Repair-It

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcFcUg9iAvM

I was all set to hear a good argument for Honda over Toyota. He never made one. Most of his points are like 20-40 years old. And when his first major point was HP/liter, I kind of realized this wasn't going to be very credible. Oh well.

I think the biggest problem is no one knows what "best" means. I kind of assumed most reliable but he was clearly factoring like engineering and sort of cutting edge stuff in there.

The big problem with the argument is cutting edge stuff may seem "good" in the short term, but only time will tell if the thing holds up. Is a fancy but unreliable or short service life engine good? Ask GM about the Northstar.

Adam wrote:The big problem with the argument is cutting edge stuff may seem "good" in the short term, but only time will tell if the thing holds up. Is a fancy but unreliable or short service life engine good? Ask GM about the Northstar.

By "good" I mean produces lots of power (per litre?) and/or revs really high.

His argument was something like "I don't know about any reliability difference between the two so I will just say Honda has more interesting engine designs."

A perfectly valid opinion but hardly ground breaking stuff.

I have to say... I don't know the history behind the Supra, but from what I hear, that engine was pretty solid, and supported tons of aftermarket HP.

This seemed to support way more power than anything Honda did.

Yeah that's also true. Most of Toyota's engines are not interesting. Then again, most of Honda's engines are also not interesting. We'd almost have to just pick a decade and compare the two offerings. It is ridiculous to attempt a generalization and I was kind of hoping the video would have some kind of supporting evidence behind a sweeping generalization. Turns out, not really, he is an old mechanic and decided he likes Honda engines like 40 years ago. I know some old people like that at work (Toomey). And yet people complain that the only blind loyalty was to American cars.

Yeah that's also true. Most of Toyota's engines are not interesting. Then again, most of Honda's engines are also not interesting.

That's kind of what I was thinking. And to add, the Supra seemed way better of an extreme engine than anything I could think of from Honda, and I can think of more issues with some Honda stuff (leaking oil etc.) than catastrophic issues with Toyota, in general.

It is a huge disappointment that they didn't develop their own new Supra in my opinion.

kevm14 wrote:Most of Toyota's engines are not interesting. Then again, most of Honda's engines are also not interesting.

You're confusing the engine with the FWD cars they usually come in. Here are some engines that came in RWD cars:

This probably isn't the right forum for this (see what I did there?), but here are some things:
Toyota UZ engine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_UZ_engine
3 generations of this engine dating back to the LS400 (1989-2011 across various cars, trucks and SUVs, the SBC of JDM). They came in 4.0L, 4.7L and 4.3L variants. Aluminum DOHC so they are pretty light. These engines are strong out of the box and respond really well to boost, think 450WHP with stock heads/cam. See this series:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwIUolF ... gtd7s9sFZt

Toyota S engine, specifically the 3S-GE/3S-GTE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_S_engine
This 2.0L engine was made from 1985-2007 in various cars and SUVs. The later ones weren't imported here, so that's unfortunate. You want the 'G' head version, not the 'F' head version for maximum valve angle. Came with turbos on the 'T' engine. Strong out of the box and respond well to turbos. Later models had VVTI and such.

Toyota ZZ engine, specifically the 2ZZ-GE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_ZZ_engine#2ZZ-GE
Bob has one of these...

Toyota JZ engines. See Supra.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_JZ_engine
The internet says these are good for 600WHP on stock internals in the turbo variant. Not too shabby.

I can do some Honda engines, but don't feel like it.

The fun stuff with Toyota/Honda is engine swaps. Most of the large-displacement versions of engines are bolt-in in cars which came with the small-displacement version. Most of the FWD engines share similar mount layouts so swapping another family of engine in place doesn't require extensive fabrication.

Of course if you want a modern chassis of one of these manufacturers that is interesting, you might be out of luck, which I'm sure is where some of your opinion comes from.

Toyota JZ engines. See Supra.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_JZ_engine
The internet says these are good for 600WHP on stock internals in the turbo variant. Not too shabby.

I agree. Besides this car looking really nice, what really made these as popular as they were/are is the stock ruggedness to turbo to 6ooWHP from the factory. This is exactly what I am talking about when I say Chevy should make a base V8 Camaro with the truck 5.3. For the exact same reason that made the Supra famous to the tuner crowd.

It wasn't a complete slouch stock either though:

For the export model (America/Europe) Toyota upgraded the Supra turbo's engine (smaller, steel wheeled turbochargers, bigger fuel injectors, etc.). This increased the power output to 320 hp (239 kW; 324 PS) @ 5,600 rpm and 315 lb⋅ft (427 N⋅m) of torque @ 4,000 rpm. Upon launch in 1993

But the fact that in 1993 more boost gave it 600 WHP! That is crazy.

Granted, it wasn't as light as it looked:

3,285–3,461 lbs (turbo)

More fun facts:

The turbocharged variant could achieve 0-60 mph in as low as 4.6 seconds and 1/4-mile (402 m) in 13.1 seconds at 109 mph (175 km/h).[21] The turbo version was tested to reach over 285 km/h (177 mph) Drag coefficient is 0.31 for the naturally aspirated models and 0.32 for the turbo models but unknown with the rear spoiler.

In Camaro terms... 22 years later, the 1LE just beats that... (The ZL1 beats it by more)
2015 Camaro SS 1LE - Zero to 60 mph: 4.5 sec - Standing ¼-mile: 12.9 sec @ 111 mph
2012 ZL1 - Zero to 60 mph: 4.1 sec - Standing ¼-mile: 12.3 sec @ 119 mph

That's a long time later though.


In Grand National terms (6 years prior): https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/r ... buick-gnx/
Officially, Buick claims a 0-60 mph time of 5.4 sec for the GNX versus their Grand National number of 6.9. Through the quarter mile, the GNX clocks 13.4 sec to 104.0 mph against 15.7 at 97.5. Remember, however, that these are a manufac­turer's figures and are conservative to cover worst-case scenari­os with customers. For example, when R&T tested a Grand National, we got to 60 mph in 6.0 sec and through the quarter mile in 14.7 sec at 94.0 mph.

Even this, if you look at the GN numbers since the GNX was more of a specialty vice full production car 60 mph in 6.0 sec and through the quarter mile in 14.7 sec at 94.0 mph is definitely behind 0-60 mph in as low as 4.6 seconds and 1/4-mile (402 m) in 13.1 seconds at 109 mph.

If only Buick didn't give up after the GN/GNX.


It's like, the Supra happened, then Toyota totally gave up (like Buick?) on anything like this until maybe the LFA, but that isn't attainable...

They made the Supra in Japan through the 2002 model year, FWIW. After that, they only really had the ZZ-powered Celica up through 2006. Plus the Lexus GS, SC, and IS cars (and their foreign market equivalents the Aristo, Soarer, and the Altezza). The IS and GS are still made so Toyota (Lexus) never really exited the RWD market. Although most of the lower end models are AWD 4-cylinder automatics, so that kinda sucks.