Highest Output 2ltr N/A engine

[pb02]

Originally Posted by melbzetec

Having driven one along the Great Ocean Road twice, I don't agree

Having owned and raced one I agree with you. You have to learn how to drive it. I owned mine for 3 years and never had a concern with the torque. You don't ride a bike and say that up to 6000rpm it was crap. All cars need a different style and technique to drive.

[melbzetec]

Steffo, from your description, I think there might have been something wrong with his engine. Doesn't remotely sound like my experience of the car

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by melbzetec

Steffo, from your description, I think there might have been something wrong with his engine. Doesn't remotely sound like my experience of the car

He got the car not long ago, its an 02 or 03 with something like 40,000 on it. Bought it off a family member, as far as I know, the car is in full working order.

[Perana]

Half of you didnt read the post.. he said N/A which means no turbo/s/c ;)

Steffo is right for most powerful production 2.0L being the S2000... But the 2.0 BDA when tuned can get similar power and has a much more usable powerband, and its a Ford! the Duratec 2.0 has shown an easyish 280HP when modded too...

[BadMac]

Originally Posted by BLKPhoon

I currently have a bet with a friend about the highest output 2ltr production engine.

I think its the Honda S2000 and after numerous Google, ask.com etc.. searchs I think this would be correct.

Does anyone know of a (standard production car only) N/A 2ltr engine that produces more than 177kw and 208nm???

Thanks

To be pedantic, do you mean exactly 2l or around 2l or upto 2l. The S2000 isn't exactly 2000cc, its 1997cc. So if you are allowing 2000cc and below then there are engines with better specific outputs (Mazda Rx8 1307cc rotary for one). Also how many had to be produced to be classed as production? If howver you want the engine generally considered to have the best specific output of approcimately 2l, then yes its the S2000 vtec motor.

[LO_ GHIA]

Originally Posted by mrnsx

running of memory the F1 engines are something like 3L v10 N/A engines or so that produce like 800 hp (thats engineering).

Formula 1 actually run V8's. 2.4L to be exact. They are putting out between 700-800hp this season. And within 5 years, ALL formula one teams will be running hybrid technology in the cars.

Back on topic, yes, the S2000 was/is the most powerful car in the N/A 2L class. Infact, i think it has the highest kw per litre of any N/A production car in the world!

[Dave_au]

Originally Posted by LO_ GHIA

Infact, i think it has the highest kw per litre of any N/A production car in the world!

Nah Rx8's 1.3L rotary would probably be the highest.

[MITCHAY]

Ferrari VS S2000? Talk about comparing a bananna to an apple Steffo.

[ThoR_]

VTEC kicks ***

[XR Martin]

Depends on your definition of production.
The Radical SR3 uses a 1.5L I4 (its based on a Suzuki bike engine) and makes 252hp, smashing the S2000's Hp/L figure.

They are street legal in the UK.

[Des]

Westfield Sport 2000 S 250hp
From the website:
"Westfield Sport 2000 S

The Engine and Gearbox
Powered by a four cylinder, sequential fuel injected, all aluminum Dunnell modified Ford i4 Duratec producing a massive 250BHP or 495BHP per ton which will rival any car in it’s class.

The engine is now bolted directly to the chassis using a crossbeam on the front face of the sump in a clubman style instead of the traditional pedestal rubber mountings; it is also fitted with extra bracing at the top front and a crossbeam at the lower rear end of the engine.

Fitted as standard is a Dry Sump System which helps protect the engine from oil starvation. This gives better ground clearance allowing the Westfield enthusiast to run a much lower ride height, lowering the cars centre of gravity.

The gearbox is a full competition specification aluminum six speed sequential that has straight cut dog gears all of which are interchangeable giving the driver of the car a choice of ratios and a quicker smooth gear change."

Also, don't rotaries get multiplied by two when compared against piston engines? Then, 1.3L = 2.6L so you'd need to look at the 10A only.

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

Ferrari VS S2000? Talk about comparing a bananna to an apple Steffo.

Yeah, a Ferrari who's engine was designed in 1994, based off the design of one from 1989, with no variable valve timing, no variable cam timing or variable anything. Just an engine, nothing extraordinarily special about it.

Compared to something a decade newer with variable valve and cam timing.... you'd expect all that technology to seriously help its low end and mid range. Obviously its not going to have the power of the Ferrari with 42.9% more capacity and twice the cylinders, but at least you'd expect that technology to be able to give it a manly mid-range. It hasn't got one. To me, its like a rottweiler that's be de-sexed. No bark, no bite. :

Plus, Honda have long modelled their vehicle and mechanical design on Ferrari's products. The original NSX strived to be a Ferrari F348tb, and did you see the Honda HSC concept of a few years back? That thing just screamed "I wish I was an Enzo!"

[brodfloyd]

Originally Posted by Steffo

Yeah, a Ferrari who's engine was designed in 1994, based off the design of one from 1989, with no variable valve timing, no variable cam timing or variable anything. Just an engine, nothing extraordinarily special about it.

Compared to something a decade newer with variable valve and cam timing.... you'd expect all that technology to seriously help its low end and mid range. Obviously its not going to have the power of the Ferrari with 42.9% more capacity and twice the cylinders, but at least you'd expect that technology to be able to give it a manly mid-range. It hasn't got one. To me, its like a rottweiler that's be de-sexed. No bark, no bite. :

Plus, Honda have long modelled their vehicle and mechanical design on Ferrari's products. The original NSX strived to be a Ferrari F348tb, and did you see the Honda HSC concept of a few years back? That thing just screamed "I wish I was an Enzo!"

Steffo, i thought you would know better than to run such utter crap out of your mouth like that.
Go sit in the corner and have a think about it. And that "oh its been 10 years and they have VTEC now" excuse, its rubbish.

And im not even gonna try the "If honda were using a flat plane v8, with more displacement and could charge over double for it etc" cos i know u'll be a smart alec

really, i thought u'd know better

[Bucket]

Originally Posted by brodfloyd

Steffo, i thought you would know better than to run such utter crap out of your mouth like that.
Go sit in the corner and have a think about it. And that "oh its been 10 years and they have VTEC now" excuse, its rubbish.

And im not even gonna try the "If honda were using a flat plane v8, with more displacement and could charge over double for it etc" cos i know u'll be a smart alec

really, i thought u'd know better

Woah...ease up there...its his opinion which He is entitled to.
You're doing 55 Posts a Year, Steffo does that In a week or two- and a lot of it is Useful.
Steffo contributes a lot of information to this Forum- so one could forgive him for saying something that isnt really offensive at all.
Get off your high horse.

[Piotr]

The S2000 has a 2L engine while the ferrari is 3.5. By default it will have more torque everywhere.

Originally Posted by Steffo

Its amazing how the Ferrari engine with no variable valve timing or any sort of magic like that, small displacement, short stroke, can feel so lively at any revs, and the Honda engine, with variable valve and cam timing is such a whizzy disappointment below any stratospheric RPM.

Honda may get some big HP/L numbers, but IMO, their engines are the opposite of special.

Because it costs a great deal more than a Honda and its a V8. In theory the crank only has to turn half the distance than a 4cyl, before the next "push" from ignited fuel vapour - better liveliness across the rev range.

For a massed produced car, hundreds of thousands daily driven world wide, the S2000 engine is something to admire, even with 4cyl shortcomings.

I believe Honda is the pinnacle of affordable 4cyl engine technology.

[blueoval]

Honda VTEC 2L FTW....yo!

[Steffo]

I never questioned that a 3.5 V8 is going to be more powerful then a 2.0 4-cylinder. That's obvious. But even for a 4-cyl, the S2k's bottom end and mid-range is non existant. My lowly Fiesta with an earth-shattering 146Nm @ 3000rpm from its non-VVT, N/A 1.6 starts picking up at about 3000 and carries its power on well to about 5000, then slowly starts dropping off.

The S2000 at 3000 isn't doing anything. Nor is it at 4000 or 5000. Unless you really wring its neck, anything and everything can beat you. That's not a very user-friendly engine if you ask me. Unless you want to constantly be revving it into its extremities to go anywhere?

Honda does make very civil, liveable, torquey and friendly to live with engines. They're just, unfortunately, not in any of their sports cars.

Originally Posted by brodfloyd

Steffo, i thought you would know better than to run such utter crap out of your mouth like that.
Go sit in the corner and have a think about it. And that "oh its been 10 years and they have VTEC now" excuse, its rubbish.

And im not even gonna try the "If honda were using a flat plane v8, with more displacement and could charge over double for it etc" cos i know u'll be a smart alec

really, i thought u'd know better

You thought I'd know better? Alrighty then. :

Originally Posted by blueoval

Honda VTEC 2L FTW....yo!

My VTEC kicked in yo!

[XR8-260]

Seriously, this thread was about whether the S2000 has the most powerful NA 2.0L and not about megabuck Ferrari V8s. If you like instant bottom end grunt get an XR6T, personal preference really. For those who love the high revving nature of the VTEC engine, the S2000 is friggin' awesome.

VTEC just kicked in YO! :

[kooky]

For those people claiming that a 13B(what ever renesis or other) is 1.3 litres is incorrect, the swept volume of a rotary is 2.6 litres ;)

[Piotr]

The s200 has around 80% of peak torque availible from 2k right to redline. Its not as gutless down low as people think. Its only the awesome top end that leads people to beleive they are gutless down low (But above 2k they produce more torque than the focus does at peak).

[ads]

Radical extreme sportcars in the UK have a naturally aspirated 1.5 litre producing 252 bhp - that's 188 kW - for their SR3. The SR3 has a curb weight of 500 kg. The turbo version produces 320 bhp. I'm sure you'll have no trouble getting to work on time, just depends on if you can get it registered and not scrape the driveway when you get home : .

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by Piotr

The s200 has around 80% of peak torque availible from 2k right to redline. Its not as gutless down low as people think. Its only the awesome top end that leads people to beleive they are gutless down low (But above 2k they produce more torque than the focus does at peak).

Like I said earlier, it makes 100kw at 5500rpm, just like a Civic, or a Focus or a Astra etc etc. Its not until the remaining 3000rpm does it start to boogie.

[locote]

EHHEEH civic..
not if its equiped with a integra typeR B18c
Good bye S2000
gota love power to weight

[Des]

Surfed all over last night looking for power figures but couldn't find the "actual" quoted numbers, but Caterham produced a street-legal Jonathan Palmer Special Clubman that basically had a lightly de-tuned Super Tourer engine installed. Can't remember the exact numbers but it was over 200kw (around 220 to 230+ I think) with a total wet weight of around 500 odd Kg. Street legal race car, love it.

[Bucket]

Originally Posted by kooky

For those people claiming that a 13B(what ever renesis or other) is 1.3 litres is incorrect, the swept volume of a rotary is 2.6 litres ;)

Correct! 2.6L 6 Cylinder Equivalent!

[EFFalcon]

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

Like I said earlier, it makes 100kw at 5500rpm, just like a Civic, or a Focus or a Astra etc etc. Its not until the remaining 3000rpm does it start to boogie.

maybe so... but with such a high RPM limit, gearing is way shorter.
they're a damn quick car for an n/a 2.0.

4.1:1 in the rear end & 3.1:1 First gear.... who cares if theres nothing under 3k.

[pb02]

Originally Posted by Steffo

The S2000 at 3000 isn't doing anything. Nor is it at 4000 or 5000. Unless you really wring its neck, anything and everything can beat you. That's not a very user-friendly engine if you ask me. Unless you want to constantly be revving it into its extremities to go anywhere?

Honda does make very civil, liveable, torquey and friendly to live with engines. They're just, unfortunately, not in any of their sports cars.

I had my S2000 for 3 years, it was my daily driver and was certainly very livable and friendly throughout it's entire 3 year span. I was averaging 25000kms + per year including track days and sprints. My times where always better than the Boxters, (including the S) Z3's and many higher priced cars.
Most of the other cars I competed with were not street legal and had to be trailered to events.

The engine is amazing, daily driving I never had to rev to it's extremities to do anything. If you don't think it's livable, then you obviously don't know how to drive....

[ebxr8240]

Originally Posted by mowog

But a triple rotor engine isnt a 4 Cycl...

Um ?? Where in first post it says anything about being 4 cylinders??
2 litre....