4.0 vs. 4.3

legacy2 · Post by **legacy2** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 8:37 pm

ok, so to sum it up, honda's dont make a lot of torque, but they only weigh like pretty much nothing so they dont have to make a bunch of torque, but its always more fun if you build the torque up your self by adding add-on's

Binford · Post by **Binford** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 9:04 pm

Why are we talking about Hondas?

scottzg · Post by **scottzg** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 10:41 pm

legacy2 wrote:ok, so to sum it up, honda's dont make a lot of torque, but they only weigh like pretty much nothing so they dont have to make a bunch of torque, but its always more fun if you build the torque up your self by adding add-on's

Hondas don't make a lot of torque, but it doesn't matter because they make peak torque at a high rpm, so it makes sense to stay in low gears and have peak torque multiplied by gearing. They don't make a lot of torque though, so at the low end where you don't have the gear advantage, the are kinda doggy.

It's hard to add torque through bolt ons, save forced induction, all you can do is shift where peak torque is.

entirelyturbo · Post by **entirelyturbo** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 12:00 am

Another problem no one has mentioned, inline-4's are not inherently balanced like our engines are. Therefore, the vast majority of manufacturers that use inline-4's also use balance shafts to try to counteract the unbalanced forces in the engine, and since the balance shaft is one more thing to turn, it is a parasitic power loss.

BAC5.2 · Post by **BAC5.2** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 10:56 pm

Isn't the Flat-4 not entirely balanced either? The only truly balanced engines would be Flat-8's and V12's?

I remember hearing someone talk about that, probably on here. Was it you Scott?

The not-weighing-a-ton thing, was because my honda that only makes 68lb-ft, is sitting in the frame of a CBR 600F4 motorcycle. It's not a civic.

THAWA · Post by **THAWA** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 11:14 pm

No engine is every truely balanced. And inherent balance only applys to a few orders of balance.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 11:15 pm

Our engines have balanced primary and secondary forces, but imbalanced moments.

Steve

scottzg · Post by **scottzg** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 11:20 pm

BAC5.2 wrote: I remember hearing someone talk about that, probably on here. Was it you Scott?

Yeah, i've mentioned it before. Inherently balanced engines are all flat engines, inline 6's, v12s, flat plane v8's, and some sort of 16, whose specifics elude me. That's not to say that just becuase its inherently balanced it will be smoother than another configuration, but it is likely to be the case. Fewer cyls usually = less smooth.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:14 am

Yeah, the balance on an I6 has to do with the crank angle, but I can't remember what that is.

Steve

entirelyturbo · Post by **entirelyturbo** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:31 am

I think it was Hardy or Scott who found a perfect website to show the way each engine design is balanced or unbalanced. Do either of you remember which one I'm talking about??

THAWA · Post by **THAWA** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:03 am

scottzg · Post by **scottzg** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:50 am

it was my post

scottzg · Post by **scottzg** » Tue Jun 28, 2005 7:11 am

found it
http://www.autozine.org/technical_schoo ... mooth1.htm

legacycentral bbs

A forum for 89-94 BC-BF(BJ) Legacy Owners and Fans

4.0 vs. 4.3