FA20 Engine Wins Ward's 10 Best Engines of 2013

[RaceR]

Originally Posted by Deslock

I've read through that ukipme site before (they had a nice write-up about the Prince motor back in 2010).

I meant performance cars (so not the Renault Twizy, Tazzari Zero, or Smart ForTwo). I didn't think the Tesla Roadster was produced anymore. The Caterham is awesome, but I consider it a track toy (lacking some modern safety equipment) like the Ariel Atom.

From what I've read, even with the 1.6L the 1-series is still quite a bit heavier than the FT86.

Not easy finding light RWD cars.. I got creative..
For some reason I consider the Caterham a useable road car. Ariel Atom, KTM X-box, Radicals are all just track toys in my head tough.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYyPicy7Bhs"]Caterham Supersport snow road trip " EVO diaries" - YouTube[/ame]

^ See, all season road car!

And, maybe with efficient award winning 1l Ford ecoboost engine as an option in the future...

Who said fuel efficient cars were boring and slow...

You are right about the Tesla Roadster. It seems to be out of production. I assumed it was still in production since I recently saw new 2012 models for sale..

I forgot to mention Lotus Exige btw...

I checked some vehicle registration register. Latest 1-series with 1.6 turbo seem to be about 60kg heavier than the 86. Which you would assume considering its size and difference in interior.

[daiheadjai]

Originally Posted by rapidcars

In the U.S., the RSX-S was about $24k, same as the FR-S. Odd how that works.

We in the frigid north traditionally got the shaft when it comes to car pricing (or pricing for anything but plaid dress shirts and maple syrup, really).

That being said, how much would $24k 2002-2006 dollars be worth today?
I imagine that inflation still pumps it up quite a bit.

[Rayme]

Originally Posted by rapidcars

In the U.S., the RSX-S was about $24k, same as the FR-S. Odd how that works.

The CIVIC SI right now is the same price as the FR-S. The US's SI's are a few thousands less...and we have 13% sales taxes here too

I keep repeating the FR-S is a deal over here, because I've seen the Celica GT-S and RSX type-S being sold for 32 000 $+. The FR-S is just around 26 000$

[Acree]

Originally Posted by Supermassive

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.

This is a dramatic overstatement. The guys with the V8 Miatas have been debunking this myth for years. An aluminum LSx motor with manual tranny adds MAYBE 70 pounds onto this car. Sure, the COG is raised a few millimeters, but you really should take a look at side profile of the LS motor the guys at weapons grade are putting into it. With the majority of the mass in the block and tranny, looks pretty freakin low to me.

-Acree

[jeebus]

When I first heard this motor made Ward's I was a little on the fence too, because I thought to myself, "does it really deserve it?" But then I started thinking about it a little bit more.

1. Horsepower - From the get-go I always thought this car should have had a bit more power. But 100hp/l is nothing to sneeze at. Of all the naturally aspirated cars I have owned, this one makes the most HP/L, with my Integra GSR coming in at a close second with 94. All my other cars with better numbers were turbo...

2. Torque - It's so easy to focus on that torque dip that you forget how much torque this thing makes below and above that dip. It's a phenomenal amount of torque for a small, naturally aspirated motor. The above mentioned GSR made almost ZERO torque until 6500RPM, and even then it wasn't a ton.

3. Mileage - I was disappointed with the EPA released numbers for this car, especially considering it is direct-injected. But my real-world mileage has been fantastic. I average 29MPG in mixed driving, and I have a heavy foot. None of my turbo cars came close to this figure (except my diesel lol), and only my wife's CX-5 with its SkyActiv motor bests it. That GSR being used for comparison above only averaged 22. That's quite a big difference.

4. Sound...no, it doesn't sound amazing, but it doesn't sound terrible either. when you rev it to redline it screams pretty well. All that direct-injection crap sounds pretty lame, but it does on all DI cars.

5. Bonus. There are a few bonus points I'd give this motor. Being a boxer is a unique touch. That it allows for it to be mounted really low is pretty cool too. Direct injection is worth noting, especially twin injection.

So there you have it. I guess I can see why it deserves an award.

[FRSjeff]

Originally Posted by Frost

You want great MPG but drive "spirited". Depending on who your grandma is, I usually come close to meeting the MPG numbers of most cars I drive. If you rev up and beyond the 50% mark of your RPM normal operating range, you're not going to get great MPG.

Complaints like that always blow my mind.

Reliable - Fast - Cheap. Pick two. Cheap includes up front price and maintenance which includes gas.

Relax, don't blow up your mind.... I was not in anyway complaining. I was instead making a comment about how one would have to drive to get boring mpg such as 39mpg. I have NO issue with my mpg; instead, I'm enjoying the way my car was intended to be driven! If I had bought a car for its mpg, I would have bought a prius AND been bored to tears!!

[deadsailor86]

Originally Posted by whtchocla7e

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

My thoughts exactly

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by Acree

This is a dramatic overstatement. The guys with the V8 Miatas have been debunking this myth for years. An aluminum LSx motor with manual tranny adds MAYBE 70 pounds onto this car. Sure, the COG is raised a few millimeters, but you really should take a look at side profile of the LS motor the guys at weapons grade are putting into it. With the majority of the mass in the block and tranny, looks pretty freakin low to me.

-Acree

while i totally agree with you on that fact. the old miatas have steel blocks and that is the reason why the weight gains are minimal. in fact, most of the excess weight comes from the rear end, brakes, axles etc and not the motor itself. it is true that the lsx is a crazy compact beast motor that really cant be beat.

Originally Posted by deadsailor86

My thoughts exactly

i fail to see why hp/liter is important at all. for starters, displacement is a totally meaningless gauge of motor. i think the metrics should be hp per cost, size of motor or maybe weight.

[Frost]

Originally Posted by FRSjeff

Relax, don't blow up your mind.... I was not in anyway complaining. I was instead making a comment about how one would have to drive to get boring mpg such as 39mpg. I have NO issue with my mpg; instead, I'm enjoying the way my car was intended to be driven! If I had bought a car for its mpg, I would have bought a prius AND been bored to tears!!

I drive a 2005 Echo Hatchback (the Canadian only import of the Toyota Vitz) - I drive spirited, I get 6.5L/100km (~36 MPG). I drive like an angel, I get 5.5L/100km (~42.7 MPG) - that's a massive difference.

My old MKI MR2 got roughly 6L/100km (~39 MPG) when driving like an angel and when I floored that good ol' 4AGE, I got roughly 10L/100km (~23.5 MPG) - I literally could see the fuel gauge drop for hard driving.

Compared to those two, my former IS300 got on GOOD days, 10L/100km (~23.5 MPG) and on bad days I would be hitting close to 12.5L/100km (18.8 MPG) and all on premium!!! Not worth the gas money for the 'fun' of it so I dumped it and got a Vitz instead while counting down when I can buy one of the Toybaru twins.

[Dontales]

Originally Posted by ScionRacer

Aftermarket support holds no weight to me when determining how great an engine is.IF the engine was built the way it should be,there would be no need for aftermarket support.A good example are the exotics,there is not much when it comes to aftermarket compared to Hondas K20A's,but there is not much room for improvement when you are already pushing 400/500 hp from the factory.Mind you these exotics were designed around the numbers they put out.The minute you start trying to exceed factory hp,you start losing factory reliability.
...

buddy, you missing one keyfact, this engine was intended to be like that, even Tada San said it..it is intended to be good at stock, but for the people who like more HUMP of it, there is an option to do it.

This is the only engine from the last 3 years i would say, which gives you the freedom without destroying the reliability with easy modification. This thing is like Lego...

[HunterGreene]

Originally Posted by Dontales

buddy, you missing one keyfact, this engine was intended to be like that, even Tada San said it..it is intended to be good at stock, but for the people who like more HUMP of it, there is an option to do it.

This is the only engine from the last 3 years i would say, which gives you the freedom without destroying the reliability with easy modification. This thing is like Lego...

First post--and you resurrect a thread that is over 2 years since its last post...well done, sir!



To be on topic, however, the engine has had its issues (spun bearings, injector blowout, cam position problems), and its interesting to see the opinions of when it just came out .

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by HunterGreene

First post--and you resurrect a thread that is over 2 years since its last post...well done, sir!



To be on topic, however, the engine has had its issues (spun bearings, injector blowout, cam position problems), and its interesting to see the opinions of when it just came out .

To argue with a guy who hasn't been here since July 2013!
I guess it means a sure win.

[chaoskaze]

Looking back its funny, but I guess the fact it's only on the top ten for a year speaks for itself well. Really good engines usually stay on it for several years.....

[FirestormFRS]

The list posted was only for new and innovative engines. No longer new after first year.