R18 is plenty fast for me.

[ryker]

Originally Posted by habitat

Your beloved "flat torque curve" is due to the performance cam switch. Maybe you failed to realize that 100% of dyno charts show torque tapering down after it's intersection with the HP curve @ 5252rpm? So if you can imagine the K20Z3 using only the performance cam profile from 0rpm-8000rpm, you'd see the max torque peak sooner then take a dip at 5252RPM. Why? MATH BUDDY.

Power refers to Horse power. Torque refers to rotational force. Drive an old Diesel mercedes, you'll get it through your head why HP and Torque figures complement one another.

Class is about to begin:

Originally Posted by ryker

Accelerating a Car

Newton's second law of motion states that the acceleration of a body is related to the force being applied and the mass of the body, as seen below:

Newton's second law of motion. A greater force or a lower mass will result in a greater acceleration.


In order for there to be any acceleration, the force must be applied at the same speed that the object is traveling, for a non-zero length of time. A force being applied at a certain speed for a period of time is power, therefore, the acceleration force on a moving object is determined by the power being applied at that speed.

The wheels receive torque and rotational speed from the engine, and lay down a force onto the pavement. It is this force which accelerates the vehicle. The car's speed is determined by the rotational speed of the wheel.


The acceleration of a moving car is equal to the power divided by the speed and the mass. The product of speed and mass is known as momentum.

The acceleration force of a car comes from the torque at the wheels. This is why the acceleration is often calculated from engine torque by using the large formula seen below:


The acceleration force can be calculated by passing the engine torque through the entire drivetrain to the road.




The acceleration force can be calculated by passing the engine torque through the entire drivetrain to the road.



If the speed of a car and the power of its engine is known at a given instant, the force of acceleration can be calculated without knowing anything about the drivetrain gearing, tire diameter, or even the engine torque, as demonstrated below using imperial units:

When the power and speed are known, the acceleration force can be calculated directly without knowing anything about the drivetrain.



The torque method and the power method will both produce the same results, as seen in the example below.



The calculated acceleration force is the same when using the torque method or the power method.

Shaft power is the product of shaft speed and torque, and the speed and torque can be altered proportionally using gears. (Honda matched this perfect on the Si) If we want to apply a lot of torque to a shaft that is rotating, a lot of power is needed. The more power the better. However, the power must be accessible from all vehicle speeds, which can only be accomplished by producing a lot of torque throughout the rev range, or by having a transmission with many gears. (try 6th gear WOT at 70mph then downshift to a higher alter gear like 3rd) It is this fact that has spawned phrases like "Torque is King", or "Horsepower sells cars, but torque wins races", which can be misleading. Torque on its own isn't useful in accelerating a vehicle, because it is not at rest; it is moving. Therefore, power at the wheels is what matters. Cars are often described by their power-to-weight ratio, not their torque-to-weight ratio.
The vehicle with the largest average acceleration is the one that has the largest average force going to the pavement through a wide range of speeds. Which is why a turbo car or v8 is easier to drive than the low torque 4 bangers.

" Peak power sells cars. High average power wins races. "


Honda knows this and does an awesome job on BOTH the r18 and Si by providing a flat torque band that is useable throughout the entire RPM range and by using a close ratio 6-speed in the Si.

[ryker]

Originally Posted by xheartcore_boyx

Since i signed up in the website,100% of posts about R18 includes people with Si (which is the majority..) insulting R18 owners and their cars clearly,for being "slow".

Mr. Si owner, your car is NOT fast,

your car IS faster than the R18 sure,but that doesnt give you the rights to help you feel fast and not regret your purchase...by insulting the R18 !

your car will never ever beat any "sporty" car out there..so please chill and stay cool with others,its not expensive,its not fast..simply a CIVIC+Some power .

SI = sport injected not Sport inspired. Key word is injected and Civic. It's a fun car for sure - without any doubt or question. It's still a Civic.

[DRMex06]

Honestly, the R18 is plenty fast for me.

I'm 18 living in New Jersey. I've had my 06 Civic EX Coupe since July 2006. This car is definately plenty fast for someone who was just learning to drive stick and was getting their first car, myself.

I have driven several R18s and a couple SI's; I prefer the R18 for everyday driving, being that I commute to NYC for work everyday. The SI definately has a sportier feel for those who prefer performance.

The civic in the end is great on gas, sporty, and extremely cheap considering what the EX and SI trim levels offer. (350-watt sound system w/ sub, moon roof, power windows, ect.) Those who are sports enthusiasts opted for the SI.

I'm enjoying my EX and the lower insurance costs, and at the end of the day it gets me from point A to B like everyone elses car. Doesn't matter how fast I get there, I'm in no rush lol.

Comparing the DX/LX/EX to an SI is like comparing the new BMW 128i's to the 135i's. Different engines for different types of drivers. And whoever says anyone with an EX couldn't afford an SI is pretty ignorant, since the SI was only 2k more than my EX. That would have made an approximate $60 difference on monthly payments lol.

(not directed at anyone, just my thoughts on the subject.)

[habitat]

Originally Posted by ryker

Class is about to begin:



Shaft power is the product of shaft speed and torque, and the speed and torque can be altered proportionally using gears. (Honda matched this perfect on the Si) If we want to apply a lot of torque to a shaft that is rotating, a lot of power is needed. The more power the better. However, the power must be accessible from all vehicle speeds, which can only be accomplished by producing a lot of torque throughout the rev range, or by having a transmission with many gears. (try 6th gear WOT at 70mph then downshift to a higher alter gear like 3rd) It is this fact that has spawned phrases like "Torque is King", or "Horsepower sells cars, but torque wins races", which can be misleading. Torque on its own isn't useful in accelerating a vehicle, because it is not at rest; it is moving. Therefore, power at the wheels is what matters. Cars are often described by their power-to-weight ratio, not their torque-to-weight ratio.
The vehicle with the largest average acceleration is the one that has the largest average force going to the pavement through a wide range of speeds. Which is why a turbo car or v8 is easier to drive than the low torque 4 bangers.

" Peak power sells cars. High average power wins races. "

What does any of this have to do with what I said? OKAY I understand, You're very good at copy/paste... you must even know the keyboard shortcuts!

Honda knows this and does an awesome job on BOTH the r18 and Si by providing a flat torque band that is useable throughout the entire RPM range and by using a close ratio 6-speed in the Si.

Still you stand by Honda as if it were god. I get it, you like the fact that our engines have flat torque curves, it's a wonderful to have 90% of your torque from 1RPM. What you seem to block out in all your misconstrued torque talk is the fact that our engines have little to no torque to begin with.

[melomood]

Originally Posted by ryker

The Si is a Sport Inspired Civic. Key word is inspired and Civic. It's a fun car for sure - without any doubt or question.

SI = sport injected not Sport inspired.

[trickyazn]

Originally Posted by IceWindius

Bwaaha hah. Oh man, im sorry kiddo but you lost all credibility for that comment, welcome to ignore land.

keep your ignorance going buddy since this was not cars.com comparison, its THEIR own tests which YOU cannot provide. why would a high traffic website used for their tests, spec sheets, and research give out false quarter mile times on a econo car? buddy you can't win this debate without evidence, sorry buddy YOU lost credibility.

[melomood]

Originally Posted by trickyazn

keep your ignorance going buddy since this was not cars.com comparison, its THEIR own tests which YOU cannot provide. why would a high traffic website used for their tests, spec sheets, and research give out false quarter mile times on a econo car? buddy you can't win this debate without evidence, sorry buddy YOU lost credibility.

Ice is a loser... lol

[louieinyo]

I love my ex,but its slower than stephen hawking in a snow storm.

[trickyazn]

Originally Posted by melomood

Ice is a loser... lol

seriously.. I should just stop replying to him before his rep goes down the drain huh?

[habitat]

Originally Posted by louieinyo

I love my ex,but its slower than stephen hawking in a snow storm.

Some people are offended by tasteless humor, however, I am a fan of stephen hawking jokes. kudos to you!

[ryker]

Originally Posted by habitat

Weight/Power ratio:
Civic LX auto = 2718lbs / 140hp = 19.41
Honda Odyssey = 4385 lbs / 244hp = 17.97

With the above facts, we can conclude that the R18 is potentially slower than a Minivan in a straight line.

potentially slower ??

Originally Posted by ryker

The math is not that simple you can't just use one single peak number and the weight.

The r18 has a nice flat torque band and a 6800rpm redline which is why it can out perform other cars with same peak power of 140hp. Also why the Si can out do the GTI which has more power and torque peak.

The math requires measuring each gears output with the correct RPM dyno spec and the weight of the car.

Originally Posted by habitat

No, it is that simple, 3.5 liter SOHC motor 244 hp @ 5750 rpm/240 ft-lbs. @ 5000 rpm. It has more power and gets it sooner, and even weighing in at more than 2 tons, it has a better weight to power ratio than the Civic.
All I'm saying is it is slower than a minivan, take it how wish... it's fact.

Originally Posted by habitat

Why? MATH BUDDY.

.

Originally Posted by trickyazn

08' Odyssey:
0-60 mph 8.50 seconds
1/4 mile 16.39 seconds at 88.41 mph

07' Civic:
0-60 mph 7.92 seconds
1/4 mile 16.14 seconds at 89.57 mph

per Cars.com.

I retract my previous statement, Its VERY possible the civic can lose, now believe it.

potentially slower?

Originally Posted by habitat

But when I used the Odyssey for comparison, I pitted it against an Automatic Civic EX which looks more like this...
Civic EX 5A
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 17.1 @ 81.7


08 Odyssey Touring
Quarter-mile acceleration, sec. 16.9
Quarter-mile speed, mph 82.4


So yea, the R18 is slower than the Odyssey... but it's nothing to get all bent out of shape about.

Still think its potentially slower?

Originally Posted by habitat

What does any of this have to do with what I said?


Still you stand by Honda as if it were god. I get it, you like the fact that our engines have flat torque curves, it's a wonderful to have 90% of your torque from 1RPM. What you seem to block out in all your misconstrued torque talk is the fact that our engines have little to no torque to begin with.

The issue is you stated some 2nd grade level math or peak HP to weight. Some 1960's car magazine crap. The real math involves the average g-force that can be pulled in the car via each gear and the RPM range of the gear untill the desired MPH is reached. Which is why the Civic with a good amount less peak power/pounds ratio is able to keep right with the more peak power car. Had the r18 came with just 5 more hp it would still have less power/pounds ration and be quicker. Or if the r18 had tighter gears.

No Honda is not god of cars. I actully like German cars! Sold my 340ft/lbs VW TDI for the r18, so I am fully aware the naturally aspirated r18 has little torque. Had I not known that fuel prices would have been so high I would have bought a used c43 or a near near GTI.

[Dickotine]

well sub 7second 0-60times for one of the best economy cars driving around on regular gas with a 1.8liter sohc engine isnt really all that slow, being that it only has between 120-123whp stock. Its pretty respectable, Just thing the mid 90's V-6 camrys needed 8.3seconds to get to 60mph with 200hp and 6 cylinders, We are bustin that down with much less power and some less weight, but with nothing to lose and everything to gain. Fastest car i ever driven was a 93' Corrado vr6 TT. It was dynoe'd at 581wps. Maxed out at 320-318km/h. Now that was fast. But the Civic is quick. Si's are pretty quick being they can beat 350z's with just intake and exhaust upgrades and a capable driver

[vetkiller]

Originally Posted by I Vtec, do you?

For one, ignore the guy you quoted. Only an idiot thinks the SI is legendary.

Secondly, don't let mags fool you. I don't care if the SI is .2 seconds faster 0-60, it's much, MUCH more fun to drive. That's why people like the SI for the most part.

You are completely wrong, I ran a R18 and was 3.5 cars ahead at 50mph. Also, an Si has more than just a better suspension, try beefed up wheel bearings and a limited slip differential. I ate up an RSX on a clover leaf the other day - why - he had no LSD and neither does the R18 econobox.

[ro.sniper]

Originally Posted by ryker

potentially slower ??












potentially slower?



Still think its potentially slower?



The issue is you stated some 2nd grade level math or peak HP to weight. Some 1960's car magazine crap. The real math involves the average g-force that can be pulled in the car via each gear and the RPM range of the gear untill the desired MPH is reached. Which is why the Civic with a good amount less peak power/pounds ratio is able to keep right with the more peak power car. Had the r18 came with just 5 more hp it would still have less power/pounds ration and be quicker.

No Honda is not god of cars. I actully like German cars! Sold my 340ft/lbs VW TDI for the r18, so I am fully aware the naturally aspirated r18 has little torque. Had I not known that fuel prices would have been so high I would have bought a used c43 or a near near GTI.

Dude you're my idol!

And for the rest of you stay in school, get an education, get a proper salary and if you don't like the Civic get something else. This is supposed to be a community of people with more or less on thing in common > A CIVIC

For now drive your CIVIC slow or fast, whichever side of the fence you are on.

I saw so many statement that are more like opinions or educated guesses rather then concrete math.

Why do you think companies have a R&D department? They put a lot of highly educated people to design the thing which they make.

And Ryker is just trying to prove this with some math, and as far as I know it really can not be disputed because it is concrete proof.

Conclusion = Odyssey < Civic R18

[Checoman]

I don't know why there's always these kind of threads , we don't have gearbox issues , we don't pay as much on gas AND they point to different markets / population segment

Outside the US prices for an EX is almost the same as the Si , and Si costs as much as the Mugen , it's always been like that
In many countries other than the US the advertising for them are
Sport Sportier
EX Si

We can make them look sportier , so does everyone else with any brand of car , you name it ... we have to learn to live knowing that there's always gonna be someone better or worse than you , but is harder to accomplish to the guys that think they're better than someone else ...

just my .02

[Implosive_Disgorgence]

Originally Posted by Checoman

I don't know why there's always these kind of threads , we don't have gearbox issues , we don't pay as much on gas AND they point to different markets / population segment

i have an r18, and filled up with my friends si, we were both on the gas light in our cars. we both filled up and his car cost a whopping 3-4 dollars more than mine (87 vs 93 gas)

3-4 dollars would not stop me from getting and si, so these gas statements have to go.

Im not trying to be a douche, im just saying its not a big difference.

[ironman1964]

Originally Posted by Implosive_Disgorgence

i have an r18, and filled up with my friends si, we were both on the gas light in our cars. we both filled up and his car cost a whopping 3-4 dollars more than mine (87 vs 93 gas)

3-4 dollars would not stop me from getting and si, so these gas statements have to go.

Im not trying to be a douche, im just saying its not a big difference.

Are you just factoring the difference in price of premium vs. regular? You also need to figure how many more miles the r18 went vs. the si.

[habitat]

Originally Posted by ryker

potentially slower ??

potentially slower?

Still think its potentially slower?

The issue is you stated some 2nd grade level math or peak HP to weight. Some 1960's car magazine crap. The real math involves the average g-force that can be pulled in the car via each gear and the RPM range of the gear untill the desired MPH is reached. Which is why the Civic with a good amount less peak power/pounds ratio is able to keep right with the more peak power car. Had the r18 came with just 5 more hp it would still have less power/pounds ration and be quicker. Or if the r18 had tighter gears.

No Honda is not god of cars. I actully like German cars! Sold my 340ft/lbs VW TDI for the r18, so I am fully aware the naturally aspirated r18 has little torque. Had I not known that fuel prices would have been so high I would have bought a used c43 or a near near GTI.

The math I used is very basic yes, it assumes many more variables than of the equations you've stated above. Still, you've stated no real mathematical calculations, rather pasted images from some how-to website. Furthermore, the variables shown in the aforementioned image are not applicable/accurate to the cars we're discussing.

That in itself is still beside the point.

The point is that an Fully loaded 08 Odyssey can outrun an Civic EX in a straight line when both equipped with an automatic transmission.

Why? Simple. I made the assumption that both cars use long life/low grip tires, both have economically tuned transmissions, and both have the weight and power distribution as stated by the reviewing websites. With those highly probable assumptions, all you need is 2 people with a set of feet to do a brake load launch and floor it. If all else equal, we can safely assume that, a simple weight/power ratio calculation equates to the PROBABILITY* that the fully loaded Odyssey is quicker in a straight line to 60mph and 1/4 mile than a Civic EX.

*i use this word on the account of my assumptions and to keep you guys from having a hissy fit

Then, I then proved my assumptions correct with further research. I've found these numbers from comparison tests made by