Choke! cough cough... :bigsmile:raitchison said:It's really an amazing engine, as good as a Honda engine.
LeeLee, just buy a Honda and go to their forums and tell them how great Hondas are, geez.LeeLee said:Choke! cough cough... :bigsmile:raitchison said:It's really an amazing engine, as good as a Honda engine.
The Mazda 2.3 is a nice engine, but I wouldn't hesitate one bit to trade it in for a "160HP" Honda K24. Not only has the K series been phenomenally responsive to aftermarket tuning, it is absolutely the smoothest 4 cylinder engine out there. The one in the Accord and TSX is smoother than many 6-cylinder engines.
This not saying that the Mazda 2.3's engine is a bad engine, just that Honda being a top engine manufacturer is pretty hard to match or beat.
Most of the things said here are opinion, on the Mazda 3. We do appreciate your opinion also, but with every contradiction you have mentioned, honda is included. I guess maybe some of us are puzzled why you bought the 3 in the first place instead of a new Si. I also wonder if you work for Honda and are trying to get their name out there to Mazda buyers.LeeLee said:I don't understand why you have an issue with me praising Honda for their strengths.
You don't think I should do that here? If so, why not?
I don't understand what you've just written, mostly the contradiction part.mnemonicj said:Most of the things said here are opinion, on the Mazda 3. We do appreciate your opinion also, but with every contradiction you have mentioned, honda is included.
Well, the Mazda3 Hatch has 4 doors and more useful room behind the rear seats. It's a more practical car for my growing family. Also, the Civic Si comes with sucky wheels and tires.mnemonicj said:I guess maybe some of us are puzzled why you bought the 3 in the first place instead of a new Si. I also wonder if you work for Honda and are trying to get their name out there to Mazda buyers.
Are we talking about the same Civic Si? The Civic Si comes with a 160HP engine. It's a higher reving K20 engine mated to a close-ratio 6-speed. I wouldn't even pick a Corolla S over a Civic EX, let alone the Si. The Corolla S is tuned for soft handling with disconnected steering feel. And while the engine is powerful, it doesn't rev nearly as willingly as the 1.7L engine in the Civic EX. Currently there is no US-spec Civic that can match the performance and handling of a stock Mazda3 without some expensive modifications. The Mazda3 is a superior package from the factory.mnemonicj said:As far as I have seen here, everyone had the choice to buy a Honda Civic Si over the 3 and have chosen against it. Personally, I would have chosen the Civic Si last of all the cars it this class including the Corolla S because I would like a lot of power from an engine from the factory instead of having to make major modifications to it to get anything out of it. Screw putting on a new exhaust and putting in a cold air intake. With the new 3 all I am going to do is change to a K&N air filter (if they ever come out with the bloody thing).
This is only true with the Civic, an observation I've pounded on to no end on www.vtec.net. The Civic's sales are dropping heavily to the point that Honda is preparing for production cut-backs. And they think this is a systemic problem with the market place rather than an issue with the car itself. That's why they are planning to introduce the a smaller-than-Civic car called the Fit. I think that is going to be a disaster. They need to fix what's wrong with the Civic.mnemonicj said:I am unhappy with Honda vehicles because for the money you pay, you get smaller engines with less displacement, less horsepower, and less torque from the factory in cars that are supposed to compete with others in the same class.
Honda compacts are known for their high reving small displacement engines. It would make as much sense to put a 2.5L big block I4 in a Civic Si as making a diesel Corvette. All they really need to do is bring over the Civic Type-R, with its 200HP, light weight factory wheels, and decent tires. That car wouldn't be the fastest in a straight-line but be a real pleasure to drive in the corners. The current Accord already has 240HP, which is higher than most mid-size cars in the market. They do not need a 3.5L. And the NSX with a 6L V12 will just become another too-heavy bloated-body super car.mnemonicj said:So, granted Honda engines may be better engines, but until they start daring to put their friggin balls on the chopping block and putting a 2.5L engine in the Si, a 3.5L engine in the Accord, and maybe a nice 6.0 V12 in the NSX for the same price they are charging for all of those cars now, I will look elsewhere and so will everyone else. Isn't that why they are here in the first place?
That is the thing, it could be a great engine, but Honda chokes it and restricts its breathing enough to rob it of a nice torque curve (hence LeeLee's forementioned choke and cough). Granted the curve is flat, but it starts out low and stays there in American cars. I think that Honda could have great engines if they would let them breathe. Here in the US, Honda is afraid of putting out anything really fun for a decent price. I would love to have a TSX, but not for almost $30,000. I would rather buy a Saab 9-3 for that price. I wish they would take a risk and move some cars that are sold in Japan and sell them for a decent price here to the US, but until then, I will look at more power and performance for the price.USCMazda3 said:Chill, bro. All Lee said was that the K24 is probably the best 4-cylinders on the market, that's all. And you'd have to try really hard to disagree with him on that point. To say the Mazda's 2.3L is as good as Honda's 2.4L is a bit of a stretch. Remember, Honda is first and foremost an engine company. They really know their stuff when it comes to that, especially 4-bangers.
He wasn't knocking the Mazda or anything. We all agree that the 3 is a great car.
In what sense? The JDM K20A is generating 220HP in stock form with a wide and flat torque curve that peaks at 152 ft-lb. The US-spec K20A2 generates 200HP and 142 ft-lb. The K24 in the TSX is a bit more mild and generates 200HP and 166 ft-lb. All three engines are also exceptionally smooth and reliable.raitchison said:I'm familiar with the K20 series engine and IMO the Duratec HE is definitely it's equal.
You are faulting the engine for choices that Honda made about which car to put it in. 200HP out of a 2.4L I4 is hardly sedate. I don't think any other normally aspirated engine with 2.4L or less in displacement comes even close. And that's a mild motor by Honda standards.mnemonicj said:That is the thing, it could be a great engine, but Honda chokes it and restricts its breathing enough to rob it of a nice torque curve (hence LeeLee's forementioned choke and cough). Granted the curve is flat, but it starts out low and stays there in American cars. I think that Honda could have great engines if they would let them breathe. Here in the US, Honda is afraid of putting out anything really fun for a decent price. I would love to have a TSX, but not for almost $30,000. I would rather buy a Saab 9-3 for that price. I wish they would take a risk and move some cars that are sold in Japan and sell them for a decent price here to the US, but until then, I will look at more power and performance for the price.
Well, we are not talking about race-tuned engines. But even if you want to do that, K20A2 engines worked on by HyTech Exhaust was measured to produce 264 wheel HP in an RSX-S. Here is the link:raitchison said:Lets look atthe market here, right now the Duratec HE is in 4 cars:
Mazda3 - 2.0 & 2.3 148hp/135lb-ft & 160hp/150lb-ft
Mazda6 - 2.3 160hp/150lb-ft
Focus - 2.3 tuned for emissions pushing only 143Hp/149lb-ft
Ranger - tuned for Torque 143Hp/154lb-ft
None of these are "high performance" versions of the engine, something that doesn't exist yet. Indicators are with the Focus 2.3 that 200 N/A HP is completely doable with the 2.3, perhaps even with bolt ons only. I've heard some racers talking about 250 RELIABLE N/A HP in heavily tuned engines without pesky emissions controls.
It should impress you that the smallest and least powerful variant of the K series engine is as powerful as the largest and most powerful variant of the Duratec HE.raitchison said:Let's look at the Si/base RSX 2.0, 160Hp/132lb-ft This impresses me how?
Opinions differ... The Mazda3's 2.3L engine is plenty smooth, but the K series is smoother still, especially the K24, which would be a more natural comparison.raitchison said:As for smoothness, I've ridden in and driven 7th gen Si's as well as RSX's and don't think they are any more smooth than the Duratec HE, perhaps someone can mount a vibration sensor on each engine to see for sure.
Well, without the benefit of direct empirical data, we can only make a guess about the reliability of new products in the years to come. Here I will just say that Honda has a definite advantage over Ford in reliability.raitchison said:& reliability, the Duratec has only been out in 01 (when it came out in the Ranger) Time will tell but it's a very well engineered engine.
I would just point out that we are comparing engines and not the cars that they come in. You claimed that the Duratec HE is the equal of Honda's K-series. To make it fair I limited it to factory engines available in factory cars. The K20A in the JDM Integra Type-R is a factory engine for a stock factory car. It is very much available.raitchison said:Well I was just talking about whats available. Last I checked you couldn'd walk into yor local Acura dealer and buy an ITR (or RTR as it would be here)
Again, we are comparing engines and not the car that they come in. You said that the Duratec HE is the equal of the Honda K series but the evidence clearly points to the contrary. Whether the TSX is a higher end car is not an issue, the fact remains that the K24 is a K series engine with no equal in the Duratec HE lineup.raitchison said:The TSX has more power but it's a higher end car than the 3 (really your comparing an <$20k car to a >$25k car). As for the RSX-S let's make that comparison when the MazdaSpeed Mazda3 comes out.
How can you claim that an engine is not as smooth as another without having driven it? For one, the K24 has dual balance shafts whereas the K20A2 does not. Read any review of the TSX and you are likely to see praises for the smoothness of the K24. A weaker variant of the K24 is also used in an 2003+ Accord so if you don't have access to a TSX, test drive one of those instead.raitchison said:I've never driven a K24, though I'd expect it to be less smooth than the K20, just like I'd expect the 2.3 Duratec HE to be less smooth than the 20 Duratec HE.