FA20 Engine Wins Ward's 10 Best Engines of 2013
 

Is there an award for the car that has won the most awards?

I guess reliability has no influence.

and in the comments people are already talking crap about it being on the list. people love to hate on our cars

How can an engine that tosses Check Wallet Lights and has a Camel shaped torque curve win awards for anything?

I am not saying it is a terrible engine, but I can't think of anything that it does that I could brag about? Power, power delivery, fuel consumption, smoothness...all under the "Meh" category as far as I can tell.

Reliability? Too early to tell; guess we will ave to start the clock ticking if the CELs ever stop going on.

Show us another 100hp/liter engine in production for $25K.

The RSX-S and Civic Si (before they went to the 2.4 liter) but those had less low end torque. Good point, I think we tend to forget how impressive that is.

37 mpg highway isn't something to laugh at either ... Especially in a 200 hp engine you can have fun with

[QUOTE=NOHOME;606366]How can an engine that tosses Check Wallet Lights and has a Camel shaped torque curve win awards for anything?

QUOTE]

Dromedary or Bactrian?

Issues with a first gen engine? Unheard of! Fwiw it's not that bad at all for a launch. I'm about 4k post CEL with no issues. Other than the CEL, idle dip and loud fuel pumps aren't major issues (ie new Ford Fusion engine fires).

2 Liters and 200 Hp, plenty of torque, dual injectors, high compression, high revving (thanks to 86*86mm pistons), great fuel mileage, and i'm sure's tons more.

Sure we all want more power but for what it is, it is a very well engineered engine.

That's mainly a design issue (camel torque). Whether you like it or not, it allows both commuters and spirited drivers/racers have their tabletop torque. For an NA engine, it's pretty great to have all that torque in such ranges.

THIS THIS THIS.

For a 2.0 liter engine, it's really smooth for what it could have been.

yes, the engine has its faults, but you forget what they said about the test:

"Editors scored each engine based on power, technology, observed fuel economy and noise, vibration and harshness characteristics. There is no instrumented testing."

This really isn't an objective test of the engine. It's more a subjective test of the car and at the end they were only asked to comment about the engine. If the car as a whole made the editors feel good while driving it, then of course they are more likely to look past any faults it has in any particular area.

I feel if you look a any individual part of this car, your opinion would be "meh" at best. The beautiful thing about this car is when you bolt all of those "meh" parts together you get :eyebulge::party0030::happyanim::clap::burnrubber: :wub::drool::bow:

I will say, the FA20 is quite torquey down low for a NA 2.0L making 200 hp. I've also been getting much better gas mileage than expected, and it's a fairly smooth engine. So I can see why it would make the list.

Now if someone could fill out the midrange please ;)

Been waiting for 2.5 months for a new ECU. It's so hot you can't get parts to make the engine run properly.

100hp/liter for under $25k with a very low COG and in a RWD package that hasn't existed since the 60's or 50's

Exactly :thumbsup:

Tomorrows technology is impressive

Wow 37 MPG? Do you drive it in reverse? :bellyroll:

I feel like everyone complaining about down low torque is coming from a VQ Nissan or other much higher displacement engine.

News flash. It's a 2.0 liter engine with a relatively basic VVT system. It's not going to have stump pulling torque down low AND that awesome high end at the same time. Just ask any S2000 driver.

My buddy Andrew drives a fully track prepped S2000 pretty regularly. His first comment on driving my car? "It's pretty torquey down low."

It's all about perspective. Time will tell if the torque dip is something that can be tuned or modified out without FI. But one thing is for sure, and that is the fact that some people are blowing it WAY out of proportion because they want it to pull at 3k like a V8 Mustang. Ain't gonna happen.

Nathan

I came from an S2K. This thing feels like a small V6 compared to that...

I have had zero issues with my FRS and Im going on 6k.

No CEL
No tailight condensation
No ill fitting panels
No clutch slipping
No electronics issues
No shifting issues
No braking noises
No bad suspension components
No interior rattling
No chirping idle issues because i accepted that its a characteristic of the car and don't even notice it anymore.


Yet a handful of people who experienced these issues are making the frs/brz out to be a engineering disaster instead of the marvel that it really is.

I may have been lucky enough to get all the good parts on my FRS,Obviously others did not.Its too bad because it has spoiled their experience of how awesome the car really is.

Then there are some people who expected these cars to deliver BMW performance and luxury on the 25k price tag.Toyota and Subaru do not make that caliber vehicle,they never have and probably never will.They have made some really nice cars,but none are on par with what the likes of BMW,Audi,Mercedes have to offer.

Ford Fiesta. 1 liter 3 cylinder 138hp.

Don't get me wrong, I do like my car, but it was launched to a huge fanfare that was deliberately created, and some of the emperors clothes are turning out to be of a lesser cloth. All to be expected. There is currently no other car out there that will do what the FRS does for my driving enjoyment.

Besides, legacy is not determined in the first few years, history will gauge this car by how reliable it is an hence how the second and third hand buyers evolve the platform.

The Twins will not be judged against the Mustangs and Huyindai's of the world. The twins are in my opinion peerless and will be measured against what they promised and how well it is perceived to have been delivered. For an example of a champion in this respect, look at the Miata that arrived peerless in 1989 and remains so to this day.

And that would be the Bactrian camel for those that were wondering!

Who the hell gets 37 mpg out of their car. I have yet to hit 30.

learn to shift within the power band

The Fiesta's a turbo. That point is invalid. Almost every turbo engine makes over 100 hp/l. That's kind of the turbo's raison d'être. Name another 25k (new) naturally aspirated car that hits 100 hp/L.

Some of the people with autos have hit really high MPG's on the freeway as their 6th gear is higher. I've hit 31 or so with my manual. All depends on how you drive. I don't like to drive below 70 on long drives so I rarely get much higher than that.

Nathan

My average is 31, but then again I got an auto for that very purpose. :)

I've got only about half that many miles on mine but same experience. No problems of any kind whatsoever.

Nobody would ever mention the torque dip if it weren't for the first hump of said curve. Low end torque is nice.

Which one? The lower one or the upper one?

Seems like you either row this thing at 3200 rpm or wait till you are on the high side and pull the lever at around 6000.

Me, I like the bigger number. So if you wait till you get past the bit where the car stumbles like a kd who tied his shoelaces together, and keep it on the high end, it is not a big dea. The option is to stay in the putter-around zone and drive at 3000 rpm. Sometimes the later option suits me.

You need to go back and read the question asked. Then come back and explain how my answer did not cover exactly what was asked!

And yes, I am yanking your chain a bit.;)My point is that this is not a "great" engine. It is just "another" engine in a large field of everyday powerplants. If it was a great engine, we could not afford it.

The 2JZ-GTE is considered one of the greatest engines of all time, and was relatively affordable considering that the engine was kicking around in one form or another since the 80's. It's not an elegant engine, some may say the exhaust note reminds them of farm machinery, but no one will deny the fact that that engine shaped a huge part of the Import scene. The FA20 is an amazing little engine, there's already 500HP plus FI setups running on all stock internals with no apparent signs of impending doom to the drivetrain. This engine will likely spawn a huge following based on it's tunability, low CG, low cost, and it's already growing aftermarket support.

Even bone stock the engine is quite amazing...and if you consider the rest of the field of engines released this year, the only real competition would be among exotics like the Ferrari F12.

I have to agree with @Supermassive.

As an engineer (Hate to pull that card but I'm going to :D) I think it's pretty great that Subaru/Toyota has given us a 100hp/L boxer engine that can do 30+ mpg on the highway. At 26k, that just doesn't happen very often. Even Honda (The "king" of I4 performance engines according to many) needs 2.4 liters to make the same peak power in the current Si. It puts out a bit more torque, but that's a given with .4 liters more displacement.

On top of this, the engine has taken to FI extremely well, especially for something with 12.5:1 compression. There aren't a lot of 2 liter engines out there that can put out 100 hp/L stock AND handle enough boost to put out 300, 400, even 500+ hp with stock internals. Time will tell if it can keep putting out those numbers over 100k miles, but the fact that it doesn't grenade itself instantly at those power levels is impressive.

Cheers
Nathan

It's not far from being a great engine. Fix the torque dip, add a tad more hp/tq, and improve the exhaust note a bit, and they'd have themselves one of the best road car engines ever made!

What's wrong with the exhaust note? I'm glad it doesn't sound like a WRX, and it doesn't sound like a straight 4 either. Sadly there are only a couple 4 cylinder engines that i have ever heard that made a sound that could be considered good sounding...both of them come from superbikes, the Aprilia RSV4 and Ducati Desmosedici which both use V4's and make 200HP per Liter.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJaTYJoPjWc"]Aprilia RSV4 Factory APRC SE with Bodis SBP-1 Carbon Slipon Exhaust - Flyby - YouTube[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bnpXGImetE"]Sitting on & revving a Ducati Desmosedici RR - YouTube[/ame]

To be honest, I am one of those coming from the nissan 3L VQ and I think the low end torque/performance on my BRZ beats the VQ. Can't say what higher RPM will compare since i'm stilll in the break in period and haven't gone above 4K RPM yet!

I disagree with the fact that it got on the list because it produces 100HP per liter of displacement using n/a. Someone pointed out the RSX and Civic hit this milestone to, but forgot to mention that Honda achieved this over 21 years ago. Two decades! It is simply no longer considered a special feat in engine tech.

So, it must be something else that qualified it. Perhaps the fact that it is a boxer making 100HP per L n/a...maybe that is the special part. And as others have pointed out, the mpg is certainly better than the examples I'm using. I still think it was something else, maybe the author just loves the car? It's just a list, for all we know he had trouble coming up with 5 to put on there, let alone 10.

Low-end torque. Direct injection. Boxer layout. Fuel economy.

"Low end torque" that takes a break on the way to being high end torque.

"Direct Injection" that sounds like a cricket farm and tosses CEL lights that the dealers can't fix.

"Boxer Layout" Makes for an ugly and clutered layout. Have any of you looked at this thing? Especially the view from below? I suspect the flatulent engine sound is also a by-product of this design. I am still optimistic that removing the kazoo that pipes noise into the cabin will help somewhat.

"Fuel Economy" that is optimistic at best if you drive this like a normal car.

If we get bored with picking on the engine, we can move on to the 6 speed box that is almost a good box.:D


Me, I'm rooting for the guy on the BRZ forum that is putting the LS2 into the car. That should fix what ails this ride.

Better than not having low-end torque at all. Look at the 200hp/2.0L NA engines that have come before it.

No crickets on my FR-S. I only use name-brand gas though. CEL is fixed with a flash/ECU update.

To be honest, I don't really care what my engine look like. I'd rather have the lower CG and inherent smoothness of a boxer layout than go with an inline-4 for its traditional "looks".

I drive mine just like I drive my 2.0t MK6 GTI, another 200 hp mill. I'm getting 28 mpg with the FR-S, compared with 25 mpg in the GTI. Same exact commute, same driver.

If you're that upset about your engine and transmission, why not sell your car? Would save you a lot of heartache. I'd never own a car where I hated the powertrain that much. Life's too short to drive cars you don't like IMO.

You have to be the most bitter BRZ owner I have ever heard of. If you wanted a V8 powered car, the BRZ certainly isn't what you wanted. Slapping an LS powerplant into this car will of course produce amazing acceleration figures, big whoop car won't handle for shit, because you are screwing up the weight bias, raising the car's center of gravity, and adding more weight to the car. It's a cute exercise to stuff an LS into any car on the road, but all it accomplishes is turning a car that is sublime in the twisties, to a car that can clock a decent trap speed in a straight line.

As for a cluttered engine bay...you obviously haven't worked on any significant imports in the last 15-20 years. In comparison to some of my older cars (02 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR4, 86 and 98 Toyota Supra's, and a 95 Nissan 300ZX TT) this car is light years easier to work on the engine. Sure it's not pretty but it isn't as terrible as you make it seem. About the only thing I would change is the crappy looking plastic intake runners...I'd like a CF solution.

I will agree that the HP fuel pump is a poor design and Toyobaru needs to engineer a replacement that won't squeak.

The torque is obviously a touchy subject for you, but I am curious why? I find the torque dip annoying only occasionally and that's only when I find myself trying to accelerate through it because of an early shift. It would be nice if there was an easy way to fix it but until Toyobaru decides to do something it's one of the "quirks" you just gotta deal with.

You guys make me laugh. You'd think I was calling your mom ugly!

I am simply pointing out that this car is not the second coming of sliced bread. It has a ton of little flaws that keep it from being a great car. In my opinion, most of the flaws are based around the drivetrain. While it is "close to great" recall that "close" only counts in horseshoes and hand-grenades.

Time will tell how Toyobaru refines the drivetrain in this car. Don't count out the aftermarket either as I have a suspicion that they were partnered in from the beginning as the solution to any performance concerns that the enthusiast may have. The basic engine seems to tolerate boost and boost is going to be available to those that want it.

As to the LS2 conversion being an abomination, you sound the the rotary brotherhood who moan about the soul of the car being destroyed when someone yanks another dead triangle out and swaps in an alternate engine into the beloved RX7s. The Miata seems to handle this conversion quite well, so why would the Toyobaru be any different? It wont be a perfect car, but I assure you I could have more fun with it than with the stock FRS:burnrubber:

Those people bashing the torque dip are asking too much of the limitation of an internal combustion engine... Everything is a compromise, and this engine is doing a VERY GOOD JOB at not sacrificing anything. It still has a lot of down low torque, great fuel economy and very very low NVH (noise, vibration and harshness)...and very good power in the high RPM..seriously, you want to whine about that???

Consider this:

The engine has only 1 cam profile to work with VS most of the other 100/HP liter small engine.

It makes almost all of it's torque at 2500 RPM, that's the reason you feel the dip, if it wasn't for that low end torque everybody would say this engine sucks and only comes alive at 4000+ RPM. Anybody here is familiar with Honda's dohc vtec engines? How's that power under 5K rpm?

It still pulls 200 HP and redlines at 7500 RPM

It sounds good doing all of the above.

I know tone is difficult to read through the internet, but I didn't intend to come across harshly in my post. Just wanted to correct what appear to be errors in your statement. Feel free to address the facts I wrote about the FA20 if you want to debate the merits.

our engine is DOHC isn't it???

Here's why I think our motor belongs on the list...

We have multiple aftermarket tuners making up to 500hp or more with no upgrades other than injectors to flow more fuel and a better clutch to handle the power.. and not one has reported any engine failure (at least not that i've read).

They overbuilt the motor... it's fantastic.

The torque dip is a tuning issue as we've seen and it completely dissapears with a good tune and/or forced induction.