FA20 Engine Wins Ward's 10 Best Engines of 2013

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by Levi

D*ckheads all those saying it does not deserve to be on the list. Your are all spoilt by lazy crappy torque of turbocahrged diesels and gazolines. First try to handle the 200 PS of the "torquless" FA20, before demanding more. I bet at min 90% of ZX6 owners can't handle 100% of the cars potential. Tell me what other NA engine today makes 100 PS/l (detuned!!!) and has such a special, in fact best configuration possible, a boxer?And please stop the "10 years ago the S2000...". Today there is no S2000. FACT. So ZX6 is the only choice, if Elise/Exige are too hardcore, Cayman to expensive and 4C not yet on sale.The FA20 deserves to be on the list. PERIOD.

how is the tq generated by turbo diesels inferior to the tq of the fa20? as far as i know a ft/lb is a ft/lb. whether we can handle it or not is irrelevant to the prestige of the motor, otherwise the prius would have one of the best motors in the world as many arent able to use its power. opinions arent facts so tone it down a little. it is not a fact that the boxer is the best configuration. if there was a clear cut "best" dont you think every manufacturer would employ one? you dont need na or 2.0l to be a good motor so why even bring those things up? if you can buy a larger motor making more power out of a similar size and weight why would you hold that against it?

[Shizzaw]

I call BS on this. Owned my car since August and its spent 60+ days in the shop with engine problems. The car is currently in the shop getting the whole thing replaced.

[Snake]

As most of you guys are from America, you don't know about the Renaultsport Clio 200. This is a 2ltr NA 4cylinder making 200hp. In some markets it is priced well below the 86, here in Australia, it is priced basically line ball.

The motor in this runs 11.5:1 compression with 215NM of torque with 95% of that produced from just below 3k rpm. In terms of the way that this car makes power it is far more impressive than the 86 and it does so without direct injection. The power band begins from around 4500RPM and it revs to 7500RPM. My previous car was the older 2001 - 2004 172hp version and even the motor in that was more impressive in the way it made power than the 86.

Don't get me wrong, the 86 is a much better overall car, but the motor in the Renault is more impressive for a 2ltr NA 4cylinder. Part of the reason for this is the longer stroke and smaller bore but even with the longer stroke it feels like it wants to rev to 7500RPM more than the 86.

[Ocala FR-S]

Originally Posted by NOHOME

Ford Fiesta. 1 liter 3 cylinder 138hp.

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

I have. I drove through rural and suburban Florida traveling back and forth between two cities. A total drive of 150 miles. I avoided the interstate since it was still during the break-in period and I also did not exceed 4,000 RPM at any time. I got an average 39 mpg on what was mainly 50 mph rural highways. I was surprised but would attribute it to the automatic transmission (with it's taller gearing), my below 4,000 RPM acceleration, the lack of any sustained high speed and Florida's flat terrain.

Post break in period zipping around town in my urban commute gets me about 23 mpg. I expect I'll get less with more agressive driving.

[subatoy]

so that nasty torque dip makes it a great engine?
It is a great car but great engine it doesn't have.

[Lonewolf]

Originally Posted by Shizzaw

I call BS on this. Owned my car since August and its spent 60+ days in the shop with engine problems. The car is currently in the shop getting the whole thing replaced.

Toyota/Subaru are hoping people can overlook these cel/vvt issues...I can't...that's why I'm holding off on the purchase of an FRS until they get this motor sorted out...

[jcX4ever]

Originally Posted by whtchocla7e

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

OMG you are right.

Oh wait,
Matrix XRS 1.8L ~$18k was rated 180hp.
Celica GT-S ~$22-25k 1.8L rated 180hp or 190hp(some counties)
Corolla XRS $17k 1.8L was rated 164hp and 170hp but averagely dynoed at ~155whp. I guess that's 180hp assuming 15% drive-train loss.

Of course not in production but it happened that there were 100hp/liter under $25k even if you consider the inflation adjustment today..

There were other Toyota engines that was or over 100hp per liter too like the BEAMS 3SGE 2.0L at 207hp+ .. They also made a Torquey version of the 2.0L 3SGE where it can hit 216 nm or 160ft-lbs at 4800rpm..

I'm not even counting those boatload of Honda engines here.

The thing is, 100hp per Liter NA is an old news and it's not even amazing anymore. Being the best engine just for having 100hp/liter is just ridiculous because that is not super rare. The FA20 is in the top 10 for other better reason.

I'm pretty much happy it's with the top 10 but I wonder what really convinced the judges. It could be the very low center of gravity.

[Supermassive]

Ok since we have a bunch of differing opinions as to what makes a great engine, maybe the real question should be what makes a great engine in your eyes?

For me a great engine has to have certain qualities:

1) Power per liter
2) Reliability
3) Suitability to it's application
4) Ease of maintenance
5) Aftermarket Support
6) Aesthetics

The FA20 nails almost all of my criteria for it to be considered a great engine...

I have had zero issues with my engine for almost 7000 miles so far save the squeaky HP fuel pump. No CEL's, no broken components, no recalls, etc. The power is great for an N/A 4 cylinder engine, it's not a V6 or V8 so what the hell are people expecting? The engine perfectly complements the car it was built for, everyone complains about the torque dip, yes it's annoying when accelerating in a straight line, but how many people here really notice this dip when the car is being tossed around twisties...especially if you are flirting with the redline most of the time anyways?

How many people here work on their own cars...by that I mean beyond the scope of changing brake pads and oil changes. As a certifiable gear head I do all my own work (as long as i have the required tools of course). This car requires almost no specialized tools to work on, granted I haven't pulled the engine out yet to crack it open, but I have yet to find a fastener or situation that I could't remove or repair with a very basic craftsman tool set. Everything in the engine bay is easy to access, and makes sense, there's no mystery wires or vacuum lines that disappear behind jumbles of plastic cladding...all in all it's extremely maintenance friendly...well except for spark plugs, but with some wobble joints they arent too terrible either.

Aftermarket support is a huge determining factor for me regarding how great an engine is...the more people making parts the lower the prices are due to competition. Right now it's still early and parts demand a premium as manufacturers are rolling out new products daily, but give this engine a year and I am willing to bet it will be as hugely supported as some of the legendary engines like the 2JZ-GE (or GTE), or the SR20DET. People throwing around engines such as the little turbo diesels as great engines make me laught because the extent of the aftermarket support will likely be simple bolt on additions without any real performance increasing internal support save for some specialty shops offering one off builds that are exorbitantly expensive.

Lastly, this engine is not ugly, the engine bay maybe, but the engine itself is actually quite nice to look at, very simple, almost spartan in that it doesn't have a whole lot of fluff attached to it save the sound tube which is trash can fodder. The stock exhaust is hideous though because the header solution is just attrocious. After market headers look glorious on this car, of course you have to be under the car with the under panels removed to admire them but they do look nice.

All this being said, there are some engines that I would love to have at my disposal but would only make sense in the cars they were intended for...an Ferrari engine makes my list simply because I am a die hard Ferrari fan boy (except the FF wtf were they thinking???).

So what makes an engine great for you?

[akyp]

I'm surprised that the FA20 is on the list. I guess they had to include a NA engine among a sea of turbo engines.

As for the 'Honda made 100hp/litre 20 years ago' argument, yes the K20A and F20C are great engines, but they won't meet today's tough emission standards.

[regal]

If it was 1990 and I got in ths car and cruised around I would honestly think Iwas driving a BMW in-line 6, the torque down low is just perfect for casual driving, this 4 banger confidently cruises smooth at 2000 rpm! It just feels competent.

For aggressive driving the torque dip is tricky, the way the gears are laid out is the real issue. I just can't help but wonder if the redline is really 8500 rpm, if it is the car's performance would be radically better.

I could give a sh1t about FI for my FR-S but if we could swap valve/springs and raise the rev limiter to 8500 it would be a new car.

[firehawk]

Originally Posted by ottopilot

Anybody here is familiar with Honda's dohc vtec engines? How's that power under 5K rpm?

Yep. Had an EP3 Type-R before the GT86 and both have a 2-litre (86mm x 86mm bore/stroke) NA 4-cylinder with 200hp. Only the FA20 just feels so much beefier at normal city-driving RPMs than the K20A2. This dyno comparison from Gardus@Supersprint pretty much shows why:



Also, Honda can no longer sell the K20A2 in EU in new cars because it does not comply to current emission standards.

[Areddi]

Originally Posted by Supermassive

Ok since we have a bunch of differing opinions as to what makes a great engine, maybe the real question should be what makes a great engine in your eyes?

For me a great engine has to have certain qualities:

1) Power per liter
2) Reliability
3) Suitability to it's application
4) Ease of maintenance
5) Aftermarket Support
6) Aesthetics

The FA20 nails almost all of my criteria for it to be considered a great engine...

I have had zero issues with my engine for almost 7000 miles so far save the squeaky HP fuel pump. No CEL's, no broken components, no recalls, etc. The power is great for an N/A 4 cylinder engine, it's not a V6 or V8 so what the hell are people expecting? The engine perfectly complements the car it was built for, everyone complains about the torque dip, yes it's annoying when accelerating in a straight line, but how many people here really notice this dip when the car is being tossed around twisties...especially if you are flirting with the redline most of the time anyways?

How many people here work on their own cars...by that I mean beyond the scope of changing brake pads and oil changes. As a certifiable gear head I do all my own work (as long as i have the required tools of course). This car requires almost no specialized tools to work on, granted I haven't pulled the engine out yet to crack it open, but I have yet to find a fastener or situation that I could't remove or repair with a very basic craftsman tool set. Everything in the engine bay is easy to access, and makes sense, there's no mystery wires or vacuum lines that disappear behind jumbles of plastic cladding...all in all it's extremely maintenance friendly...well except for spark plugs, but with some wobble joints they arent too terrible either.

Aftermarket support is a huge determining factor for me regarding how great an engine is...the more people making parts the lower the prices are due to competition. Right now it's still early and parts demand a premium as manufacturers are rolling out new products daily, but give this engine a year and I am willing to bet it will be as hugely supported as some of the legendary engines like the 2JZ-GE (or GTE), or the SR20DET. People throwing around engines such as the little turbo diesels as great engines make me laught because the extent of the aftermarket support will likely be simple bolt on additions without any real performance increasing internal support save for some specialty shops offering one off builds that are exorbitantly expensive.

Lastly, this engine is not ugly, the engine bay maybe, but the engine itself is actually quite nice to look at, very simple, almost spartan in that it doesn't have a whole lot of fluff attached to it save the sound tube which is trash can fodder. The stock exhaust is hideous though because the header solution is just attrocious. After market headers look glorious on this car, of course you have to be under the car with the under panels removed to admire them but they do look nice.

All this being said, there are some engines that I would love to have at my disposal but would only make sense in the cars they were intended for...an Ferrari engine makes my list simply because I am a die hard Ferrari fan boy (except the FF wtf were they thinking???).

So what makes an engine great for you?

Nailed it

[RaceR]

I don't think the FA20 deserves an engine award.

Ill base my opinion on the following criterias in random order. Again this is my opinions, not a personal insult to anyone.

Fuel consumption:
It sucks. Simple as that. Im not aware of any engine with that kind of power that consumes more fuel in a relatively light car. (Im from EU)
From a scale from A+ to G its rated F.
I know the gearing is partly to be blamed, but either way. Its bad and that makes it expensive in terms of taxes.

Torque:
Not impressed, its not bad for its type of engine. But nothing to go "wow" about. Going from a good 1.6 turbo to the FA20 is a huge dissapointment in terms of torque. Yes. Apples and Oranges should not be compared directly... but still..

Sound:
NA engines are supposed to be good sounding. This is just mediocre. Lots of people find it quite bad sounding. I think its OK, but not more.

Powerband:
Too narrow. On tight twisty tracks or roads you can easily experience 1. gear to not go far enough. So you change into second. All power is gone, and your into the torque drop as well. The autocross tracks im at are mostly driven in 2. gear, on this car is not flexible enough due to the lack of useable powerband. Which is mostly 2500 rpm.

Peak RPM:
I would hope for higher. Powerband is more important, but since this should be an exiting NA machine, it would be nice to have a good sounding "screamer".

Character
For a NA, its quite boring. And the torque dip does not help. Engines should not have annoying factors. yes, you could praise it for "all the low down torque". But its just annoying to feel that torque curve. And there is no "NA" WOW-effect, it does not fly when you get high into the revs. And as mentioned, nor does it sing.

Reliability:
Based on the the CEL problems. I would not consider this a reliable engine. Many people still seem to have problems after getting a new ECU. I would fear the CEL problem and issues people have had with it. Bying a new car should not make me fear the possibility to have lots of down time due to known engine issues.

Tuneability:
You can do all the normal stuff, intake, exhaust, chip etc.. Not that much to gain for the amount of cash used.
I don't care if it may or may not be reliable with 400+ WHP and a turbo (time will tell). That would ruin the throttle response way too much anyway. Ruin warranty, could get into emission problems, more reliability issues, would take lots of money etc...

Paper vs real life:
The specs of the engine does not seem to be underrated at all. You really don't get more torque or power than advertised. Several other manufacturers give you more than you expect.

Butt dyno:
It feels slower than it is. And it feels slow for its specs. I would rather have the opposite feeling.

Lots of negativity here some would say. I don't think the engine is really bad. I just don't think that its award worthy. I highly doubt it will get an "international engine of the year award". Many reviews complain about the engine. It is the weak point of this car in my opinion too.

The good stuff about the engine. Throttle response and low CoG. Considering it is a NA boxer that is supposed to be sporty and that engine is mounted low in the car, that is just the nature of the thing. Not traits that are award worthy in my opinion.

I think the international engine of the year awards make more sense.
Overview from earlier years.

[regal]

Originally Posted by firehawk

Yep. Had an EP3 Type-R before the GT86 and both have a 2-litre (86mm x 86mm bore/stroke) NA 4-cylinder with 200hp. Only the FA20 just feels so much beefier at normal city-driving RPMs than the K20A2. This dyno comparison from Gardus@Supersprint pretty much shows why:



Also, Honda can no longer sell the K20A2 in EU in new cars because it does not comply to current emission standards.

One thing folks aren't factoring in (and I'm not picking on firehawk) is that this is RWD, there is significant powertrain/torque loss spinning the back wheels vs fwd.

I wonder if there has ever been a more fuel efficient rwd car made ?