Any evidence that the 2.0 is detuned/overrated?

[xcivicx]

You all seem to think you have fast cars, well you don't. Yours is faster than mine, good for you. Do I want a faster car than you, no. My 98 hp accord sure piss'd off many a tunner who wasn't raceing either wanting a rematch.



Edit on the fast comment, these civics are plenty fast enough to get into trouble, not raceing trouble either.

Sponsored

 

[Micah]

You all seem to think you have fast cars, well you don't. Yours is faster than mine, good for you. Do I want a faster car than you, no. My 98 hp accord sure piss'd off many a tunner who wasn't raceing either wanting a rematch.

Check my list of cars in my signature. I have owned fast cars, and the Si is not fast at all. Fun to drive as a hopped up econobox with excellent mpg.



Edit on the fast comment, these civics are plenty fast enough to get into trouble, not raceing trouble either.

 

[xcivicx]

The whole point I guess is that IMFO the 2.0 is just a blast to drive as the turbo and just quite possibly more if only tuned. For get about 0 to.

 

[xcivicx]

Maybe if the driver of the 1.5T miss a shift and put it in reverse, you win
Joking

but thats kind of the point, leave a little late make a slow shift and in the lower powered 1.5 you could easly find that 2.0 next to you if not ahead. all of the early 1.5 vs old si's were cvt gunna be hard to beat the cvt.

 

[jred721]

The whole point I guess is that IMFO the 2.0 is just a blast to drive as the turbo and just quite possibly more if only tuned. For get about 0 to.

Lol finally someone who gets it and you own a 1.5 currently too. People all over this forum are so concerned with the 0-60 times and stuff and they often forget that the 2.0 engines have their own appeal and are still awesome to drive (coming from a person who also drives a 510 whp car). I've seen people on this forum go as far to say that the 2.0 is under-powered and the car does not have enough power with the 2.0 (which is a ridiculous statement because the car has PLENTY of power). I test drove both and the 2.0 had a much more smoother and linear power delivery (along with the lower price tag of course) and my 2.0 is currently tuned also and it is legitimately fun to drive and this is coming from someone who also drives a 510 WHP car.

 

[David Harper]

I've got the 2.0 with 6mt and I think the HP is overrated at 158. Maybe it can make that much at 7000 rpm in third gear, when the IVTEC kicks in, but who wants to drive their car like that? My guess is that the real world hp is more like 140-145. I love this car but I would like a little more hp. Maybe I'll get a tune after the warranty expires. Can anyone tell me how much hp the 2.0 makes with a tune? Otherwise, it's an excellent engine, IMO. I'm guessing that Honda could probably get an honest 170 hp out of the engine with a few changes like cams, making the IVTEC kick in earlier, fuel injector changes, intake and exhaust manifold changes, all that kind of stuff, but the gas mileage would suffer big time, and that's really what these cars are about,fuel efficiency, not hp.

 

[Deezy]

I've got the 2.0 with 6mt and I think the HP is overrated at 158. Maybe it can make that much at 7000 rpm in third gear, when the IVTEC kicks in, but who wants to drive their car like that? My guess is that the real world hp is more like 140-145. I love this car but I would like a little more hp. Maybe I'll get a tune after the warranty expires. Can anyone tell me how much hp the 2.0 makes with a tune? Otherwise, it's an excellent engine, IMO. I'm guessing that Honda could probably get an honest 170 hp out of the engine with a few changes like cams, making the IVTEC kick in earlier, fuel injector changes, intake and exhaust manifold changes, all that kind of stuff, but the gas mileage would suffer big time, and that's really what these cars are about,fuel efficiency, not hp.

Here's some info on a tune with KTuner
https://www.civicx.com/threads/civicx-2-0l-tuning-big-gains-confirmed-for-the-second-time.17353/

 

[David Harper]

forgive me for not knowing anything, so do I order this online and they ship it to me? and when I get it, what specifically is it? how much does it cost? who installs it? does it void my factory warranty?

 

[IDriveACivic]

Side note, when I drove a loaner 2019 LX, it felt faster because the 2.0 engine was more eager to rumble. That was my perception in city, gridlock driving.

 

[jred721]

forgive me for not knowing anything, so do I order this online and they ship it to me? and when I get it, what specifically is it? how much does it cost? who installs it? does it void my factory warranty?

You can order from various online vendors, just go onto google and search "KTuner v1.2" and various websites will come up having it for sale. You order it from them and then once you recieve it, you go to http://ktuner.com/downloads/ and download the KTuner software onto your laptop, connect the KTuner to the computer using the provided cable in the box and you set it up. Here is the link on how to flash your car with the base map tune: http://www.ktuner.com/KTunerHelp/reflashing_the_ecu_1.htm?ms=AgAAAQ==&st=MA==&sct=MA==&mw=MjQw

 

[Aurelleah]

Lol finally someone who gets it and you own a 1.5 currently too. People all over this forum are so concerned with the 0-60 times and stuff and they often forget that the 2.0 engines have their own appeal and are still awesome to drive (coming from a person who also drives a 510 whp car). I've seen people on this forum go as far to say that the 2.0 is under-powered and the car does not have enough power with the 2.0 (which is a ridiculous statement because the car has PLENTY of power). I test drove both and the 2.0 had a much more smoother and linear power delivery (along with the lower price tag of course) and my 2.0 is currently tuned also and it is legitimately fun to drive and this is coming from someone who also drives a 510 WHP car.

This sums upy experience with my EX. I test drove the Touring for a few hours to see if I wanted to pass off my financing and go with an EXT but regardless of the faster 0-60 time, the feel and driving experience of the 2.0 felt way nicer to me than the 1.5T. The turbo needs to spool to get the torque, while the NA engine you feel the acceleration quicker and for longer before getting to speed. Takes a bit longer to get to speed but feel more satisfying, and the sound of VTEC at 5600rpm and the roar of the engine with a CAI just sounds awesome. I like how much control I have over my power instantly when I press or release the pedal, it feels precise, and it feels like it's begging you to make it roar.

Fuel consumption wasn't much different either and when I got into the "daily use" mindset, there wasn't a huge difference I noticed between the two power-wise, aside from the 1.5t power being slightly delayed

Love my NA, and I'm actually really glad I chose it!

 

[Aurelleah]

I've got the 2.0 with 6mt and I think the HP is overrated at 158. Maybe it can make that much at 7000 rpm in third gear, when the IVTEC kicks in, but who wants to drive their car like that? My guess is that the real world hp is more like 140-145. I love this car but I would like a little more hp. Maybe I'll get a tune after the warranty expires. Can anyone tell me how much hp the 2.0 makes with a tune? Otherwise, it's an excellent engine, IMO. I'm guessing that Honda could probably get an honest 170 hp out of the engine with a few changes like cams, making the IVTEC kick in earlier, fuel injector changes, intake and exhaust manifold changes, all that kind of stuff, but the gas mileage would suffer big time, and that's really what these cars are about,fuel efficiency, not hp.

Tune makes a big difference, 5hp/lb-ft in most of the spectrum and something like 22hp at the peak. I have it with the aem CAI and It feels to have gained around 10hp/lb-ft total (which matches with the dyno testing of the CAI and tuner separately.). I'm sure with a high flow cat it could bring that 10 up to a 25 total across the band as the catless downpipe added like 17 on its own, so 44hp total in the power band vs stock power band. The tune makes VTEC kick in at 5600rpm. It feels really good

 

[lopcd]

i guess i was trying to convey(not very well) that i believe the 2.0 to be 158 hp and that the hp rating of the 1.5 seems to be 173. there has been statements that the hp of the 1.5 is understated. also i think the performance difference is closer than one would think.
both engines exhibit different characteristics acceleration wise. the low end torque is where the 1.5 shines. upper rpm is where the 2.0 needs to be. in a would be race if the 2.0 got a good enough jump on the 1.5 i think the 1.5 would have a hard time killing the 2.0. from what i've seen a tuned 2.0 could just possibly take the 1.5 flat out, i said possibly. after reading for a year how bad ass the 1.5 is, i'm a tad let down, seems to me all those kill stories are just that stories. i am however happy with the 1.5 and it really is about how i expected it to be. i really liked the 2.0 also


disclaimer: strictly talking 6 speeds here. i'm of the mind set that the cvt is just too perfect for acceleration.

 

[xcivicx]

Like I said hard to beat cvt. And all these type of contests totally bogus.

Sponsored