Primaris said:Chevy used to call their "iron duke" pos I4, the 4 tec. It was call 4 tec long before honda came up with the vtec name. The Vtech name is use by a electronic company. What's my point? Don't believe marketing BS, it doesn't mean ****.
So who won the argument? Or was recess over?Kaduku said:Okay my friend is all saying "damn ford for trying to copy vtec blah blah" and I say "dude, it's not even close, we dont have the vtec thing that goes off at certain speeds/rpms" and he says "vtec has beena round since 1980 though...":thumbdown Anyone else wonder why it was called something close to vtec? even though vtec sucks? :lol:
focust05 said:sorry but honda si's are an easy kill for my '05 ST. honda has basically no torque in comparison to its hp rating. ive always viewed them as the most overrated engines these young kids babble about.
Actually that's MIVEC. (Which is ironic, because Mitsubishi Innovative Valve timing Electronic Control isn't all that innovative.)waynenewton said:dont forget mitsu's mi-tec
vvt (pronoucned vivftee)
The Ecotec is an awesome engine and will be a force to reckon with four-cylinder motorsport.mievil said:And he's not complaining about Chevy/Saturn copying with the Ecotec?
For the benefit of others who may not percieve your humor, nothing in a Zetec or Duratec "kicks in" valve-timing-wise as these two Ford engines have 'fixed' cam timing (with the exception of the SVT Zetec and the Mazda 2.3 Duratec which have variable intake cam timing).Just tell him that Ford didn't copy Honda because the VTEC kicks in at a totally different time than the Zetec or the Duratec. BTW, when exactly does the Z kick in? For that matter, at what point in the powerband does the Dura kick in?
Ah, that would teh doke. Less weight in the recip portion of DOHC valvetrain (no rocker arms).Second to lastly, what's better, soke or doke?
That's a valid point... It wouldn't be possible to do a cam-on bucket SOHC that is also crossflow... or if you did, the valves would really be at the wrong angle.Z63R said:Ah, that would teh doke. Less weight in the recip portion of DOHC valvetrain (no rocker arms).
I don't know if I'm entirely surprised that you'd be the one to catch that.Z63R said:
With no major disrespect to ZX3ST.... I'll take the general concensus of the automotive press over his opinion on the matter.Z63R said:Why do you disagree? It has a ton of factory support and makes decent power.
Is it not reliable? :dunno: Educamate me.
I am a Ford guy, so saying that is going out on a limb, LOL...
Well, the ecotec is a really modern, free revving engine (not unlike a duratec) which has a LOT of factory support (unlike duratec, sadly). He is right, they have already been proving themselves at the track. They have developed 'hydramatic' racing transmissions for them, many types of drag shocks, etc. And, they didn't hesitate to start dumping boost to these engines, whether it be supercharged in the production models, or turbocharged at the track. I saw a NOPI chick this summer named Brittney (she's even hotter that her car) running an automatic turbo ecotec into the low twelves, beating a CRX with an 11 foot traction bar like it was sitting still. Don't get me wrong, I hate Chevy's more than any person on this planet, but I've seen proof and substinance to what they have been saying about ecotec. Look for a 240 hp 2.2 version in the pontiac solstice (miata wannabe) late this year. (I did dust an SS supercharged the other day but that's another story). I'm glad that Dodge really underrated their motor as they all dyno 230ish and make probably 260 at the fly, so that I'm still ahead of these quick new cars coming out, like SS cobalt and civic si.ZX3ST said:I disagree...