PDA

View Full Version : Honda VS Toyota, Who really is better then who?



GT4SOM
12-25-2005, 05:52 PM
I just want a simple break down of both manufacturers. Who really has the better motors and also faster "stock cars." I'm not too familiar with Honda's complete line. So lets leave our biased opinions out of this thread. Now I would think that Toyota's best performance motor would be the 2jzgte. What would honda have to compete with this? What motor would be easier to tune to get the most potential out of it with out having to break the bank on it?

Morwan
12-25-2005, 07:27 PM
With currently available models? It's Honda. The Civic Si is handles better, costs less, and is faster than a supercharged Scion tC.

But otherwise, Toyota wins. I don't think Honda had anything that could compete with the 2jzgte. I believe that the NSX engine is limited by its reliance on variable valve timing, kind of like the 2ZZ-GE is.

Weasy2k
12-25-2005, 09:25 PM
Toyota has and will always kill honda in the V6 and V8 market in my honest opinion....

WHen it comes to I4's they both have there edge....the honda motors are great revving machines and I have nothing to smash them on besides 90% of the owners treat them as gods as 90% of toyota owners treat the 2jz....

To me they are both equal in the I4 world...you may think toyota is better because of the turbo/sc motors that they have produced and i agree it does give toyota that extra edge, but again Hondas are pritty tough if you put some basic bolt ons that = what is on the toyotas... IE S/C on the 4agze or the turbo from 3s-gte....an example would be a couple car manufactures taking some honda 4bangers (i know NOTHING of there codes :P ) and putting a jackson racing s/c on there...puts out some decent power with incredible reliability.

But again v6...toyota...for sure...

gt4-Showcar
12-25-2005, 09:45 PM
Ask this question ten years ago and Toyota would be supreme leader with nothing in there way, but, now Honda is finally getting there act together. I am talkin only honda and toyota, I will leave Lexus and Acura out of this as will I leave Scion out also. Lately Toyota has been leaning more towards less powerful cars and doing more suv's and trucks. The problem is Honda is focusing on the ricer crowd and making faster small cars, hence the S2000 and new 197 hp (I think) Civic SI. While Toyota really has no new cars that are real quick. Still Toyota is rated the top car company of all middle class car companies. Lexus is rated the highest of Luxury. You can go to consumerreports.org if you want to see proof, you just need a membership. Right now Honda has more appeal, with their newer cars, to the young racing group, than Toyota. But nothing Honda has made can ever compete with the Twin Turbo 2jz Supra. Toyota's are rated more dependable and longer lasting, but honda is doin a better job of keeping our group satisfied. It brings tears to my eyes...

K40S
12-25-2005, 10:24 PM
Back when i used to live in japan, my dad worked in an auto shop on a military base. he said that most of the cars that went through there were hondas. H also mentioned never working on any toyota. That was when i was around 11. It got me thinking. I do believe toyota is better because of the reliability. I have never really seen an '85 with over 200,000 miles on it and it still runs perfectly. My cousins 85 Corolla GTS coupe has over 200,000 miles on it and still runs perfectly. So id say toyota wins on reliability...and looks

MooseKnuckle
12-25-2005, 10:46 PM
If you really want to break down each one on "stock cars", you would need to pick a time frame- then or now.
THEN- you had the Celica, the Supra, the MR2 and even the Camry vs. the Prelude, CRX, Civic, and Accord (in no particular order). Highs: N/A V-TEC engines,like in the Prelude produced a whopping 190-200hp ('93-'01), Toyota models had exceptionaly high torque ratings as always. The lows were flip-flopped: Honda less torque, Toyota less hp. The Supra and 3sgte are the exception here, however it is very difficult to compare the Supra to much of anything besides the NSX. I've never owned a Honda but from a few short rides and drives in them I can say that I did't like the handling/ride anywhere near as much as I like Toyotas. Had cars like the CRX, MR2 and Prelude lived on longer, and the Celica been provided with more power, I believe there would be nearly if not more aftermarket support for them as there is for the Civic.
NOW- what's left? Can you really blame the young kids for running out and jumping into Civics? Just look at all the goodies you can get for them. And the S2000 is a pretty nice ride. I would still prefer a new Celica GTS, plenty of junk to buy for those, but the marketing for them was poor when compared to that of Hondas. Toyota nixed the Celica and said"...we have seen a steady decline in the demand for the cars in the past several years..."-gee I wonder why? Could it be that for every 1 Toyota comercial I see, I then see 15 Honda ones? I think Toyota just wants to move into a different class with their vehicles, one that does not include us, thus the onslaught of the Scion division.
Last but not least, a comparison such as this should never be done without mentioning Nissan. The 240sx and 300zx were also some of the best at the time, the 240 hanging on to RWD power, and the 300zx being the only close competition for the Supra out of the big 3. But if Nissan is to be left out, and I don't mean to leave an opening for addition to your post, I must say this. In the past ten years and less, we have seen a great decline in the making of true middle-class sports cars. I do not believe the Civic to truely be one of these, anything you can get in a sedan model just doesn't fit in to me. So the question I pose is this- If you had to go out and buy just one '06 model car from Honda or Toyota, what would it be? This will accurately answer the question for the now part.

Weasy2k
12-25-2005, 10:47 PM
Ask this question ten years ago and Toyota would be supreme leader with nothing in there way, but, now Honda is finally getting there act together. I am talkin only honda and toyota, I will leave Lexus and Acura out of this as will I leave Scion out also. Lately Toyota has been leaning more towards less powerful cars and doing more suv's and trucks. The problem is Honda is focusing on the ricer crowd and making faster small cars, hence the S2000 and new 197 hp (I think) Civic SI. While Toyota really has no new cars that are real quick. Still Toyota is rated the top car company of all middle class car companies. Lexus is rated the highest of Luxury. You can go to consumerreports.org if you want to see proof, you just need a membership. Right now Honda has more appeal, with their newer cars, to the young racing group, than Toyota. But nothing Honda has made can ever compete with the Twin Turbo 2jz Supra. Toyota's are rated more dependable and longer lasting, but honda is doin a better job of keeping our group satisfied. It brings tears to my eyes...

very good points..if you look back in those days yea i would say toyota would rule then!....i have seen some of those old honda engines Throttle body injection? wtf?

hobbie2k
12-26-2005, 06:47 AM
Having owned a couple Toyotas, a Honda, and several Nissans, I'd have to say, Nissan is my favorite. While we didn't see any in the USDM, there are Nissan motors that can make that magical 100hp/litre rating stock from the factory (I believe it's a GA16VE, but correct me if I'm wrong), in addition to the undeniable performance potential of the SR20DET, the RB20DET, RB25DET, RB26DETT, RB30DET, VG30DETT, VQ35DE, and VH45DE series motors, as well as a lot of brilliant sports cars that the USDM never saw (Pulsar VZ-R, GTi-R, Silvia, 180SX, Skyline GTS-T, GT25-T, GT-R, Bluebird SSS). It's rather unfortunate that the only cars we got were the 240SX (pulled down by it's truck motor) and the 300ZX/350Z. The primary two for this comparison would be the SR20 and the RB26. Compared to Toyota's seminal pair, the 3s and 2jz, they are actually pretty comparable in all respects, it's only in the details and personal preference that one motor gains an advantage over the other. As far as their non-sports motors go, they are all quite similar and the average driver would have a hard time picking them out.

When we bring Honda motors into the equation, though, things go a little haywire. The only Toyota/Honda motors that are really on an equal footing concept wise is the 2zzge and the B18C, and they are both very similar. In fact I have read numerous reviews of each motor that have directly compared one to the other. So, direct from the factory, the Honda motors are a brilliant piece of work putting out huge power from small displacement and natural aspiration, and I'll say this, too. Drive an H22A powered anything and it'll open a whole new world to you outside of turbos and superchargers. Unfortunately, they are high-revving and relatively torqueless so they can be a pain in normal driving (the bigger H22 doesn't suffer from this nearly as bad as the B16 and B18 motors, and the lack of turbo lag makes up for the lack of torque in a stock 3s comparison).

As far as tuning potential? Nissan has the most motors with real tuning potential, but the Toyota 3s and 2jz are at least as good as their closest Nissan rivals. Honda motors are tuned pretty close to their limit right from the factory, so don't have quite the tuning potential of the others without spending a lot of money on a total restructuring of the motors.

Best cars from my personal experience? I had a lot of fun in my GA16DE powered '91 Sentra, mostly because it was very lightweight (no options and stripped) and I could beat on it and it would not die. All around best, I would say my Accord, great handling, fairly comfortable ride, very solid, if a bit underpowered. The Camry was easily the most comfortable, of the three. The one that was the most fun? My JDM Silvia.

Weasy2k
12-26-2005, 07:26 AM
Nissan is one company i wanted to venture into as well, but Toyotas keep me really happy...
but to say that Nissan is more tunable...i would say toyota/nissan are equal in that dept...everyone always looks at that 2jz and thinks its toyotas ONLY engine that is any good.
Wow are they wrong...
1uz-fe an engine deigned for a plane is becoming widly used to replace the 2jz...with little money that block can take on HUGE amounts of power and cost 1/4 of what the 2jz would run you. The 3uz-fe is an engine that is even greater then the 1uz but alot more pricey...this is what SARD used to race for there MR2 power, reliability all in one engine :)
5vz/3vz blocks ar amazing and one has yet to test the waters on what it can do with stock bottom end!
Me and Node (mr2guru.com) are taking the 5vz to the next level...pushing 500whp out of stock bottom end is a goal for both of us and a redline of upto around 7k rpm vs 5500stock.
The vz series blocks are also very compact allowing them to fit in many vechiles with ease vs the I6 layout being friggen huge.
Toyota has really hit it big with the V6/V8 markets....Nissans new 3.5L engine looks and sounds like a winner tho its awsome...i need ot learn more.

hobbie2k
12-26-2005, 11:34 PM
Well, yeah, any motor is tuneable, but the aftermarket support and knowledge base (in the US, anyway) for most of those motors is actually quite small, and while they may have a lot of potential, they haven't really been tapped yet.

Most of the Nissan motors, in contrast, have a large aftermarket, with lots of experience and knowledge available to anyone willing to do a little research. All the options have been explored and if you have any ideas, it will be fairly easy to find someone who's tried it, and that makes them safe and easy motors to tune.

It's for those reasons that I claimed Nissan motors as the most tuneable, not because of any inherent engineering advantage (in engineered potential Toyotas are at least on an equal footing), but rather because of a very strong aftermarket product and knowledge base (on a par with Honda's).

But you gotta start somewhere, and no one will know what a VZ will take until you push it, so go for it, man. Let us know what she'll do.

Weasy2k
12-27-2005, 12:16 AM
cant argue that point in regards to aftermarket...i was shocked to find out how little there was compaired to other companys...unless its a 2jz

Doctor Jinxed
12-27-2005, 01:14 AM
Toyota is straightforward these days, Scion is for the tuner kids and all that nice stuff, the main Toyota line has your white bread sedans and affordable gas savers, and Lexus has your luxury and sport cars. Of course the lines aren't definitively drawn, but for the most part there is a clean distinction.

Honda has their own little luxury line, but they lack a specific tuner car line (ala Scion). All though Scion is young and they aren't all that and then some at this point, they are still defined and exclusive. Honda let's all their tuner cars spill over both Honda and the Acura makes, so of course it's gonna seem that they have the import market in their palms, but that's only because Toyota hasn't really gone anywhere with the Scion line yet and that's all anyone's looking at. When you look at the Lexus type vehicles, they are friggin awesome, especially between the SC and IS types. Toyota's main line of sedans and stuff might be on par with Honda's though, but they are hardly overwhelmed.

From a sales standpoint, Toyota's pretty much king worldwide. And even though my favorite Toyotas died with the 90's, I still think they make better cars overall.

P.S. I didn't read half the posts in this thread, so I'm sure the topic got taken in a totally different direction than the one this post is going.

Azzazzyn
12-27-2005, 02:21 AM
the one thing to prove hobbie's point, maybe.....is trd vs mugen vs nismo....but not quite. Now you have all their racing tags right there but the one thing nissan has which is awesoem by the way and their probably gonna get all my money is jim wolf technologies. Nissan pretty much gives every last drop of info on their cars to jwt and they find out what and where they can push the respective cars, thus you get the market hobbie was talking about. The only thing thats gonna hurt me there is its 150 for a pop charger....ouch. I am biased though, I <3 my 240, can't wait for the rb25 to come.

Abacaba
12-27-2005, 06:13 AM
The reason I don't buy Honda's is because it hardly has low-end torque and they don't make real trucks. Honda's Ridgeline is okay, but it's just a Chevy Avalanche knock-off, has a VTech (no low-end torque for pulling), and too high for ease of loading, and expensive.

Weasy2k
12-27-2005, 06:31 AM
I like how toyota designs most of there engines like there going to be raced or soemthing....

or even design it for use in a airplane...
*couh* 1uz *cough*

KoreanJoey
12-27-2005, 08:23 AM
To put it this way, if I was going to buy another car there are only two options in my mind. MR2T or a 240SX. Which makes more power stock, MR2, which has the most bang for the buck, 240SX. The reason I say that is Nissan parts are way, WAY cheaper than toyota parts. That's part of why I like Toyotas though, the exclusivity(sp?) as far as tuners go. I don't, however, usually get along w/ the 2JZ guys because well... their heads are usually the size of basketballs. Oh, as far as potential goes in a car, the NSX is (in my view) superior to the Supra due to the lighter weight. I'm not talking drag potential but as far as getting around a track, I can always go faster with an NSX than a Supra.

Weasy2k
12-27-2005, 08:28 AM
hehe :)
Then you will like my mr2....

Toyota 5VZ-FE 3.4L V6 Quad-Cam 24v found in toyota trucks
+ MR2
+ 2 Turbos
= Fun :)

I too am part of the anti 2jz club just because of the fact everyone looks at that engine and that engine only...
The 5vz is just starting its rise and my company along with 2 others are spear heading that :P

oh yea and the 5vz doesnt have the I6 problem of its length as its very compact and can fit in more cars then the 2jz and costs about 80% less

KoreanJoey
12-27-2005, 08:56 AM
As far as the Twin Turbo motors I'm split between the 2JZ and the RB26. Personally I like the RB for the shorter stroke/ higher rev, that's how a sports car is supposed to be set up.

Weasy2k
12-27-2005, 09:02 AM
you know the info on the 5vz? :)

Bore is 93.5 mm and stroke is 82 mm 5vz
Bore 86.0mm Stroke: 86.0mm Size 2jz

Sooooo.....

KoreanJoey
12-27-2005, 09:06 AM
but a V orientation usually isn't set up to rev like a straight-6.

tomyc48
12-27-2005, 10:14 AM
i've owned all three, nissan toyota adn civic... i always come back to teh toyotas!!!
my first 2 cars were corrols, then some other cars ( afew american jobs in there) a civic an other corrola, a sentra, adn then back to teh good stuff,the last 3 are celicas, adn i'm about to buy another celica to do a 7M-gte swap. but most importantly, i live in teh states and (trucks aside) if it didn't come off a boat then i don;t want it !!!!

Weasy2k
12-27-2005, 05:47 PM
but a V orientation usually isn't set up to rev like a straight-6.

You gotta look at it more openly...
That term is thrown around nowadays just to try to win debates really, there are many engines outhere that rev very smoothly and are of a V type. The 5vz is only a 60 degree V6 so its pritty tight compaired to the giant 90 degress.
The bore and stroke ultimatly describes the engines ability to rev in the end (as described by my buddy who is a engine builder).
Not to knock on the 2jz...but i just like give out the message that its not the ONLY good toyota engine out there...

And yes i still maintain Toyota > Honda

MooseKnuckle
12-27-2005, 10:42 PM
...but most importantly, i live in teh states and (trucks aside) if it didn't come off a boat then i don't want it !!!!
HEAR HEAR!!

hobbie2k
12-28-2005, 05:41 AM
As far as the Twin Turbo motors I'm split between the 2JZ and the RB26. Personally I like the RB for the shorter stroke/ higher rev, that's how a sports car is supposed to be set up.

That is one of the RB's advantages, but from what I've read (and I can't remember the exact reason) the 2jz has a revving advantage over the RB in stock form due to the 2jz's lifter design (I think) which allows higher revs before things start going haywire. So that coupled with the bore/stroke issue puts them on an even footing in stock and mild tune form...

...of course, the top end issue of the RB's lifters is easier to fix than the 2jz's bottom end issues...

Another RB vs. JZ funny fact: Some of the top Toyota dragsters and drifters in Japan use an RB powerplant. Why? Because the RB turbo is on the left side of the motor, whereas the JZ turbo is on the right, and in Japan the steering column is on the right, meaning that, when your Toyota I6 application requires a high-mount turbo, it's generally cheaper and easier to swap in Nissan power, than run around the steering column. I'm sure there are Toyota powered Nissans out there, but I haven't seen or heard of any...

hobbie2k
12-28-2005, 06:05 AM
but a V orientation usually isn't set up to rev like a straight-6.

...and, yes, an inline engine (all else being equal) is inherently better balanced than a vee engine, but all else is never equal. And the issues of vee vs inline were more pertinent in the 1960s, 70s, and 80s when engine tolerances were far more broad and nearly all vee engines had pushrods and nearly all inlines had overhead cams.

So the bore/stroke issue (not to mention precision balancing, valve actuation, and breathing) does have a FAR more significant effect on the car's ability to rev as well as how smooth and progressive the engine's power delivery (which some people can mistake for smooth revving) is. But, physics dictate that an inline format (assuming all the parts are equally well-weighted with it's vee cousin) will still have an inherent balance advantage....

Today, most of those balance issues can be overcome and then the vee engine's packaging advantage becomes a performance advantage, because you're able to fit more cylinders in the same space, or reduce the amount of space required for the same number of cylinders, thus reducing weight and complexity.

So for the most part, the inline engines of Toyota and Nissan are formatted like that more because they are developments of older engines, than because of any performance advantage from the layout.

I did think of one other inline advantage, though...you only need two cams, as opposed to four...less reciprocating mass.

Weasy2k
12-28-2005, 08:42 AM
How does having 2 cams have less recip mass then 4 cams...i dont understand how that could even be a big deal at all?
I would think that swinging 4 smaller cams would be equal then driving 2 longer cams...
i really dont think that is a aparent advantage....

also H style (boxter) is the smoothest reving engine :)

But i agree in teh fact that new technonlgy and balancing methods have helped teh V type engines really pick it up and the stroke plays the largest part in overall reving.

So this brings up the little snip of info i posted earlier....the
Bore is 93.5 mm and stroke is 82 mm 5vz
Bore 86.0mm Stroke: 86.0mm Size 2jz
And the 3vz is in the 82-3 range as well :)

jason
12-28-2005, 09:01 AM
I think the original question has to be posed differently. "Who is better?"....better at what? Building motors? Drag racing? Circuit racing? Customer satisfaction? Whichever question you ask, the answer is subjective and the following will be my two cents simply because I'm awake and bored.

Aftermarket support is an irrelevant discussion...the 2jz, 3sgte, 4ag, b-series, k-series, whatever, they are all catered to by excellent oem and aftermarket parts, even when considering forced induction. Although I WILL say that hondas are cheaper to cater to because of the sheer numbers of cars the factory produces for cheaper.

First I regard Toyota to be...more mature (unfortunately) than Honda. Back in the day they geared marketing and sales to a young tuner-crowd by offering turbo and supercharged rwd/awd platforms with the corolla, supra, alltrac, and mr2. Honda....had the nsx. Finally, when Honda caught on they upped their market-share by providing tuners with power and reliability both, but not necessarily versatility...which I'll come back to later.

When Honda entered this mix, Toyota had had its fun, apparently, and moved on to sedans and luxury. So now that Honda has had time to catch up to moves Toyota made decades ago, which is the wiser? Wisdom comes with age and experience and of the two, Toyota is the only one to force induce motors from the factory, and they did this with AMAZING reliability. The motors are absolutely bulletproof, stock bottom ends and transmissions seeing upwards of 500hp...I've heard of 700. Of the two, Toyota is the only company to have offered AWD sports compacts and to have participated and excelled in rally, which many (including myself) consider to be the hands-down, ultimate automotive and driver challenge.

And lastly I'll come back to what I mentioned earlier about versatility and answer all other questions at the same time. What does Honda offer, days of old or new, that rules the racetrack or drag strip? NSX? With the pricetag it rolled off the production line with it's more comparable to a Porsche with Honda's lack of comfort and meaningful interior. S2K? Sure...but that very same platform is offered by an mr2, a supra, an ae86 corolla, etc. And that comes to the end of Honda's all-around performance. Two models, that's it. Toyota has what, 4-5, minimum, that offer FR/AWD layouts, most of which are forced induced. Leaving Honda to dominate the FF layout which is competitively good for only drag racing, really, and it's not even the ideal layout for that type of racing.

Whichever you choose, it's all about going fast for cheap. I'd say Honda's can do it cheaper, but you pay for what you get. And you'll get less driving EXPERIENCE from a Honda than you will from a Toyota, Yota is simply more versatile. Plus, while you're not understeering and falling flat on your face in a Toyota you can look good while not doing it with the sexiness of Toyota's curves...the lack of "boxy"styling is something Honda still has barely recognized even with the 2006 S2K!

I'm done, time for eggnog and xbox

psyco13013
12-29-2005, 01:32 AM
As far a which is a better company, I havent been driving enough to get enough experiance to make a fair call. I have only ever owned 2 cars, a 90 integra rs with automatic, and my current 2000 GTS with 6SM. Of the two, the celica is much "sportier." It handles better and drives faster. Then again, the Integra had 470,000 miles on the origional engine and tranny, and the suspension was at least 5 years old, but probably much older. But despite the 470k miles, the integra was much more reliable, IMHO.

I have had the Celica for less than 6 months, and it has almost 70k miles on it.I am already installing a new tranny, and am looking to fix the lift bolts. The sun roof is de-laminating, and the car makes all kinds of rattling and squeeking noises as it goes down the road to my house. The tranny is notchy (this may have been from it going out though) and when the engine goes into lift, the rush of power is so strong that it jolts the car, making lift more or less useless when AutoXing.

The Integra, with its 470k miles did have some issues now and again, but I never had to do any kind of major repair work, with the exception of replacing the crank case seal at 465k miles. Sure it squeeked down the road, but after 15 years of driving, I'd expect a car to make noise on bumpy roads. I sold the Integra to a friend of mine, and he is still driving it today. The car is very near 480k miles now, and is still running. It doesnt even smoke (unless its cold outside). I fear that my Celica will never last as long as the integra has. So in terms of reliability, I'd have to say Honda takes it in my book.

Morwan
12-29-2005, 03:42 AM
I'm pretty sure the 7th gen GT-S was one of Toyota's least reliable cars.

I think the Celica has been getting less and less reliable as the years have progressed. I know Consumer Reports said it was the most reliable coupe in the early 90's, but now it's not in the top 10.

KoreanJoey
12-29-2005, 05:17 AM
As far as Jasons comment about Hondas as track cars go you have to look at the sporty FFs that never made it here. The Type Rs mostly. If you look at an EG6 (I know, it's ugly and underpowered) those things with their lightness can go blitzing down a track. You say they're only good for drag racing when FF cars have a HUGE disadvantage in drag racing (weight shifting from the front to the back). Lightweight machines like the EG were and are great around a track, in stock or in modded form.

hobbie2k
12-29-2005, 05:49 AM
How does having 2 cams have less recip mass then 4 cams...i dont understand how that could even be a big deal at all?
I would think that swinging 4 smaller cams would be equal then driving 2 longer cams...
i really dont think that is a aparent advantage....

The advantage isn't so much in the weight of the cams themselves (as you said, 4 short cams don't weigh a whole lot more than 2 long cams, though in my experience they are a little bit heavier), it's in the rotational weight of the extra cam gears, the extra belt or chain, the extra drag caused by the extra bearings, etc... and, as I'm sure you know, people will pay a lot of money to save a few milligrams in the valvetrain, and that means there has to be a measurable advantage...

...like I said, it's a small advantage, but one none-the-less...

fiveSFE
12-29-2005, 05:52 AM
both company's make awsome cars, personally i think hondas are easier to fix up, toyotas seem to be more of a higher class car. they both have a awsome reputation for reliability.

I think that the opinions on this board would be very biased, i love toyota's and i want another celica more than anything. I have only owned 3 cars, my celica as my first, a civic that i bought for 100dollars, and my dsm. my civic was stock. the civic twas a very reliabe car that i just used to have fun with, but it held up my beating. My celica had around 170k on it when the tranny locked up. the civic had 190k. I have many friends that own honda's, fast ones. my friend has a b20/vtec integra that is built, it is a very tourqy car that rev's to 9500rpms, that in my opinion is a fun car. I drove my friends integra gsr when it was stock with intake and exhuast it was a 94 and i got hooked on honda's i love vtec and being able to rev to 8k it is fun. yeah toyota has nice low end tourque but they are limited to the short power band.

I have worked on a few honda's before, i swapped a few honda motors with absolutly no experience on them except breifly watchin someone show someone else what is needed to do it. it is very simple, i look at toyota and mistu motors and i know it would be a pita compared to honda. People say that honda have no tourque, but their motors in question are 1.6litres or 1.8 litres. i driven a few swapped b18c1 powered hatches and they have plenty of tourque, if you compare these motors to a toyota motor of the same size it would be no comparison at all, unless you go over seas then it would a close competition with the 4age and the b16a.

tourque low, shift high!

KoreanJoey
12-29-2005, 09:41 AM
Don't forget the Blacktop 3SGE Beams motor.

jason
12-31-2005, 09:09 PM
As far as Jasons comment about Hondas as track cars go you have to look at the sporty FFs that never made it here. The Type Rs mostly. If you look at an EG6 (I know, it's ugly and underpowered) those things with their lightness can go blitzing down a track. You say they're only good for drag racing when FF cars have a HUGE disadvantage in drag racing (weight shifting from the front to the back). Lightweight machines like the EG were and are great around a track, in stock or in modded form.

I agree...partially. But people can make those cars here. They simply take an eg6 or ek9 and put in a type-r motor which aren't hard to come by at all. Several of my friends have that swap done, one of them is actually turbocharged as well. And yes, it is LIGHTNING quick...unbelievable actually. They run into problems though, and they're not minor. In a rear-wheel drive car (AWD tends to understeer but you can still apply the gas as I'll talk about) you experience oversteer, obviously, and if you have driving experience you can easily compensate for it and USE your power in a corner. The eg6, ek9, rsx-s, prelude are all FWD platforms and the more power you put into the motor, the less you can actually step on the gas after/near/during apex. Serious tire wear is unavoidable; both understeer and LSD issues are exhausting, even in a lightweight chassis like an eg6. As far as drag-racing, I said that they are better in straight lines because you don't have to worry SO MUCH about LSD and you don't have to worry about understeer at all in the 1320. You are simply asking the front wheels to do too much in a FWD car around a course. Can they be quick? Sure, anything can be. But when comparing FWD vs AWD/RWD, if you mod a good RWD or AWD car the same as you do a FWD car there is NO competition, I don't care what cars you use. Actually, I'll rephrase that a little: an underpowered AWD or RWD car can keep up with a more powerful FWD car because of sheer balance. The FWD car will be quicker, hands down, on the straights...but the RWD and AWD car can USE its power in the turns and catch up quickly in the corners to break even.

KoreanJoey
12-31-2005, 09:47 PM
That's where you're wrong, an EG6 is a momentum car, the idea is to sustain speed through the corner, it's not like a FWD or an AWD where you slow down for the corner and then accelerate through, in the FWD you come in with high entry speed using left foot braking to induce slight oversteer into the corner. The primary advantage to a car like an EG6 is it's light weight. FWD in general is going to weigh less than a FR machine simply due to the fact it doesn't need additional parts to transfer power from a motor in the front to the wheels in the back. I can take a stock EG and absolutely smoke a C5, Boxster, ECT around a road course. Is the EG going to do an endurance race? Hell no, it does wear, but most events don't go on for several hours. FWD is a harder drivetrain to master, that's a given but with the advantages that they have inherently you can learn to use it to it's full potential which is quite high.

Punisher
12-31-2005, 09:55 PM
Eh.. I don't think it has anything to do with marketing on Toyota's side.. they don't need to market like Honda.. They are already fighting GM for #1 position in the world for manufactuering.. and they wouldn't be putting out that many cars if the demand wasn't there.

Also to note, the decline of the Celica's was in my opinion due to power loss.. If they would have continued an AWD version as they did in JDM they would have a lot more business for the Celica. Hell, I think they completely fucked the new celica up.. it doesn't like as nice as the previous generations and it completely lacks in raw power.. a 3sgte platform would kick ass in there.. couple that w/ AWD and it would have been a big seller.

However, I heard that when the 5th gen AT's came out that they were priced around 30 or 40K?

It ain't cheap to make that stuff and that is probably why they let it go. But still, I think they could have kept the MR2 and Celica line rolling with great performance and aftermarket support, not to mention some better body lines. I think they totally fucked the MR2 up and made it into this mid-life "i'm a doctor and i wanna look sporty for cheap" car.. It just doesn't represent anything that blows my mind when I look at it, like the what are they MKIII? 90+ MR2's..

But as for handling.. i'd hit a Toyota up any day.. just last night I was out with some friends on the highway and this one guy had an 88 or 89 Prelude Si and I beat that thing out in my stock 90 GTS.. he had an aftermarket exhaust system too..

I should mention that the only Toyo commercials I see are for their trucks or the scions.. they just simply do not market the Celica's.. probably because they are done with them. They are trying to grab a portion of the truck market to help boost their production.. probably to wipe GM out.. MAYBE once they accomplish what I believe to be the fight for first position.. and they have a better market share through all the vehicle classes they will focus on sport cars again to throw honda in the dirt?

Hell, I LOVE the corolla they use in the rallyX now.. fricken thing is sweet.. stocked up with a 3sgte n all.. they realize that the 3SGTE is the most reliable performing motor they have for it's class. I don't know if they still run in the wrx or not? The last thing I was reading was for like 1999 or something.. but damn that is one awesome car and they totally kicked ass through-out their WRX duration.

hobbie2k
12-31-2005, 11:52 PM
I always find it funny when kids here try to tell a major corporation how to do business. The All-Trac died in the US because it was too expensive for the people who wanted one, and all the people who could afford it were buying minivans, pickups, and SUVs, just like what happened to the Supra, 300ZX, 240SX, RX-7, etc. If Toyota had continued the AT with the 6th gen, they would have had to have spent a massive sum in research and development in order to make the car continue to meet US emissions and safety standards (which would have choked the life out of the 3sgte anyway), and that would have pushed the price even further out of their buyer's price range, sales would have slowed to a trickle, maybe a dozen a month at best, and the car would be a financial pox on their spreadsheets. Don't make a claim about the "halo" effect, because the Celica was too pedestrain to be a halo car, and the AT was virtually unknown outside of Celica circles, anyway. Also, this was before the big WRC craze in the US so that eliminated their primary marketing tool.

I agree in being disappointed that Toyota hasn't got a real sports car in their US lineup anymore, but Toyota is also doing better than ever in the marketplace and is poised to firmly grab the #2 spot in the world, and they didn't need a sports car to do it.

Now IS the time for Toyota to return to sports cars (if they want to), but the Celica and the 3sgte aren't going to be a part of it.

jason
01-01-2006, 10:17 PM
That's where you're wrong, an EG6 is a momentum car, the idea is to sustain speed through the corner, it's not like a FWD or an AWD where you slow down for the corner and then accelerate through, in the FWD you come in with high entry speed using left foot braking to induce slight oversteer into the corner. The primary advantage to a car like an EG6 is it's light weight. FWD in general is going to weigh less than a FR machine simply due to the fact it doesn't need additional parts to transfer power from a motor in the front to the wheels in the back. I can take a stock EG and absolutely smoke a C5, Boxster, ECT around a road course. Is the EG going to do an endurance race? Hell no, it does wear, but most events don't go on for several hours. FWD is a harder drivetrain to master, that's a given but with the advantages that they have inherently you can learn to use it to it's full potential which is quite high.

Alright, this is slightly off-topic but I can't resist, I have to tear this apart. FWD cannot change direction as well as RWD! And you're smoking some very illegal shit if you think a stock eg6 will smoke something like a boxster. I don't know of very many places that clock stock lap times but let's look at some of them, shall we? http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/powerlaps/index.shtml
that's top-gear's website and unfortunately they don't have a boxster on there. boxster (s) will lap close to a carrera but maybe a couple seconds slower. At 1.28.9 they have a Carrera S in the VERY wet. So I'll be EXTREMELY generous and say a Boxster would time a 1.30 - 1.33. They have a civic type-r (might be ek9, more sure it was a hatch at least) clocking a 1.36.5....in the dry. Same pro-driver in all cars of course. http://www.idsfa.net/miata/Solo2National.html
A boxster, stock, placed second in the 2000 SCCA Solo 2 National Championship and the following year it was 3rd place. Granted these were boxster-S's competing in superstock class but A and B stock class boxsters followed just under at 108. Now of course autocrossing deals with points, not times as a whole, and drivers matter. But you're talking about national championships, drivers here are all skilled as hell. The first FWD Honda to come close to that was an almost 113 and in-between were about 100 cars, many other boxsters. Now, the car that placed 113 was actually an Integra type-r, but given that an actual civic or crx didn't place 'till WAY further down the charts I figured I'd give you that as a cookie. FWD < RWD and AWD...you can't convince me or the people at porsche/bmw/ferrari...hell, you can't even convince the people at honda about that, otherwise they would have made their track cars FWD and they don't...they make their best cars RWD, for safety and driveability they make the rest of their models FWD.

Punisher
01-01-2006, 11:17 PM
I always find it funny when kids here try to tell a major corporation how to do business. The All-Trac died in the US because it was too expensive for the people who wanted one, and all the people who could afford it were buying minivans, pickups, and SUVs, just like what happened to the Supra, 300ZX, 240SX, RX-7, etc. If Toyota had continued the AT with the 6th gen, they would have had to have spent a massive sum in research and development in order to make the car continue to meet US emissions and safety standards (which would have choked the life out of the 3sgte anyway), and that would have pushed the price even further out of their buyer's price range, sales would have slowed to a trickle, maybe a dozen a month at best, and the car would be a financial pox on their spreadsheets. Don't make a claim about the "halo" effect, because the Celica was too pedestrain to be a halo car, and the AT was virtually unknown outside of Celica circles, anyway. Also, this was before the big WRC craze in the US so that eliminated their primary marketing tool.

I agree in being disappointed that Toyota hasn't got a real sports car in their US lineup anymore, but Toyota is also doing better than ever in the marketplace and is poised to firmly grab the #2 spot in the world, and they didn't need a sports car to do it.

Now IS the time for Toyota to return to sports cars (if they want to), but the Celica and the 3sgte aren't going to be a part of it.

I love your opening line, that is if it was directed towards me.. because you finished the rest of your post up in agreement with everything I said.. Even the part about the AT being so damned expensive.. the fight with GM and the possible returning of true sport cars once they get a good foothold in all sectors of the automotive marketing.

If I misunderstand your post and what I thought was a joust towards what I "said" then sorry.

Azzazzyn
01-01-2006, 11:21 PM
to put this to rest, who is better? Honda or toyota? Nissan.

alltracman78
01-02-2006, 12:58 AM
Alright, this is slightly off-topic but I can't resist, I have to tear this apart. FWD cannot change direction as well as RWD! And you're smoking some very illegal shit if you think a stock eg6 will smoke something like a boxster. I don't know of very many places that clock stock lap times but let's look at some of them, shall we? http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/powerlaps/index.shtml
that's top-gear's website and unfortunately they don't have a boxster on there. boxster (s) will lap close to a carrera but maybe a couple seconds slower. At 1.28.9 they have a Carrera S in the VERY wet. So I'll be EXTREMELY generous and say a Boxster would time a 1.30 - 1.33. They have a civic type-r (might be ek9, more sure it was a hatch at least) clocking a 1.36.5....in the dry. Same pro-driver in all cars of course. http://www.idsfa.net/miata/Solo2National.html
A boxster, stock, placed second in the 2000 SCCA Solo 2 National Championship and the following year it was 3rd place. Granted these were boxster-S's competing in superstock class but A and B stock class boxsters followed just under at 108. Now of course autocrossing deals with points, not times as a whole, and drivers matter. But you're talking about national championships, drivers here are all skilled as hell. The first FWD Honda to come close to that was an almost 113 and in-between were about 100 cars, many other boxsters. Now, the car that placed 113 was actually an Integra type-r, but given that an actual civic or crx didn't place 'till WAY further down the charts I figured I'd give you that as a cookie. FWD < RWD and AWD...you can't convince me or the people at porsche/bmw/ferrari...hell, you can't even convince the people at honda about that, otherwise they would have made their track cars FWD and they don't...they make their best cars RWD, for safety and driveability they make the rest of their models FWD.

No, your right on topic man.
100% correct.
There is only one place a FWD has the edge.
From a roll, going straight, in the dry.

jason
01-02-2006, 01:11 AM
No, your right on topic man.
100% correct.
There is only one place a FWD has the edge.
From a roll, going straight, in the dry.

My point exactly. Which leads me to my first comment about FWD being for drag-racing. Are they made for it? NO. Are they made for twisties? NO!! They're a manufacturer's middle-ground which doesn't excel in either category, they excel in talentless driveability, something the majority of car owners excel at! Their launches suck big fatty rhinoceros penis...guaranteed. The nice thing (if that can be said) about FWD dragsters with no torque (definition of a Honda) is that you don't have to worry about grip since you're not going to be torquing through your every gear. Slap a set of hoosiers on there, turbo the bitch, stiffen stuff to minimize wheel-hop and u're set. In drag-racing it's better to make torque up high so you can take advantage of long gear ratios and that's what honda's do. They're not MADE for dragging, but they'll take to it competitively better than tight twisties because they're making their peak torque and hp up high.

hobbie2k
01-02-2006, 01:55 AM
I love your opening line, that is if it was directed towards me.. because you finished the rest of your post up in agreement with everything I said.. Even the part about the AT being so damned expensive.. the fight with GM and the possible returning of true sport cars once they get a good foothold in all sectors of the automotive marketing.

If I misunderstand your post and what I thought was a joust towards what I "said" then sorry.

You were right on most of that stuff, it was the implication that slapping AWD and a 3sgte into the 7th gen would have produced a big seller that I was disagreeing with. It would be a very POOR seller because of all the reasons we both listed for the original AT's demise.

I'll agree that I'd like to see new sports cars from Toyota, but I won't pretend that I know how to run Toyota better than the people who are doing a brilliant job of it right now.

While my post was prompted by yours, it is directed to all the members out there who repeatedly try to tell us that a new AT or Supra would be a financial boon for Toyota. Why do they keep suggesting it? Because they like the cars and want to see them alive again, which I can empathise with, but would they BUY the cars? Not likely, and it's not likely that enough people will buy them to make these sports cars worth while.

Punisher
01-02-2006, 02:05 AM
I never said it would be a financial boom... But toyota is falling behind other companies like Dodge and Honda.. I just think they really pussyfied the 7th gen.

Even the 6th gen was a lead up to shit.. a 7afe.. sporty? um.. no..

5th gen was the last in the line of true Celica's if u ask me. 5SFE isn't much but it isn't a bad motor when it's in good condition. Plus you have the alltrac, and the platform which allows us to do a 3sgte swap easily.

Morwan
01-02-2006, 03:49 AM
Toysport has two good articles on the decline of Toyota for the enthusiast:

1985 (http://toysport.com/webpages/NewsInfo/Info/1985.htm)
2005 (http://toysport.com/webpages/NewsInfo/News/2005.htm)

IMHO, Toyota is... Dead to me. I just look at cars like the AE86, ST185, and even the ST205... And now I look at their current/future lineup, and I don't want anything they have planned. The IS500 looks interesting, but won't ever be within my price range. I'm going to go on playing with their sport compacts from the early 90's and late 80's, but I'm not going to buy a new Toyota. I'd rather give my money to Hyundai or Nissan.

I know affordable performance isn't the most profitable thing in the world.. But I don't give a shit about how much money a company is making when I buy a car. If I'm going to be putting down thousands (or tens of thousands of dollars) a car better meet MY requirements, not a corporation's.

hobbie: I disagree. How is that the Evo and the WRX are selling so well?

Dayze
01-03-2006, 06:31 AM
To Answer The Thing About The Nissans I Think The Nissans Are Damn Good Cars. The Pulsar Nx Se Of The Years 86-91 I Think Is A Very Similar Car Compared To What Else A Celica. Power Is Great Handling Is Great And As Far As Putting It Against A Gts Well The Nissan Will Smoke It. I Have 8 Of Them. But Thats Only Put Up To A Gts Not A Gt4. As Far As Hondas And Toyotas Go Id Definatly Say Toyota. Though Honda Has Been The Main Attraction Amung My Age And Generation Toyota I Beleive Is Way More Attractive In Design And Holds Its Own Way Better.

KoreanJoey
01-03-2006, 06:42 AM
http://www.strugglingreaders.com/images/jpegs/M%20Caps%20cover.jpg

alltracman78
01-03-2006, 02:21 PM
:laugh:

RallyK
01-03-2006, 02:41 PM
heeheehee

Celicaguy13
01-04-2006, 08:12 AM
I believe you can't actually get a straight "who is better" because both companies had different views of building cars. In the 90's Honda was busy making a bunch of B series engines that only produced a few that actually produced 200hp. Of course now with all the aftermarket support Hondas have, of course more tunners are going to be leaning towards Honda. They are good cars, but my del sol always gave me problems. I also hated the crowd, even when I didn't know squat about Toyotas and never owned one.

Toyotas in the 90's really only built either a "performance car" or a "economic car". All the Toyota Performance cars are Great and Historical. As far as our "Economic cars", since most of the fad is with honda concepts, It sort of makes us wish that our engines would "rev to 9krpm" or "had a massive aftermarket support". But the truth is, our eco engines wern't made to be performance engines. Of course i'm speaking about I4's here.

The Celica, Mr2, Supra and other performance cars made are owned "for the most part" by mature, smart, respectable people. The term "ricer" or "rice", is now usually used to describe most Honda owners and other kids because most of them try to follow the trend with their 5 dollar paying jobs buying stickers and 20 dollar ebay exhausts, with a 89 civic stock and sometimes they're Automatics!. Then trying to race a Real sporty car and get Upset and Confused of why they lost?!?!

In my opinion, its just the trend now of days. Honda owners are mostly focused on "Performance" and don't care what car or what it looks like as long as it moves fast and have no respect for anything else.

Toyota however has most of the style and mature drivers. If we wanted performance we just need to swap a 3s-gte and make a bunch of power and not worry about all the "ls/vtec" or "88 civic with a b18" and still be dynoing under 200whp, or the most important in my opinion.... "Getting your car jacked"

Of course this is my opinion and I'M not SAYING TOYOTAS ARE BETTER THEN HONDAS or viseversa"

nuclearhappines
01-04-2006, 08:46 AM
imho

reliability: toyota > honda ..toyotas are overbuilt
out of the box power to weight and handling ...etc honda > toyota
aftermarket options : honda > toyota

here's the catch... toyotas are overbuilt...so when you do finally mod it, boost it, spray it... then tend to take very very kindly to tons of power... whereas hondas are great in stock or stock ++ trim, but for serious mods you NEED a block guard, you need new valves that won't decide to jump into the combustion chamber, you need new sleeves

obviously designing a motor to be lightweight, and revvy makes a bit closer to the ragged edge than one that is built with commuter moms and a tankish mindset ...

Hondas always tickle my fancy... i'm a 5sfe advocate (Because it was my first and because there really is so much you can do to it/with it) but an H23Vtec , or even an h23vtec with a SC placed in a 5th or 6th gen would really RIP UP the streets !

h23vtec in normally aspirated trim can dyno 240wheel hp (and i have a such dyno saved here) and they are about the same mods that you would put on a 5sfe to get 170 or so hp ...

insane ... i could spray a 120 shot on that if it were a toyota motor and still feel safe (ie if the 5sfe could do that i could have a 360hp celica easy)...

that was 5sfe vs other I4's ...
when it comes to V6 honda has the power edge ...320hp TL ...etc vs the 220hp IS300 and 218hp ES300 etc ...
When it comes to V8's toyota is making 300hp V8s ...not saying that's not a good figure ...but i'd like to see toyota put out a 450hp v8...i mean if the 2zzge can make 180hp stock from a 1.6/1.8 (i forget) then an LS430 with a 4.3 litre should make around 430 hp stock !

look at the M5, look at the M6 ...

I was looking at the new toyota landfender freebounder... i dunno what it's called but it's a new SUV ...at a trade show and i about puked... stock v6 has about a 2" intake cone squirreling through the engine bay to what i'm sure was an undersized throttle body.

The headers where not nice 3-1's , they were some non equal length homologation of awkward shaped cast pipes (not tubes, not square tubing, some awkward trapezoidal thing that some engineer probably put together during his lunch hour) ...and followed with a tiny ass exhaust ...

There are alot more ways to make good wide torque curves than to choke a motor... i think we learned that back in the 1980s. i dunno what toyota is thinking...

their ads here are all about the ionova project (not exact on the name) where they will use local suppliers and manufacturers to develop vehicles with toyota standards based on local resources to maintain cost and deliver a more accurate product for that region...

my focus if i had worked for toyota would be to get these different teams to exchange ideas and promote these new 430hp v8's , these hybrid allwheel drive alltracs (or at least the return of the AWD camry to kick back at the subaru and the evo) ...the camry is already obviously getting edgier and shrinking in size ... i think they should put it on a diet, and couple the v6 with an AWD, and toss in a clutched S/C on top (this is all technology that toyota has tried and proven many times) it would cost 0 in R&D to produce this 330hp AWD camry ... and i'm sure it would eat back at the WRX/EVO market ...it would attract the execs that like the camry, just like they are attracted to the 320hp TL/CL TLS/CLS ..etc and it would attract the tuner crowd and the younger crowd being a serious , yet simple, and reliable toyota

i have high hopes on the camry with the celica being gone...the camry is the celica's 4 -door brother

Azzazzyn
01-04-2006, 01:59 PM
i was looking in a nissan nx2000, aka the se-r model with the sr20de in it, to rallyx it, what do you think about that? I was either that or another 240, cuz nissan has to be repped in the rallyx, down with the subaru's

JMadtrd
02-05-2006, 09:22 AM
I had a prelude once an 88 si aws I believe and an 87 gts rwd corolla, but in comparison between these cars, I'm more satisfied / the toyota, handling and acceleration wise. It all depends on how we like these two arch rival japanese car makers and theres alot of variations to liking them, etc. etc. But I'll stick / toyota, Amen.

Snafu
02-05-2006, 05:38 PM
I would say that the quality of the engines are about the same. There have been numberous high HP numbers comming from a b18c, as well as a 4age and others. I just think that the Honda crowd is willing to take more chances. They obviously have more aftermarket, they have more people building there blocks and turbocharging, more options for engine management, more people in the scene. It's harder to build a high hp Toyota, but it's not impossible by any means.

I have both a Celica and an Integra, and I'm getting very bored of the Celica. The Integra handles better, makes more power and is a lot more comfortable. Doesn't hurt that I run TurboEdit on 11 pounds ;)

Hiko
02-06-2006, 05:10 PM
I just think that the Honda crowd is willing to take more chances. They obviously have more aftermarket,

I disagree here. I think because toyota has jack for aftermarket, we have to think very creatively to get horsepower out of our cars. I see about the same number of creative tuners (the kind willing to take chances) coming from both sides. The problem is that there are tons more honda people. So per capita, there are more toyota people willing to take these sorts of risks. Plus, once one honda tuner pulls off some ingenious mod, there are plenty of people who work off the knowledge and repeat the mod.

I like honda for there reliablility and their n/a abilities. However, I prefer toyota for their more accessible (price wise) drivetrain selection, and frankly, they have a better overall crowd.

gt4wannabe
02-06-2006, 06:07 PM
Yup i would agree with hiko there... Toyota's have jack for aftermarket parts here.... the only car with real aftermarket parts here is the Supra.... everything else nothing. And yes the Honda scene is incredibly high. But things are so much easier to do with honda's than toyotas and nissans. I mean with all the B-series engines all you do is slap on a B20 Block with a B18 head, exhuasts, headers, and intake and you got yourself a low 15 to high 14 second car. Not that im hating on Honda's but yes I have incredible respect for Honda's and their VTEC but because of the damand and the growth and ease of tuning a Honda, the demand for parts are just so high that performance companies make and compete with one another to attract them towards teh company by lowering their prices for those High school honda owners... and other honda enthusiasts. Me personally being 17 when i first bought my car.... I looked into honda and said yeah they are easy fix and easy be fast cars. But i personally didn't get one because if you're fast; people are going to steal your car and tear your motor down. So thats when i looked into Toyota a bit more and found the Celica GT-S and All-tracs and got me a g00d deal too $1300 for a 90 GTS 5spd no rust no problems. And once again I agree with Celicaguy13 yes toyota sport car owners are more mature and would rather have a higher quality car compared to a Honda where its not so great interior and exterior wise but EXCELLENT under the hood for the bucks.

jai
02-06-2006, 08:03 PM
(this is call current, not historic info's, historical perspective, toyota hands down). IMO, honda makes some great 4bangers. If i were choosing an i4, a honda would it it. On the other hand, toyota makes some great v6's. There are people with over 200K miles on their 1mzfe's, with simple maint (dino oil changes). Thats awesome! Not too many honda v6's can brag about how smoothly they run past 200K miles.

GRUMPY514
02-06-2006, 09:57 PM
Honda of course wins the medal for the best N/A engines

Toyota for the F/I


Also have helped swap honda motors and they are EASY AS PIE

Just working on my brothers 1st gen AWD TSI Talon was a fucking PAIN in the ass.

Toyota comes right along besides it with the 3sgte and working on it. Espically in a MR2

alltracman78
02-07-2006, 01:52 AM
imho

reliability: toyota > honda ..toyotas are overbuilt
out of the box power to weight and handling ...etc honda > toyota
aftermarket options : honda > toyota

here's the catch... toyotas are overbuilt...so when you do finally mod it, boost it, spray it... then tend to take very very kindly to tons of power... whereas hondas are great in stock or stock ++ trim, but for serious mods you NEED a block guard, you need new valves that won't decide to jump into the combustion chamber, you need new sleeves

obviously designing a motor to be lightweight, and revvy makes a bit closer to the ragged edge than one that is built with commuter moms and a tankish mindset ...

Hondas always tickle my fancy... i'm a 5sfe advocate (Because it was my first and because there really is so much you can do to it/with it) but an H23Vtec , or even an h23vtec with a SC placed in a 5th or 6th gen would really RIP UP the streets !

h23vtec in normally aspirated trim can dyno 240wheel hp (and i have a such dyno saved here) and they are about the same mods that you would put on a 5sfe to get 170 or so hp ...

insane ... i could spray a 120 shot on that if it were a toyota motor and still feel safe (ie if the 5sfe could do that i could have a 360hp celica easy)...

that was 5sfe vs other I4's ...
when it comes to V6 honda has the power edge ...320hp TL ...etc vs the 220hp IS300 and 218hp ES300 etc ...
When it comes to V8's toyota is making 300hp V8s ...not saying that's not a good figure ...but i'd like to see toyota put out a 450hp v8...i mean if the 2zzge can make 180hp stock from a 1.6/1.8 (i forget) then an LS430 with a 4.3 litre should make around 430 hp stock !

look at the M5, look at the M6 ...

I was looking at the new toyota landfender freebounder... i dunno what it's called but it's a new SUV ...at a trade show and i about puked... stock v6 has about a 2" intake cone squirreling through the engine bay to what i'm sure was an undersized throttle body.

The headers where not nice 3-1's , they were some non equal length homologation of awkward shaped cast pipes (not tubes, not square tubing, some awkward trapezoidal thing that some engineer probably put together during his lunch hour) ...and followed with a tiny ass exhaust ...

There are alot more ways to make good wide torque curves than to choke a motor... i think we learned that back in the 1980s. i dunno what toyota is thinking...

their ads here are all about the ionova project (not exact on the name) where they will use local suppliers and manufacturers to develop vehicles with toyota standards based on local resources to maintain cost and deliver a more accurate product for that region...

my focus if i had worked for toyota would be to get these different teams to exchange ideas and promote these new 430hp v8's , these hybrid allwheel drive alltracs (or at least the return of the AWD camry to kick back at the subaru and the evo) ...the camry is already obviously getting edgier and shrinking in size ... i think they should put it on a diet, and couple the v6 with an AWD, and toss in a clutched S/C on top (this is all technology that toyota has tried and proven many times) it would cost 0 in R&D to produce this 330hp AWD camry ... and i'm sure it would eat back at the WRX/EVO market ...it would attract the execs that like the camry, just like they are attracted to the 320hp TL/CL TLS/CLS ..etc and it would attract the tuner crowd and the younger crowd being a serious , yet simple, and reliable toyota

i have high hopes on the camry with the celica being gone...the camry is the celica's 4 -door brother


I think alot of the problem is Toyota is becoming "Americanized"....
At least over here.
Not 100%, but they are building bigger and not necessarily more efficient.