Turbo vs. Non Turbo

[LoveToDrive]

1.5T pulls for days at less than 2,000 RPM. I didn't drive the 2.0, but I find it hard that it has the low-end grunt that the 1.5T does. That's half the beauty of it - its tuned *really* well for everyday driving, and always has tons of power in reserve.

Great point.

Comes down to a matter of personal taste? Some appreciate not having to WOT, some love doing it to hear the revs.

Sponsored

 

[Billy4202]

Great point.

Comes down to a matter of personal taste? Some appreciate not having to WOT, some love doing it to hear the revs.

Haha, for sure. Its fun to slingshot the turbo to 3-4k and shoot past traffic, but (this is my first Honda) it apparently doesn't have that "traditional" Honda sound lol.

 

[LoveToDrive]

Haha, for sure. Its fun to slingshot the turbo to 3-4k and shoot past traffic, but (this is my first Honda) it apparently doesn't have that "traditional" Honda sound lol.

The Earth Dreams sure sounds good, but definitely different from the past. The VTEC sound is sorely missed! Sadly, the 10th gen 2.0 doesn't have it. I kept waiting for it during my test drive without realizing the extent of the Civic overhaul.

 

[CEXT]

here's my 0-160 km/h, which is same as 0-100 mph. I didn't step on it until I straightened out the wheel.
EXT

 

[inv4zn]

here's my 0-160 km/h, which is same as 0-100 mph. I didn't step on it until I straightened out the wheel.
EXT

Would have been faster in S.

That said, 160km/h in the DAY in Vancouver, with one hand using your phone? That's like $900 in fines and an automatic impound man.

 

[DarkLight]

The Earth Dreams sure sounds good, but definitely different from the past. The VTEC sound is sorely missed! Sadly, the 10th gen 2.0 doesn't have it. I kept waiting for it during my test drive without realizing the extent of the Civic overhaul.

It actually does, in fact, have VTEC, but you probably weren't going fast enough to get it to engage. With the factory tune, it will only engage in 3rd gear and above. Look at the vid in post #40 that I put up. You can hear when the big cam lobe engages in 3rd at around 80 mph and 4th at around 100.

 

[CEXT]

Why doesn't the vtec engage until 80mph? Is it because EPA rating tests are performed below that speed?

 

[CEXT]

Would have been faster in S.

That said, 160km/h in the DAY in Vancouver, with one hand using your phone? That's like $900 in fines and an automatic impound man.

You're welcome

 

[DarkLight]

Why doesn't the vtec engage until 80mph? Is it because EPA rating tests are performed below that speed?

The VTEC point is 6.1K RPM's beginning in 3rd gear, though I have no evidence as to why. But, being that it's the base engine, and the fact that the output is somewhat close to the 1.5 hp wise, if the VTEC were to engage at the traditional 5.7K RPM's the performance, especially 0-60, would be too close to the 1.5. That's my theory at least. It's only thing I can think of that sort of makes sense.

And no, it will not have an effect on emissions or fuel economy, and I don't think the EPA tests WOT fuel economy lol.

After getting a reflash from KTuner, which activates VTEC in all gears, it shaved off about 1.5 seconds on the 0-60, getting about 6.5-6.6 seconds if I really thrash it.

Nice pull BTW!

 

[gunbunnysoulja]

Lol, most people think that there is a huge difference in fuel efficiency between the 2.0NA and 1.5T. I average 50 mpg combined and 50-55 highway and unless the 1.5T can do 70 mpg then that "big" difference is nothing but a grain of salt. People underestimate the 2.0 NA this is based off the K-series and is definitely not a base model engine. It can definitely keep up with the 1.5T no problem. Not only that, the 2.0NA will be the more reliable engine later down the future. It's the best of both worlds.

What is your lifetime MPG at right now?

FYI, the 1.5T CAN do 70 MPG. Wayne Gerdes got 72.6 mpg in the 1.5T, and in the 2.0, got 52.4 mpg. Check out cleanmpg.com. If you are familiar with hypermiling, you know who he is. The difference between the 1.5T and the 2.0 when hypermiling isn't even close. I have SEVERAL 65+ mpg trips. Your image shows a previous drive of 32.3. I've NEVER had any trip anywhere remotely close to that. All of mine these days are 50+, irregardless if highway or city.


95.0 actual miles on 1.309 gallons = 72.6 mpg vs 72.0 mpg over 93.7 miles indicated.

http://www.cleanmpg.com/community/index.php?threads/52714/page-4

 

[CEXT]

The VTEC point is 6.1K RPM's beginning in 3rd gear, though I have no evidence as to why. But, being that it's the base engine, and the fact that the output is somewhat close to the 1.5 hp wise, if the VTEC were to engage at the traditional 5.7K RPM's the performance, especially 0-60, would be too close to the 1.5. That's my theory at least. It's only thing I can think of that sort of makes sense.

And no, it will not have an effect on emissions or fuel economy, and I don't think the EPA tests WOT fuel economy lol.

After getting a reflash from KTuner, which activates VTEC in all gears, it shaved off about 1.5 seconds on the 0-60, getting about 6.5-6.6 seconds if I really thrash it.

Nice pull BTW!

Thanks. The KTuner must do much more than just the VTEC in all gears. The needle doesn't seem to spend enough time between 6k and 7k in 1st and 2nd gear to knock 1.5 seconds off. Does it engage it sooner?

 

[LoveToDrive]

It actually does, in fact, have VTEC, but you probably weren't going fast enough to get it to engage. With the factory tune, it will only engage in 3rd gear and above. Look at the vid in post #40 that I put up. You can hear when the big cam lobe engages in 3rd at around 80 mph and 4th at around 100.

OMG, you're right! Somehow I missed a lot of posts on that page. Awesome video!!!!! Put a big smile on my face. What fun to have been able to do that!

Ok, I love to drive hard, but you're right again, I never drive that fast here. Come to think of it, I don't think I ever hit 80 mph with my 2016. No roads around here that I can hit 80 in 3rd. Too chicken. 6.1K feels so late to engage to me.

I agree 100% that it's underrated.

 

[Javex]

People value different things differently. I have the EX-T. Turn back back the time and I would get the EX and spend the change on spoiler and other things.

That's exactly what I did. I didn't care about the touring extra stuff. I was torn between the EX and EX-T but I didn't see much of a difference. I spent the extra on cosmetics and such. I mean the EX-T is nice... but I went with saving some and putting it down to make it spicy! LOL

I even had a EX-T for 2 days while Honda had my car. Didn't feel any regrets or a huge difference.

That's my opinion tho. I like all the civics hehehe.

 

[DarkLight]

Thanks. The KTuner must do much more than just the VTEC in all gears. The needle doesn't seem to spend enough time between 6k and 7k in 1st and 2nd gear to knock 1.5 seconds off. Does it engage it sooner?

You're right, it does. It now runs only on 93 octane, due to leaner air/fuel ratios and advanced ignition timing with an increased rev limit, thus it will hit 60 in 2nd gear now.

I have done quite a few mods since the tune, but it is still lacking in the torque department compared to the 1.5.

 

[SteveGG]

yup, 1.5T is much faster at the start as well. Just look at the 0 to 60. I count 10 seconds in 0 to 60 for the 2.0 while I get less than 7 in the 1.5.

The 0 - 60 time for the 2L NA is only a bit less than 1.5 sec. longer compared to the 1.5T, not over 3.

Sponsored