si instead.

Never knew that about the SRT4. Never been a fan of US cars. Hopefully the FT is not like that.

My post on the other thread

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showt...page=5&p=32764

Post on engine tech thread

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showt...page=6&p=32841

Critical parts of the engine must be re-designed for high-rpm bhp applications. The FB20 and FB25 engines wouldn't be able to withstand the high rpm wear. The FB25 would reach 200bhp with minor upgrades like the D-4S injection however it would not rev out like you would expect. I think they are sticking with a 2.0L engine for the launch in all markets so I'm expecting a slightly redesigned naturally aspirated FB based engine for this car.

My mistake thanks for correcting my facts. It was just off the top of my head. And no lol I'm not a civic boy I just made a common reference to Honda engines. VVT-i (VALVE TIMEING NOT ENGINE) FTW :bonk:

So yeah the engine wouldnt be cluttered like that. Didn't Toyota say it would be a mid engined car?

I call BS on the idea that an 03 COBRA gets 24mpg!! lmfao!! I have a 2007 Toyota Sequoia and it averages 13.9mpg hwy and city....no way in hell a supercharged 450hp muscle car beats that by 10mpg...

lol how can you trash the fc20 since it was the most powerful NA engine until Ferrari released the 458 Italia just THIS year so from 1999 until 2010 theis engine was the best NA engine in the world

Yes it doesn't get as good MPG as the other 4s but how can you even compare a high output highly developed and tuned 4 to a regular eco box 4.


I have a hard time believing in the 24mpg since my friends dad owns a Shebly GT500 and those things deff don't get good MPG. I do know the Vettes get in the 20s tho.

@OP
The S2k makes it power due to the stroke and compression but because of how it was design it doesnt take well to boost without being overhauled 1st

Some of the Muscle cars with really tall gearing tend to get "decent" highway MPG. The Corvette has really long gearing too.

The S2000 is capable of plenty of power on the stock block especially with race fuel or alcohol. Although for pump gas it's probably safer to lower the compression :iono:. I've heard of 400WHP S2000s on pump gas.

i believe it, actually. as has been mentioned, taller gearing helps a ton with that. my 2006 Tacoma will average 19mpg+ on a good day, and it's WAY less aerodynamic than a mustang.

that's not what i've seen. i've witnessed numerous turbo/sc S2000s that are on stock blocks and make pretty good power with low boost levels.

back on topic: there is really no reason why they couldn't design the flat 4 that's going into the FT86 to behave like the K20Z3 or even the F20C (although i think the former is plenty good enough). there's not some magical wall that designers hit when cylinder layout is changed. it's all about having a good head, intake, and exhaust designs.

:laughabove: Right.

oh, and the S2000 had the highest specific power output, but was not the most powerful n/a engine. ;) and it's arguable about which engine was the best in the world. just saying... haha

Sorry I missed a part there

Most powerful NA engine HP/L

SC s2000 I have seen but for turbos I have seen a couple but them were both built and talkin to the owners is how I learned the block isnt good to turbo stock but maybe that was just them.

I wouldn't want a engine like the k20z3, I mean its the black sheep of the K series no one really wants this engine in comparison to say a K20A.

"Under the hood of the Caterham is Ford’s Duratec 2.0-liter inline-4, tuned to produce a whopping 263 naturally aspirated bhp at 8500 rpm and 177 lb.-ft. of torque at 7200."

THAT'S a powerful N/A!

what makes you say the k20z3 is the black sheep of the K series? it does fabulous work in the new Civic Si. it responds extremely well to mods, has usable torque throughout the rev range, and is fairly efficient. i do believe the A makes more power stock, but i wouldn't say the z3 is bad in any way, really.

have you driven many cars with the K20Z3? it's a very fun engine.

wrong. the s2k is an awesome car to boost. it already has forged internals. head over to s2ki.com and see what they've been doing with boosted s2ks.

Again your on a wrong forum man, you keep compairing american crap car to a global production engine, F20 or F22 are one of the best FR engines, no one outside the USA says cobalt SS & neon Srt are good cars. Why not stick on what you know muscle cars no shame on that, going 1/4 mile is good for you or maybe just keep going left.

Most powerful NA piston engine HP/L.

I think its possible to hit +200hp on the boxer engine! I drove one friend 05 impreza rx with EJ204 engine (its a detuned version of the JDM EJ204) and it was making 160hp and redlined at 7900 rpm! it was awesome above 5000 rpm and feels kinda fast for a heavy car!
on the other hand the same MY but the JDM one was makeing 190hp and was also redlined to 7900 rpm!

Now, its been about 6 to 7 years for that engine and technology changed, so I guess with the move advanced avcs & DI , I can see +200hp on the same based engine?
the EJ204 CR was around 11:1 as I rememmber :)
hell if toyota make the new boxer cr into 12:1 the I guess 220~240 on 2.0L na engine is so easy! but since this is a mass production engine/car I guess we will have a detuned version for better fuel econ?

couldn't they just add longer rods than changing the whole borexstroke ratio? the F22C is also undersquare, but it feels great revving to 8000. 87x90.7 borexstroke with a 1.65 rod/stroke ratio.

we already know the FT86 is gonna have D-4S, so since it's gonna have a different head already the combustion chamber design will surely be different as well. i really hope they do a good job with this motor!

Yes but that a tuned extremely low volume track car

The Ford Duratec 2.0 made 143Hp in regular form.

Your point is moot. There is no comparing a tuned engine to a stock engine. If you want to make that agurement there are many tuned s2k making 300+HP NA


I have driven a CSX type R as well as the new civic Si and this engine does nothing for me tho that could be cause I've driven a K20A RSX type S and that is a much much much better engine.

My bad I shouldnt say its the blacksheep of K engines but I deff think its the worst out of the high preformance Ks (K20A, K20Z1, K20Z4 etc) hell even the older K20A2 I thought had a better feel to it than the K20Z3. Just my personally opinion however tho the K20A is easily the best in my mind.

Yes yes rotary engines

Not so moot in my book. I can go out and buy a Caterham Superlite R500 and get those numbers. That is the engines regular(a relative term) form in that model; it is the stock engine for that vehicle. Whether its tuned by the company or not doesn't flex the point that it's more powerful than the Honda. You buy an unmodified S2k with competitive numbers.

On another note, Mazda is coming out with their new 2.0l Skyactive engines and will run a cr of 14:1 with 30mpg city/40mpg highway. I think they will be rated at around 163hp/155tq. Just an example to point out you can have high cr and still great fuel economy.

Sounds like Atkinson cycle or something similar if it's to run on 87?
High CR = MORE efficient, it's just the cars you see with high CR tend to be performance cars fitted with fat engines/short gearing.

Sorry if this is a noobish question, but when people are really wringing out their engines do they really get to 6th gear? Or 5th gear for that matter? What kinds of speeds do you hit on a track? Is there a good reason why companies want to have such short gearing on cars like the s2k (highway cruise at like 4000rpm?)?

There's a lot of reason, but simply say "Cuz they said so" :bellyroll:

Seriously, I think the main reason is there won't have rpm dead zone

That car is so low production its crazy there only what 2 delaers in NA?

I don't know the cost of one in USD but considering its 61+ Euro I'll take the S2k and mod it.

If I were to include low volume track cars then I would of said Ariel Atom V8 since its a 3.0 V8 that makes 500hp


I'm just going to agree to disagree cause I don't consider these types of cars should count

What happens to your piston to head clearance with a longer rod? It depends on the amount of change in connecting rod length without changing the stroke, think about the crank at Top Dead Center and now increase the height of the piston. You run the risk of unfavourable (very high) compression ratios or possible piston to valve or even head collisions. Like I stated if they're going to change the rod to stroke ratio (longer connecting rods) which was 1.44:1 to +1.50:1 I speculate that the FB would need a de-stroke from 90mm to compensate for the longer connecting rod. The FB boxer engine can't really become that much wider after all (increase block deck height), unless changes in reducing the height of the cylinder head are made...

there will be no valve clearance and we need to pray everyday that nothing happens to the timing like on a Z or any other interference engine.

it just sounds a lot easier to change the rod length and change the cylinder heads and pistons than changing the entire borexstroke ratio. also, do those crazy angled rods have anything to do with the short rod length? i wonder if having the rods at an angle may compensate for the low rod/stroke ratio.

can you explain what about the A is so much better than the Z3? all you've said is that the A is better, and haven't given much to support it. i'm not looking to start a fight, but i'm curious why you like the A that much more than the Z3. :happy0180:

according to wikipedia, it looks like the main difference is the A has Vtec on intake and exhaust cams, whereas the Z3 only has vtec on the intake side. i'm not as familiar with the A, so if there's something more substantial than that, please tell me.

Longer rods equal higher piston speeds thus lowering redline. Do not want

you mean longer stroke. longer rods actually reduce piston speeds, if i'm not mistaken.

^your right.