European 1.5L Turbo Gets VTEC and Produces 201 bhp (vs 174bhp American) in 2016 Civic

[serif]

The 1.0T specifically states VTEC for intake side.

Maybe this information isn't accurate?

The 1.0l has VTEC on the intake, but the 1.5l doesn't, and they're calling both (and the 2.0l) VTEC TURBO.

Sponsored

 

[Ten10]

I wish it was that easy but I don't think that would make enough difference. I'm just thinking of all the LS Turbos vs GSR Turbos running around. GSR Turbo can make 350, LS-Turbo can probably make 310 on the same turbo/injector/exhaust combo. Of course the extra 1000RPM of the GSR helps, as does the higher compression pistons and oil cooled pistons...
No sadly I don't think it will be this easy.
One option, and I think you'll like where I'm going with this, is to bump the output of the TypeR engine to 360+... thus giving plenty of room for a 250-275hp Si! Hah - this is highly unlikely as well but we can dream right? The power of dreams.

We would all pray for that but definitely dreaming. Ford shocked everyone by announcing 345hp in the Focus RS and at a much cheaper vehicle there's no way the CTR will have more power. That would be truly market busting but fact is Honda does not need to make it that powerful. It's done so well already without competing on horsepower.

 

[Design]

One option, and I think you'll like where I'm going with this, is to bump the output of the TypeR engine to 360+... thus giving plenty of room for a 250-275hp Si!

The 9th Gen platform is plenty potent at 306 HP. Maybe a small bump to 310-320 for the 10th Gen. At that level most would struggle to gain an advantage anywhere except in a straight line. Suspension and chassis will continue to be the CTR's strengths.

I think we've established sufficient reasoning as to why the Euro market is getting smaller motors in different configurations. As mentioned earlier, there is a tax and efficiency benefit, unlike the US market.

 

[CaptK]

If the information is in fact true, two things are probably influencing this difference. 1. Europeans are paying more for their vehicles than Americans, especially if you consider the strength of the Euro (which is weak at the moment but still worth more than the dollar). This means Honda can add additional features such as VTEC...and 2. European fuel quality is higher than American fuel quality with consistent RON or Octane ratings. European manufacturers always struggle with the varied (and sometimes poor) fuel quality in the U.S.

Europeans pay more but for many reasons that don't really benefit Honda. Taxes and high insurance rates, emissions penalties etc. They usually pay more for equally spec cars than the US. I think it would be a mistake to offer a more powerful Si than the US. With the Type R noticeably missing from our market the Si has become the de facto performance Civic. Plus it hits the sweet spot price point for many who can't afford the Type R. Don't give us across the ocean envy theres been too much of that already.

 

[Shralper]

I think your right. I feel they need to have the Si very affordable and if they could get 215 hp and 215 torque out oF 1.5 T go for it car will be light. If you want a total bad a$$ car you have the type r

IMO the SI needs to finally be competitive with the GTI, WRX, Focus ST and future MazdaSpeed3. All those cars run in the $25-$30K range. The current SI, while maybe bit cheaper, can't compete with these cars in terms of power and performance. It's been left in a sort of No Man's Land. That must change if Honda expects to ever become relevant in this market segment, even if it means bumping up the price by several thousand. And having seen the beautiful new coupe and read about the new premium level quality of the new Civic platform, if they put a neutered 2.0T in the SI for around $28K fully loaded, it will *crush* the competition.

BTW, the Type R competes in a different market segment in terms of price and performance. Direct competitors are Golf R, WRX STI, and upcoming Ford RS.

 

[martyr]

IMO the SI needs to finally be competitive with the GTI, WRX, Focus ST and future MazdaSpeed3. All those cars run in the $25-$30K range. The current SI, while maybe bit cheaper, can't compete with these cars in terms of power and performance. It's been left in a sort of No Man's Land. That must change if Honda expects to ever become relevant in this market segment, even if it means bumping up the price by several thousand. And having seen the beautiful new coupe and read about the new premium level quality of the new Civic platform, if they put a neutered 2.0T in the SI for around $28K fully loaded, it will *crush* the competition.

Honda did the Si badge no favors either with the weak 9th gen offering, which I saw as an actual downgrade compared to the 8th gen Si. Sounds like Honda is trying atone for its 9th gen mistakes by making the CivicX better than anyone expected... so I have hope that they'll do exactly what you're calling for -- an Si that makes a leap in terms of performance (even if it costs more) so that it competes with those cars. If it does, just watch the press gush about it. The car will sell itself.

 

[firsthonda]

IMO the SI needs to finally be competitive with the GTI, WRX, Focus ST and future MazdaSpeed3. All those cars run in the $25-$30K range. The current SI, while maybe bit cheaper, can't compete with these cars in terms of power and performance. It's been left in a sort of No Man's Land. That must change if Honda expects to ever become relevant in this market segment, even if it means bumping up the price by several thousand. And having seen the beautiful new coupe and read about the new premium level quality of the new Civic platform, if they put a neutered 2.0T in the SI for around $28K fully loaded, it will *crush* the competition.

BTW, the Type R competes in a different market segment in terms of price and performance. Direct competitors are Golf R, WRX STI, and upcoming Ford RS.

Yea if they use 2.o T the car will definitely be a much more potent power train. I do kind of expect the car to be significantly more expensive then the last. As I thought the base models would have been. But you are right they need to make at least 240 hp out of Si and keep the weight below current caRs 3000 lb. Hears hoping the speculation ends today and it gets announced at sema.

 

[takemorepills]

I'll pay more for it. In a world of $38k Kia Optimas a $27-28k CivicX Si 2.0T would be a smoking good deal.

Make a Sport 1.5T Coupe with available 6MT for those that want to put a budget on performance.

 

[17CivicTypeR_Brian]

Honda did the Si badge no favors either with the weak 9th gen offering, which I saw as an actual downgrade compared to the 8th gen Si. Sounds like Honda is trying atone for its 9th gen mistakes by making the CivicX better than anyone expected... so I have hope that they'll do exactly what you're calling for -- an Si that makes a leap in terms of performance (even if it costs more) so that it competes with those cars. If it does, just watch the press gush about it. The car will sell itself.

You're right about that. I'm on 8thCivic.com - not sure if anybody else from here was there, but back in like 2011, Honda invited 8thCivic to come out to Fedex Field in DC to check out the all-new Civic in person. It was a press-drive event. We weren't allowed to take pictures or anything. They said we'd get to drive the car, but then like 80 people showed up and there just wasn't time. Anyway, they had some of the engineers in from Japan and we talked to them through translator. They were rather boastful of the increased torque, VTEC meter, and multi-level display. I got the sense I insulted them when I asked why they lowered the red-line, still haven't added Direct Injection, and still do not utilize a turbo. Their answer was 'improved driveability of larger displacement and lower redline, DI and Turbo are not consistent with the desired dynamic of the car, etc' Anyway, I left the event kinda confused and thought the then-new Civic was just a shrunken Accord.

 

[firsthonda]

I'll pay more for it. In a world of $38k Kia Optimas a $27-28k CivicX Si 2.0T would be a smoking good deal.

Make a Sport 1.5T Coupe with available 6MT for those that want to put a budget on performance.

Ha far fetch have a great idea. The Si be the 1.5 T souped up and then have a type s that is a 2.0 T de tuned then a type r which is the insane one. Ha now I am dreaming

 

[takemorepills]

You're right about that. I'm on 8thCivic.com - not sure if anybody else from here was there, but back in like 2011, Honda invited 8thCivic to come out to Fedex Field in DC to check out the all-new Civic in person. It was a press-drive event. We weren't allowed to take pictures or anything. They said we'd get to drive the car, but then like 80 people showed up and there just wasn't time. Anyway, they had some of the engineers in from Japan and we talked to them through translator. They were rather boastful of the increased torque, VTEC meter, and multi-level display. I got the sense I insulted them when I asked why they lowered the red-line, still haven't added Direct Injection, and still do not utilize a turbo. Their answer was 'improved driveability of larger displacement and lower redline, DI and Turbo are not consistent with the desired dynamic of the car, etc' Anyway, I left the event kinda confused and thought the then-new Civic was just a shrunken Accord.

I think those guys weren't involved in CivicX, and probably not the latest Accord either. I wonder if Honda fired them or reassigned them to janitor duty

 

[serif]

I'll pay more for it. In a world of $38k Kia Optimas a $27-28k CivicX Si 2.0T would be a smoking good deal.

Make a Sport 1.5T Coupe with available 6MT for those that want to put a budget on performance.

I'm warming up to the idea of a Sport trim. It work well for the Accord, so it could be a sweet spot for the Civic. The 201hp tuned 1.5l would be great for that.

 

[17CivicTypeR_Brian]

I'm warming up to the idea of a Sport trim. It work well for the Accord, so it could be a sweet spot for the Civic. The 201hp tuned 1.5l would be great for that.

That's actually a good idea. I mean they have a Pilot, CRV, Accord, and Civic Touring... the Accord Sport is pretty popular. A Civic Sport would be a great option. Not to be confused with the Si of course... that needs to remain its own car.

 

[firsthonda]

That's actually a good idea. I mean they have a Pilot, CRV, Accord, and Civic Touring... the Accord Sport is pretty popular. A Civic Sport would be a great option. Not to be confused with the Si of course... that needs to remain its own car.

Would love to see the base, 1.5 T, a sport 1.5t a Si and type r. But then I feel like we're asking too much

 

[JAG]

I covered this briefly in another thread last week, but this seems to be merely a difference in tuning. The 1.5l is a VTEC in name only, as covered in depth by Paul Tan in the original article that's cited by the OP. All of the specs listed are identical to the North American engine; neither one gets variable valve timing on either cam. The only difference between the two would be tuning for different grades of gasoline. Europe's lowest grade is equivalent to our 91 octane, so Honda can tune for what would considered "Premium Unleaded Only" over here. It's like the difference between maps for an aftermarket ECU, which would generally give the sort of gains seen between the engines for the two markets.

What is the Variable Valve Mechanism then? It seems like 27 hp would be a lot to gain from just switching to 91 octane fuel, especially with a 1.5l engine. I'm wondering if they simply forgot to add it in the technology section. Not sure why Honda would advertise VTEC and not include it. Plus they built a different engine for Europe, if they were adjusting for different fuel I would imagine they could do this with a few ECU tweaks.

Sponsored