That engine though. Where will it sit among the great 4cyl NA's?

[drift86]

The new 2.4 has a sky high 13.5 compression ratio (12.5 on the old 2.0). This gives it more power potential.

Really keen to see what aftermarket tuners can do on the 2.4 on e85

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

But it isn't a dyno reading it is.... Oh never mind. I give up already.

I'm not suggesting its some kind of dynamic dyno reading! I get you.

But its effectively a static dyno chart of the car (like every readout is once its done). I assume is the actual car - and that its a graph taken from a real dyno run of the car. Certainly it seems like the original one was a real dyno run of the car.

And like I said, crazy torque for a 4 banger of ANY breed, hardly anything touches it in production history.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by drift86

The new 2.4 has a sky high 13.5 compression ratio (12.5 on the old 2.0). This gives it more power potential.

Really keen to see what aftermarket tuners can do on the 2.4 on e85

Well yes an no.
The higher compression will take E85 mods and be wonderful.
Everything else will be walking a tightrope. At that high a ratio it will be really really easy to introduce pre ignition and therefore knock.
Knock is bad MMMKAY.
They are also already under a lot more stress than a lower compression engine and although the parts are built for that stress they are not designed for a bunch more.
Higher compression engines are more efficient but that efficiency comes at a cost when trying to add power.
Anybody wanting to go with boost is gonna have a hard time!
I anticipate a pile of thrown rods in the future.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Blighty

I'm not suggesting its some kind of dynamic dyno reading! I get you.

But its effectively a static dyno chart of the car (like every readout is once its done). I assume is the actual car - and that its a graph taken from a real dyno run of the car. Certainly it seems like the original one was a real dyno run of the car.

And like I said, crazy torque for a 4 banger of ANY breed, hardly anything touches it in production history.

No no it is not. It is a theoretical display of what the car should be doing at those RPMs. It just happens to look like a dyno since it is displaying the same info. Even the live lines do not vary one little bit no matter what the weather or driving conditions are. I have watched. It is just a gimmick and not a real measure of what the car is actually doing.
I am interested in seeing what an actual at the wheel reading is (even though those are a poor data source as well but that is a whole different story) since that tells the real truth of the cars performance.

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

No no it is not. It is a theoretical display of what the car should be doing at those RPMs. It just happens to look like a dyno since it is displaying the same info. Even the live lines do not vary one little bit no matter what the weather or driving conditions are. I have watched. It is just a gimmick and not a real measure of what the car is actually doing.
I am interested in seeing what an actual at the wheel reading is (even though those are a poor data source as well but that is a whole different story) since that tells the real truth of the cars performance.

Here is what they did.

1 - Dyno's the test mule engine at the fly wheel, smoothed it out.

2 - Took that dyno chart and put it on the background of one of the OSD screens in every BRZ/86.

3- I assume they animated it?

I don't care about any fake animation.

All we need to care about, and take note of is that dyno graph. It looks great. It has no hole, and in fact it looks as though we have 95% of tq on tap practically from 2.5k onwards.

[Red-86]

Originally Posted by Blighty

It has no hole, and in fact it looks as though we have 95% of tq on tap practically from 2.5k onwards.

To play devil's advocate, just because they permitted the torque dip to be graphically represented in their display on the 2017-2020s, doesn't mean the display in the 2022 is accurate. If they wanted to be mischievous, they could just erase any dip on the display, even if it still exists in the actual dyno charts. After all, perception is reality, if a buyer sees a nice steady torque line on their display screen whilst test driving, maybe they will believe it even if there is an actual dip in torque going to the wheels.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Blighty

Here is what they did.

1 - Dyno's the test mule engine at the fly wheel, smoothed it out.

2 - Took that dyno chart and put it on the background of one of the OSD screens in every BRZ/86.

3- I assume they animated it?

I don't care about any fake animation.

All we need to care about, and take note of is that dyno graph. It looks great. It has no hole, and in fact it looks as though we have 95% of tq on tap practically from 2.5k onwards.

No no they didn't.

I knew this was a waste of time.

[spike021]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

We are a year away from them hitting the roads. We need another two years (at least) after that to see how they hold up.
Celebrating it as one of the greatest engines every built right now is way premature.

Anyway, an engine can be one of the greatest ever built and still suck.

Namely something like, I dunno, a 13B?

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

No no they didn't.

I knew this was a waste of time.

Oh comon man, you shouldn't leave me hanging like that - rude!

What did they do then? You think they just drew a squiggly line and said 'Yeah, that looks about right'.

I don't want to be racists, but that's not a very Japanese thing to do!

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by spike021

Anyway, an engine can be one of the greatest ever built and still suck.

Namely something like, I dunno, a 13B?

Someone always has to throw a wankle in to these conversations at some point, at lease you gave it a good description.

But yeah lets look at 4 bangers...

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Blighty

Oh comon man, you shouldn't leave me hanging like that - rude!

What did they do then? You think they just drew a squiggly line and said 'Yeah, that looks about right'.

I don't want to be racists, but that's not a very Japanese thing to do!

They did not test the mule. The whole idea of a mule is to try engineering. It is not a finished product.
They ran several engines (not in cars, had never been in cars) on a standalone dyno that connects directly to the drive shaft. This is done in a climate controlled room so that each test is done under the exact same condition. These conditions simulate the perfect operating temperature, humidity and even air pressure at 0 feet above sea level. These are then the numbers that they publish. The only thing they are even remotely good for is the marketing people to push as to how much power the engine is. The testing standards are a couple of hundred pages long. Here is what you can see for free. https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:...550:ed-2:v1:en
So if you want to call that graph a "dyno" then sure but that squiggly line is made by running a perfect engine under perfect conditions and the numbers have little meaning in the real world other than for bench racers to compare against number in other cars.

The fake animation is relevant in it's deceit and can not just be dismissed because you don't care about it. Like the fixe graph it is showing what the car would do under those perfect conditions not what it is actually doing. It is just supporting the lie.

It is possible (not probable but still possible) for the power put to the wheels on the new car to be LOWER than we have now.

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

They did not test the mule. The whole idea of a mule is to try engineering. It is not a finished product.
They ran several engines (not in cars, had never been in cars) on a standalone dyno that connects directly to the drive shaft. This is done in a climate controlled room so that each test is done under the exact same condition. These conditions simulate the perfect operating temperature, humidity and even air pressure at 0 feet above sea level. These are then the numbers that they publish. The only thing they are even remotely good for is the marketing people to push as to how much power the engine is.
So if you want to call that graph a "dyno" then sure but that squiggly line is made by running a perfect engine under perfect conditions and the numbers have little meaning in the real world other than for bench racers to compare against number in other cars.

The fake animation is relevant in it's deceit and can not just be dismissed because you don't care about it. Like the fixe graph it is showing what the car would do under those perfect conditions not what it is actually doing. It is just supporting the lie.

It is possible (not probable but still possible) for the power put to the wheels on the new car to be LOWER than we have now.

You really think that.

Well, perhaps I'm going crazy.

Cause what you are saying seems completely and utterly wrong.

A) they would have done plenty of dyno's on those test mules, I don't care how many they had, whatever was set to the final spec.

B) Of course its an image of the dyno.

C) There is ZERO chance this will have less power at the wheels.... Zero dude zero.

So, I think one of us are mad. You have posted more often here and should know a lot more, so I give you a point in your favor for being more sane. HOWEVER you have also just spend a load of cash on getting the final
Toyota 86 Hakone, which I think counts against your sanity for this particular topic.

So we are even.

Lets call it a draw where I win.

[Baldeagle]

I am excited about this car and am confident the new 2.4 will be amazing for it. Sorry if my next thought is negative, but being the best four cylinder engine screams of being the biggest fish in a small pond to me. Also, without variable valve lift can it really be considered amazing? 20 years ago, Honda extracted 240 hp from a nearly indestructible 2.0-liter engine that had a usable 9,000 rpm redline. If the new 2.4 had variable valve lift on both sides, variable valve timing and another 1,200 rpm of usable power, maybe then it could be considered one of the greatest four cylinders. But then again, what cost would that add? Where will this engine sit? I’m sure it will be among the best, for whatever that is worth in a world of affordable V8 Camaros, Mustangs and Challengers.

[alone1i]

Off topic, how about our first gen FA20 engine? Why we can't respect it as a great engine. It is 2L, makes 100HP/litre, reliable for 8 years.