its called direct injection folks
and I think it's W/A, so somewhat intercooled

 

Its got a little liquid/air intercooler. Its actually really easy to overlook because the charge pipe runs behind the engine and the intercooler is tucked up under the intake manifold.
Im not sure if its using engine coolant or if it has its own heat exchanger and fluid.



I think most of these engines are running port injection under load and only using the direct injection for cruise and light load. Could be wrong though.

I bet the engines do probably have some crazy quench though.

 

 

 

I've no experience with the 200t setup, but judging from their 4s setup on the twins it actually switches in various places/loads if/when needed.

And yeah the way DIT pistons are designed, it's a whole nuther ballgame that doesn't require fat afr to keep it together. way over my head

 

Yep, at first some of the guys going after big power were plugging the DI ports on the twins because they couldn't figure out the tables and proper way to tune.

Then, like the N55 in my BMW it's DI only. So here in about 5-10k miles I get to do the walnut blasting of the intake manifold.

 

 

Until they power a non fail wheel drive car, no one will care

 

Are you just talking steady state on the highway? Or actually like most people's commutes that go through neighborhoods, surface streets, bumper to bumper traffic, etc?

 

 

 

 

the new turbo motor in the accord is better. pretty much does what the v6 was doing.

 

I was curious about the new-gen Accord, particularly since it's still offered with a standard. I stopped by a dealer last week and they actually had one in stock and offered a test drive. I couldn't wail on it, for a couple of reasons:

1. Mechanical empathy precludes me abusing an engine with only delivery mileage
2. It was -20, the roads were still atrocious from a recent snowfall, and the car was on all-seasons

Still, it was an interesting experience, not least because I could row my own. The 2.0 liter engine is a detuned version of the one in the R and it runs on regular gas. Torque down low was little soft, but boost builds quickly and the car pulls strongly through the mid-range. While I didn't redline it, there was no discernible rolling-off of power at the top end. I did notice a bit of vibration at around 2,500-3,000 rpm but couldn't say if it was poor NVH control or a wheel out of balance due to packed snow. The transmission itself was just fine - Honda slick with decent clutch feel.

As for the rest of the car, it was a mixed bag. The "Sport" version (which is what your get if you want a manual) had some interesting variation on cloth seats. It was more akin to the top layer of a wetsuit but it was grippy and will probably wear like iron. The interior design was well done, with a digital dash and a prominent screen perched on the dash (albeit better integrated than most). Back seat room was cavernous - when "sitting behind myself" I had 6-8 inches between my knees and the front seat. Styling was okay, with the most controversial feature being the, uh, prominent front beak. Oh, and it's WWD.

Still, it would be a great cross-country touring car. I'm glad that Honda still offers a standard and I hope that enough people opt for one so that it'll continue in the next generation.

 

Hey some of us enjoy struggling endlessly with fail wheel drive

 

if you can stomach how ugly it is.

Toyota and Honda built boring plain cars for so long, they don't know how to keep up with kia and Hyundai -- rofl.

 

Umm, the toyobaru is not boring

 

And apparently the new Civic Type R doesn't even need AWD to compete with the Focus RS and all it's fancy drivetrain tricks.

Toyota is also working with BMW on a Supra/Z4 replacment to have a shared chassis.

Not like the old days, but it's coming around.

 

So exactly what my Fit gets. But with more everything. Sounds nice.