Comparison of the best ~2 liter N/A engines ever produced

[theGonz]

Originally Posted by Cope52

The old H22 was better than the later K20. Sounded better, you could hold it at 5 grand without your ears bleeding, and had the old-school VTEC punch. Who cares if the K was more receptive to bolt ons.

I strongly disagree. Very hard to make a k20 burn oil even after beating on them countless times on track, H22 is the exact opposite. The transmission options available for k series also put them in another league from H22's.

[Kilos6]

Not sure if this was covered. But...

Mazda 1.3l 13b 2 rotor. 2004-2012 rx8.

I understand that's it's not actually at 2 liters. But rotaries operate differently and if it were to be compared to a piston engine it would be about a 2.5L NA piston engine. Puts out about 200hp to the wheels stock (198 was mine stock to be exact).

I think the rx8 is the closest comparible car to the FRS after owning and driving both.

[DohcTor]

Originally Posted by hmong337

Honda rules the NA 4cylinder arena. I don't see anything touching them. Toyota needs to release a 2.0L VVTL-i engine that could do battle with the K20.

Sadly, I feel our FA20 is only mid-pack.

THIS.

Honda makes the best. Our engines are underwhelming in comparison

[tahdizzle]

With current emission standards, the fa20 is probably the best NA 4 cyl. 2012+ I can't think of a better 2.0l 4 cyl.

[tahdizzle]

the k20z3 only had 197 hp and 139 lb.ft of torque; I don't know why people feel like praising that k20 over our fa20.

[hmong337]

Originally Posted by tahdizzle

the k20z3 only had 197 hp and 139 lb.ft of torque; I don't know why people feel like praising that k20 over our fa20.

They respond amazingly well to mods. It's not hard to get 220whp NA out of a k20a. We need e85 or racegas to even crack 200whp.

I wish we would've gotten lift with the fa20.

[tahdizzle]

Originally Posted by hmong337

They respond amazingly well to mods. It's not hard to get 220whp NA out of a k20a. We need e85 or racegas to even crack 200whp.

I wish we would've gotten lift with the fa20.

to get a k20 to 220whp N/A, you need higher comp pistons, cams, and a new valve train.


We do not have those modifications available yet, so how can you say an engine that has over a decade of aftermarket support is better because of the "mods" you can do to it?

I/H/E, and an e85 tune is all we really have in terms of "bolt on" performance modifications.

Fa20 I/H/E and an e85 tune makes less power than a k20 with I/H/E and an e85 tune?

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by tahdizzle

the k20z3 only had 197 hp and 139 lb.ft of torque; I don't know why people feel like praising that k20 over our fa20.

The K20 engines had a huge amount of headroom NA. With full bolt-ons and a tune on 93, you were looking at 210-215 whp. The K20 benefits from a better flowing head and ability to rev to 8000+ RPM safely.

The FA20 might come close on e85, but will be down a good 10-15 whp on 93.

[tahdizzle]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

The K20 engines had a huge amount of headroom NA. With full bolt-ons and a tune on 93, you were looking at 210-215 whp. The K20 benefits from a better flowing head and ability to rev to 8000+ RPM safely.

The FA20 might come close on e85, but will be down a good 10-15 whp on 93.

Didn't Delicious make 200whp w/ bolt-ons and a 91 octane tune?

Here's that thread: http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=64770

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by tahdizzle

Didn't Delicious make 200whp w/ bolt-ons and a 91 octane tune?

Here's that thread: http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=64770

Yeah that's what I'm saying, it's still a good 10-15 whp below what a similarly modded K20 would be making

I'd also trust the K20 to last longer.

[nikitopo]

Difficult to compare older engines with newer ones that have to deal with emission standards and fuel consumption rates. It is like comparing apples with oranges.

[Celadrielas]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Yeah that's what I'm saying, it's still a good 10-15 whp below what a similarly modded K20 would be making

I'd also trust the K20 to last longer.

Shouldn't we be looking at the base line dynos of each and comparing to the end game of each after I/H/E (or I/H/E/e85)? If we're using the same dyno, we may put 160hp to the floor and they put 175hp to the floor. If we end at 200hp and them at 215hp, we've made the same amount of power.

Then consider the weight of our vehicle and thier vehicle at a base (Stock for stock). If we weigh 500+ lbs less, we may have the same or better power to weight ratio. Either way, I'd still prefer the RWD vs FWD application. Not for drift or drag or anything like that. Just for the feeling of it when the power is being used.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Celadrielas

Shouldn't we be looking at the base line dynos of each and comparing to the end game of each after I/H/E (or I/H/E/e85)? If we're using the same dyno, we may put 160hp to the floor and they put 175hp to the floor. If we end at 200hp and them at 215hp, we've made the same amount of power.

Then consider the weight of our vehicle and thier vehicle at a base (Stock for stock). If we weigh 500+ lbs less, we may have the same or better power to weight ratio. Either way, I'd still prefer the RWD vs FWD application. Not for drift or drag or anything like that. Just for the feeling of it when the power is being used.

That's one way of looking at it. For me, I'm usually more interested in absolute whp figures rather than relative gains, although I can see where you're coming from if you're just trying to compare engines independent of platforms.

Agree with you on weight and drivetrain configuration.

[themadscientist]

I'm biased....

I like a big nasty sounding old school engine.



[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcgFy0HRW9E"]Datsun 510 FJ20 BRE Replica - YouTube[/ame]