Headline I thought I'd never see

On 03/24/2012 04:59 AM, Tegger wrote:
> "David E. > wrote in news:1e3fcf7e-eecb-
> :
>
>> Honda V-6s have possibilities in a sportier car. They've increased
>> rated HP in the last couple years and could probably get more if they
>> tune them like Acura does.
>>
>> A Honda V-8 would be an interesting motor, if they did it.
>>
>
>
>
> A number of years ago Honda officially stated that they would never made a
> V8

and yet they made cvcc heads for g.m.'s v8's when they were trying to
get g.m. to pick up their cvcc emissions technology.


> becuase they didn't think V8s were "green" enough.
>
> But then around the same time they also said they'd never make their V6 any
> bigger thean 3.0 liters, so...
>


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

jim beam > wrote in :

> On 03/24/2012 04:59 AM, Tegger wrote:
>> "David E. > wrote in
>> news:1e3fcf7e-eecb-
>> :
>>
>>> Honda V-6s have possibilities in a sportier car. They've increased
>>> rated HP in the last couple years and could probably get more if
>>> they tune them like Acura does.
>>>
>>> A Honda V-8 would be an interesting motor, if they did it.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> A number of years ago Honda officially stated that they would never
>> made a V8
>
> and yet they made cvcc heads for g.m.'s v8's when they were trying to
> get g.m. to pick up their cvcc emissions technology.
>
>
>> becuase they didn't think V8s were "green" enough.
>>
>> But then around the same time they also said they'd never make their
>> V6 any bigger thean 3.0 liters, so...
>>
>
>

IMO,a sporty small car does not need a V-6 or V8.
4 cylinders ought to do it nicely. if your small car needs more than a 4-
banger can reliably develop,your car is too heavy.

Or are you discussing "supercars"? corvette-class? drag racers?

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

On 03/24/2012 09:40 AM, Jim Yanik wrote:
> jim > wrote in :
>
>> On 03/24/2012 04:59 AM, Tegger wrote:
>>> "David E. > wrote in
>>> news:1e3fcf7e-eecb-
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Honda V-6s have possibilities in a sportier car. They've increased
>>>> rated HP in the last couple years and could probably get more if
>>>> they tune them like Acura does.
>>>>
>>>> A Honda V-8 would be an interesting motor, if they did it.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A number of years ago Honda officially stated that they would never
>>> made a V8
>>
>> and yet they made cvcc heads for g.m.'s v8's when they were trying to
>> get g.m. to pick up their cvcc emissions technology.
>>
>>
>>> becuase they didn't think V8s were "green" enough.
>>>
>>> But then around the same time they also said they'd never make their
>>> V6 any bigger thean 3.0 liters, so...
>>>
>>
>>
>
> IMO,a sporty small car does not need a V-6 or V8.
> 4 cylinders ought to do it nicely. if your small car needs more than a 4-
> banger can reliably develop,your car is too heavy.

indeed.

<http://www.theoldone.com/articles/Larryscivic/Larrys_Civic.htm>

and then of course, you have the more readily available evo's and wrx's...


>
> Or are you discussing "supercars"? corvette-class? drag racers?

i'll go up to sears point on occasion and watch the weekend guys test.
it's a "real" windy circuit, not that oval crap, and it's fun when you
see a tricked prelude or integra wipe the floor with italian or german
money.


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Jim Yanik > wrote in
4:


>
> IMO,a sporty small car does not need a V-6 or V8.
> 4 cylinders ought to do it nicely. if your small car needs more than a 4-
> banger can reliably develop,your car is too heavy.
>
> Or are you discussing "supercars"? corvette-class? drag racers?
>



The sorts of vehicles Toyota and Nissan produce with V8s. Honda made an
explicit decision not to participate in those market segments, and not to
produce a V8.

Honda's official reason was that they didn't think V8s were "green" enough,
and that they could achieve the same objectives using a "greener" V6. The
old press releases are out there somewhere, I'm sure.

When Honda finally did make a pickup, it used a V6.

And thus they never did give Acura a V8 to compete with Lexus models that
are so equipped. From a competitive perspective, that may have been a
mistake: A RWD V8-powered RL might have been a viable competitor to Lexus
instead of the slow-selling dud that was the V6 RL.


--
Tegger

On 03/24/2012 04:28 PM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In >,
> > wrote:
>
>> And thus they never did give Acura a V8 to compete with Lexus models that
>> are so equipped. From a competitive perspective, that may have been a
>> mistake: A RWD V8-powered RL might have been a viable competitor to Lexus
>> instead of the slow-selling dud that was the V6 RL.
>
> Agreed overall, except for the RWD part. The current AWD platform would
> be fine, but absolutely they needed to plug a V8 in for competitive
> reasons.

why? why are we absolutely fixated on v8's? i've lived in europe and
/everywhere/ you have small little 4-bangers, and sometimes 6's doing
everything we do in v8's. the only difference is that they don't seem
to have a problem with the concept of using more than one ratio in their
transmission. we seem to have the bizarre mentality that once the
vehicle is rolling, we should be able to climb mountains, with a trailer
and 6000lb boat attached, without ever shifting gear. it's completely
incomprehensible to me.


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

cameo wrote:
> On 3/21/2012 3:54 PM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>> Reality bites, don't it?
>>
>> But reality it is, and reality is what Honda has to live with.
>
> Elmo is on fire again. ;-)
>


....and probably rightly so. Only thing is I think that the mojo was
lost beginning with the '84 models though I must concede that a good
part of *that* was due to guv'ment interference..

JT

JRStern wrote:
>
> Hey, I actually saw two Volts on the road today, setting a new
> American record.



<snicker>

Let's see... The Volt cost $45K and has a 40 mile range

The Nissan Leaf cost $35K and has a 100 mile range

Hmmmmmmmm

JT

On 03/25/2012 04:39 AM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In >,
> > wrote:
>
>> <snicker>
>>
>> Let's see... The Volt cost $45K and has a 40 mile range
>>
>> The Nissan Leaf cost $35K and has a 100 mile range
>>
>> Hmmmmmmmm
>
> <snickersnort>
>
> Let's see... The Volt cost $45K and can be filled with, and run on,
> gasoline available at any of thousands of gas stations no more than a
> few miles apart anywhere in the country--said fillup taking no more than
> a few minutes. This makes it a real car, useful for anything a four
> seat car like that needs to do.
>
> the Nissan Leaf costs $35K and is tethered to hours of electrical
> charging to make each 100 mile trip.

price on the base prius is ~$30k. better then either of them.



>
> Hmmmmmmm.
>
>
> You remind me of those troglodytes 15 or so years ago who made fun of
> the small AWD car-based SUVs--OK, small tall wagons--that Japan Inc was
> beginning to bring out, such as the CRV. "That ain't no four wheeler!"
> they'd all cry, laughing to themselves. They seriously thought that
> driving all four wheels meant, by definition, crawling over rocks at
> half a mile per hour. They were too dense to grasp that there might be
> other reasons to drive all four wheels, not to mention other
> technologies not spelled J-E-E-P.
>
> In other words, they were comparing apples and oranges, and the laugh
> was on them.
>
> You're doing the same thing. You're comparing a pure electric car to a
> plug-in hybrid, and just because they share one function--being able to
> run on electric motors without a gasoline engine engaged or
> spinning--that doesn't mean they actually compare to one another.
>
> Get a ****ing clue.


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

On 03/25/2012 03:52 PM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In >, jim >
> wrote:
>
>>> the Nissan Leaf costs $35K and is tethered to hours of electrical
>>> charging to make each 100 mile trip.
>>
>> price on the base prius is ~$30k. better then either of them.
>
> absolutely. But for usefulness, both the Prius and the Volt are way
> more suited to everyday life than the Leaf could ever hope to be.
>
> Also, isn't the *base* Prius significantly less than that?
>
> My '07 base (as in, so base the dealers didn't carry that model) was
> something like $22K. Surely, it hasn't gone up that much since.

here in kalifornistan, particularly the bay area, there's not a lot of
competition. and the prius is extremely popular. neither work for good
pricing.


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

"jim beam" > wrote in message
...
> On 03/25/2012 03:52 PM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>> In >, jim
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> the Nissan Leaf costs $35K and is tethered to hours of electrical
>>>> charging to make each 100 mile trip.
>>>
>>> price on the base prius is ~$30k. better then either of them.
>>
>> absolutely. But for usefulness, both the Prius and the Volt are
>> way
>> more suited to everyday life than the Leaf could ever hope to be.
>>
>> Also, isn't the *base* Prius significantly less than that?
>>
>> My '07 base (as in, so base the dealers didn't carry that model)
>> was
>> something like $22K. Surely, it hasn't gone up that much since.
>
> here in kalifornistan, particularly the bay area, there's not a lot
> of competition. and the prius is extremely popular. neither work
> for good pricing.
>
>
> --
> nomina rutrum rutrum

The bay area is a world unto itself.