Those wheels are nice but the car is nothing special, at least for me.
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
ASCC/NSX headed back to drawing board?
- Thread starter White98LS
- Start date
Who knows what honda will do. Perhaps they are just presenting the FR layout to mess up toyota and then releasing the MR HSC :biggrin:
Whatever they do just put this in there...
- Joined
- 4 October 2002
- Messages
- 569
That is the mighty fine Mugen MFS408. A 4.0 Liter V8 at 590Hp in racing trim.
It has a 180 degree crankshaft for that racing Ferrari engine note.
It has a 180 degree crankshaft for that racing Ferrari engine note.
I don't see them beating this unfortunately.
"this", may be $180,000.
Whatever they do just put this in there...
Why that when they have this!!!:biggrin:
I don't see them beating this unfortunately.
WHAT????!!!!
A Wide body Celica with S2k wheels?
:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :wink: :wink: :wink: :tongue: :tongue: :tongue:
Why that when they have this!!!:biggrin:
WHAT????!!!!
A Wide body Celica with S2k wheels?
Whoa, Is that second engine the V10 Version?!?!
Can someone explain why the V10 gives off so much vibration as cited in a previous post that qouted a Honda Exec, or Engineer?????
Wide Body Celica....LMAO:biggrin:
Huh I think V8 would do just fine, but detuned on ~500 HP to just beat F430
And V8 is what they use now in F1, while NSX was engineered there were V6 turbos actual in F1 if Im not mistaken.
And V8 is what they use now in F1, while NSX was engineered there were V6 turbos actual in F1 if Im not mistaken.
- Joined
- 4 October 2002
- Messages
- 569
More cylinders isn't always better.
Some info about V10 vibration problems:
http://www.autozine.org/technical_school/engine/smooth4.htm#V10
Some info about V10 vibration problems:
http://www.autozine.org/technical_school/engine/smooth4.htm#V10
Hmm, having read this..I wonder if Honda was Better off sticking with the V8. There wasn't much info regarding the V10 though. Still an interesting read. I would be lying if I said I understood all the technical details though. Hopefully, Honda's F1 experience with the previously used V10s will be utilized in designing the next-gen engine.
I am still perplexed as to why Honda hasn't spent the last 8 years figuring out how to stick two F22C1 S2000 engines together.
They'd have a small, lightweight, high-revving 480hp V-8. With the additions of constantly variable valve timing and Ti con-rods it would have plenty of torque in the low end and a 9,000 rpm redline. :wink:
Not sure what Honda is thinking these days but if they were going to create a V-8 they would have done so by now--or at least announced it. The F22C1 was an outstanding platform from which to create a performance V-8. They don't even want to create a V-8 for their trucks! Maybe that's why Toyota keeps bashing Honda's brains in. But I guess Honda's only really interested in secrecy, misdirection, procrastination, delays, and, as we've seen with the ASCC, whimsy and lack of foresight. Particularly all these things in regards to their performance cars.
So if they use the similar configuration and created V10, which can push it over 500hp, would that be a worse idea?I am still perplexed as to why Honda hasn't spent the last 8 years figuring out how to stick two F22C1 S2000 engines together.
They'd have a small, lightweight, high-revving 480hp V-8. With the additions of constantly variable valve timing and Ti con-rods it would have plenty of torque in the low end and a 9,000 rpm redline. :wink:
They basically annouced a V8 is in the work.
V10 is a technology show case. It's not who can make the engine, it's who can make the engine better.
Ferrari has a tradition to keep. V8 for their entry level car, and V12 for their top end car. If they create a V10, they may very well have to create a new segment.
As for FR layout, I'm not against it, I think it's a good idea to show that they are capible of making a Astin Martin/F599 competitor at a fraction of the price. What I don't like is the fact that they have a very good MR layout from the NSX and not continue the next evolution. But again, I'm not their accountant, and I'm have absolutely no influence on their decision.
I wouldn't mind have an ASC if it is a wonderful performer. It will be interesting to see what it is capible of. I wonder if people will still bash it if it can out perform Z06/F599/
Lets add more to the speculation:biggrin:
They didn't gave powerplant details of the new HSC/ASCC/etc because Honda might just introduce this
http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=87154
AVTEC into the market in their flagship car with advanced tech engine.
But first they need to prove the car and engine before introducing the new technology into the rest of the family of course on a smaller displacement engine... well I guess that would work for their 5-10yr plan.:smile:
Timing and the right car would play a big role...
Just my $0.02 speculation
They didn't gave powerplant details of the new HSC/ASCC/etc because Honda might just introduce this
http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=87154
AVTEC into the market in their flagship car with advanced tech engine.
But first they need to prove the car and engine before introducing the new technology into the rest of the family of course on a smaller displacement engine... well I guess that would work for their 5-10yr plan.:smile:
Timing and the right car would play a big role...
Just my $0.02 speculation
- Joined
- 4 October 2002
- Messages
- 569
V10 vibration characteristics is similar to In line-5. The info below came from Autozine. http://www.autozine.org/technical_school/engine/smooth2.htm#Inline-5
Inline 5-cylinder engines
Straight-five engine is not very common in motor industry. In the past 20 years, only Audi (2.2 and 2.3-litre), Honda (Acura TL), Volvo (2.0-litre, 2.3 turbo and 2.4-litre), Fiat group (2.0 and 2.4-litre Super Fire series) and Mercedes diesel adopted such design. However, straight-five engine has its own advantages. Firstly, it bridges the gap between 4 and 6-cylinder engines, thus may offer the best cylinder capacity for optimized efficiency; Secondly, compare with 4-cylinder engines, it saves one balancer shaft; Thirdly, compare with 6-cylinder engines, it is short enough to be fitted transversely into the engine compartment of front-wheel-drive cars, driving directly the inline gearbox. Lastly, it can be derived from a modular design consisting of 4 and 6-cylinder inline engines, not only saving development cost but also eliminating the investment of a new production line. Fiat, Mercedes and Volvo’s 5-pots, for example, are made as modular engines.
The inline-5 engine fires once every 720° / 5 = 144° crank angle. As a result, the crankshaft design is as shown in below. Firing order is 1-3-5-4-2.
My mathematical analysis proved that both its resultant first order force and second order force are balanced. Therefore it doesn’t need the twin-balancer shafts as a big 4-cylinder engine. However, it generates end-to-end vibration like 3-cylinder engines, because piston 1 is not in the same position as piston 5, and piston 2 is not in the same position as piston 4. Therefore both ends of the engine will vibrate up and down with respect to the engine center.
Solution - single balancer shaft
Obviously, the solution is the same as 3-pot engines, that is, employ a balancer shaft on which there are counter weights moving in the opposite direction to the pistons. The balancer shaft is driven by the engine at the same speed as the crankshaft.
Is that enough to make 5-cylinder engine as smooth as 6-cylinder? no. For packaging reasons, the balancer shaft cannot be placed in the most optimized position, that is, right above or below the crankshaft. Therefore it has to be offset to either side of the engine, resulting in incomplete cancellation of vibration.
V10 engines
Theoretically, the best V-angle is 72°. Like two inline-5 mated together, there is no vibration in vertical and transverse directions, but there is vibration from end to end of the engine, thus require a balancer shaft install in the V-valley for best balance. However, there is no vibration between bank and bank because pistons in both banks are in the same positions.
WOW Thank Silver F16. Okay, I lightbulb flashed and I believe I understand a bit more. I always assumed the Acura TL was six cylinder engine?? Or perhaps the article spoke of an earlier TL model. Nonetheless, if two mated inline-5 engines cancel out the vibration partially, then Honda shouldn't have too much trouble with the rest of the Vibration issues.
Also, AVTEC sounds very intersting; however, I'm afraid that once again, having read the article found in the link regarding Honda's Patent request for AVTEC, left me with a bit of a headache. Can someone put this in less technical terms?? From what I gathered, this "advanced" form of Honda's Vtec, will provide better performance and fuel efficiency.
Thank Silver F16. Okay, I lightbulb flashed and I believe I understand a bit more. I always assumed the Acura TL was six cylinder engine?? Or perhaps the article spoke of an earlier TL model. Nonetheless, if two mated inline-5 engines cancel out the vibration partially, then Honda shouldn't have too much trouble with the rest of the Vibration issues.Also, AVTEC sounds very intersting; however, I'm afraid that once again, having read the article found in the link regarding Honda's Patent request for AVTEC, left me with a bit of a headache. Can someone put this in less technical terms?? From what I gathered, this "advanced" form of Honda's Vtec, will provide better performance and fuel efficiency.
Well, because the V-10 is an inherently less reliable design.
Vancehu said:
I don't really think there's any reason for Honda to develop a V-10 for a performance car. I wouldn't mind a V-10 designed for a GT car like the ASCC with carryover to their trucks but if they ever really do make an NSX successor I'd like to see the V-8. A high-revving V-10 just makes me nervous over the long term. Just because they used it in F1 where it was designed to run for 3 hours at most doesn't mean it's going to last over a 10-year period. The jury's still out on the long-term lifespan of the new Audi & BMW V-10s but there are many experts who question it whether it will last anywhere near as long as the alternative 6 & 8 cylinder options.
Vancehu said:
I agree. I have no problem with the ASCC itself. Honda can make any car they wish. I hope it's a great performer and I think a powerful GT car is a nice one to have in your lineup. However the ASCC isn't F1 inspired nor will it be built and designed with the same philosophy as the NSX. To me, the V-8 is the natural choice for an NSX successor as they have the all the tools and technology to make one of the finest V-8s ever built right under their noses. I don't think one needs to be an accountant to see that developing a V-8 from the F22C1 is dirt cheap, logical and a fantastic starting point for a new NSX.
I think that’s a myth. If the V10 were introduced back in the 70’s, I would agree with you. Honda was the pioneer in V10 design if F1 with Renault, and for over 10 years, the standard for all F1 engine, I think the reliability issue has been solved.
Well, if that’s your approach about the V10, you should feel the same way about the V8, since all F1 runs on V8 now and required only to last two race weekends. And the V6 from the old days weren’t even required to last more than the qualifying lap.
Considering the fact that M5/6, Gallardo, Viper all run on V10 with good reliability record, you don't need decades to prove the design works. I think Honda will make it even better. I love the idea of V10!!! Imagine a 5 liter v10 with 550HP before any owners does any mods!!!
[/QUOTE]I agree. I have no problem with the ASCC itself. Honda can make any car they wish. I hope it's a great performer and I think a powerful GT car is a nice one to have in your lineup. However the ASCC isn't F1 inspired nor will it be built and designed with the same philosophy as the NSX. To me, the V-8 is the natural choice for an NSX successor as they have the all the tools and technology to make one of the finest V-8s ever built right under their noses. I don't think one needs to be an accountant to see that developing a V-8 from the F22C1 is dirt cheap, logical and a fantastic starting point for a new NSX.[/QUOTE]
If you meant F1 inspired by having a MR layout, which again would be an incorrect statement. Back in the old days, some F1 machines were FR. Even though those days are gone, they do exist.
I think other than the layout, it will be very much F1 inspired. Such as double wishbone suspension, VTEC, CF components, exotic metals, traction control, DBW throttle, etc.
V8 probably should have been the natural choice for NSX to begin with, not as successor. Than again, Honda like to built their cars two cylinders short of its intended competitors. I remember an article from CAR magazine (GB) mentioned that Honda does it not only they want to save weight, but to show the world that they can do it.
Last edited:
I have been preaching this for years now... but to me the V6/V8/v16 is no issue. PRICE IS! Who cares about the cylinder number?
Honda, make it 350hp, 1300kg, reliable(!), BEAUTIFUL(!!!) and price it at 70k$!
That is the maximum Honda can price a car for... sorry, anything more and it will be a disaster! :frown:
Honda, make it 350hp, 1300kg, reliable(!), BEAUTIFUL(!!!) and price it at 70k$!
That is the maximum Honda can price a car for... sorry, anything more and it will be a disaster! :frown:
Huh it wouldnt be competitive at all with 350HP, IMO anything under 500HP = disaster.
- Joined
- 4 October 2002
- Messages
- 569
WOW
Let me clarify. the 2 mated inline 5 does not cancel out the vibrations, not even partially. The comment implyies that the V10 configuration does not introduce more vibrations than 2 in line-5. A 72 degree V10 will still have the inherent vibration characteristics of 2 inline 5.
Actually vibration is not the right term, it should be called a rocking motion. The 5 cylinder (and V10) suffers from a up and down rocking motion between cylinder 1 and 5. I believe this is a first order rock motion. First order means it rocks to the same frequency as the RPMs.
An IN line 4 cylinder on the other hand has vibration in the second order yet no rocking motion between end to end of the cylinders. The second order vibration means the vibration is occuring at 2x the engine speed, hence the counter balance shafts are spinning at 2x the engine speed to partially offset the vibration of a 4 cylinders.
In practice, what this means is that 4 cylinders tends to suffer from a buzzing vibrations whereas a 5 cylinder or v10 engines tends to shake rather than buzz. This shaking is what caused the reliability issues that some manufactureres have encountered.
Balance shafts does help in 5, and 10 cylinders engines, but they do not completely eliminate the shaking. During development, Toyota reported had some set backs on their new super Car V10 engine due to excessive vibration. But supposely these issues were resolved. It is unknown how they solved it.
Formula 1 V10 engine also needed to stay away from sustained operation at certain RPMs because if sustained operation was allowed in that RPM, it would lead to earlier than expected engine failure due the the excessive vibration (Rocking) at those RPMs.
BTW, First generation TL had both an Inline 5 and a V6, prior to that, the car was called the Acura Vigor, which had a 2.5L inline 5.
"Toyota reported had some set backs on their new super Car V10 engine due to excessive vibration"
Where did you hear that?
"Formula 1 V10 engine also needed to stay away from sustained operation at certain RPMs because if sustained operation was allowed in that RPM, it would lead to earlier than expected engine failure due the the excessive vibration (Rocking) at those RPMs"
Whare RPM range are you talking about? Earlier V10 did not rev over 14k RPM and stay between 6 to 14k during the race, latest V10 did not rev over 20k rpm and had the range between 7k to 19.5k during races.
Ferrari's and Renault's final generation V10's were so reliable that the failure rate was below 3% during the the last final six years (2000-2005).
Again, vibration was an issue during the old days, but it is an none-issue today.
- Joined
- 4 October 2002
- Messages
- 569
Vencehu, you seem to be defensive regarding V10 engines. I am not taking a position in this posting here, just sharing what I've read and learned with the rest of you.
The tid bit about F1 V10 engines and staying away from certain RPMs came from Automotive Engineering. This is an Industry magazine which covers very elaborate technical details. I do not recall which rpm they had to stay away from, but do read that the key is to avoid sustained operations at those speeds. Granted as the engine revs, it needs to go past that rpm but as long as the driver does not need to keep it there for long.
This reading came from an article comparing the v10 versus V8 F1 engines so it was a recent article (within the last 12 months?).
The problem Toyota was having with V10 engine development came from Road and Track, around 2 years ago.
According to the article you translated and posted here several years ago, which you titled "Something I read" where they interviewed with the Creator of the NSX, he acknowledged that v10 does have inherent vibration problems. Below is a quote of what you translated from the interview with Mr. Uehera.
"Issues faced: It is rather easy to squeeze over 100hp/liter plus on 4 or 6 cylinder Engines; however, it is rather difficult to accomplish the same task on a large displacement, let's say, a 5 Liter engine. The problem is, a traditional V10 have series of vibration problems; therefore, to solve those problems and achieve “over” 100hp/liter (at the same time) will be a major challenge (That is why Ferrari stick with V8 and V12, and Gallardo's V10 will probably not last more than 60k miles without any major overhaul, and same can be said about BMW's M5/6's V10)"
The tid bit about F1 V10 engines and staying away from certain RPMs came from Automotive Engineering. This is an Industry magazine which covers very elaborate technical details. I do not recall which rpm they had to stay away from, but do read that the key is to avoid sustained operations at those speeds. Granted as the engine revs, it needs to go past that rpm but as long as the driver does not need to keep it there for long.
This reading came from an article comparing the v10 versus V8 F1 engines so it was a recent article (within the last 12 months?).
The problem Toyota was having with V10 engine development came from Road and Track, around 2 years ago.
According to the article you translated and posted here several years ago, which you titled "Something I read" where they interviewed with the Creator of the NSX, he acknowledged that v10 does have inherent vibration problems. Below is a quote of what you translated from the interview with Mr. Uehera.
"Issues faced: It is rather easy to squeeze over 100hp/liter plus on 4 or 6 cylinder Engines; however, it is rather difficult to accomplish the same task on a large displacement, let's say, a 5 Liter engine. The problem is, a traditional V10 have series of vibration problems; therefore, to solve those problems and achieve “over” 100hp/liter (at the same time) will be a major challenge (That is why Ferrari stick with V8 and V12, and Gallardo's V10 will probably not last more than 60k miles without any major overhaul, and same can be said about BMW's M5/6's V10)"
Last edited:
I'm not defensive about V10 at all; in fact, I like the idea because it is what makes an engine manufacture great for making the impossible possible.
I believe during design stage of any engines, there will be problems regardless the cylinder quantity. If a company such as BMW, Audi, Toyota and Honda are willing venture into the unknown, they will make it work. After all, their reputation is on the line
I have absolutely no doubt that if Honda wanted to do a 5 liter V8, they can extract same/similar HP out of the engine, but I do believe when the V10 is well designed, it will more potential, and depend on how conservative they want to be, the engine can actually pack more HP for the same capacity as well as better reliability. We all know Honda’s DOHC VTEC has been reliable regardless the capacity.
The concern for vibration has always been there, but Honda is a company that knows how to make the impossible possible. I think this V10 in the ASC will upstage Audi/Bmer’s V10 and with the usual Honda reliability.
As for the translated article, the failure of the BMW’s variable timing system is documented with their “none” V10 units, and has been written by many car publications. This is actually nothing new for German cars, they seems to have problems after 60/80k miles range.
Don’t worry, I’m not been defensive, I think this V10 vs V8 is discussion is a little out of proportion; than again, it’s the Internet, where people can express their mind freely. Don’t you agree?
I have been preaching this for years now... but to me the V6/V8/v16 is no issue. PRICE IS! Who cares about the cylinder number?
Honda, make it 350hp, 1300kg, reliable(!), BEAUTIFUL(!!!) and price it at 70k$!
That is the maximum Honda can price a car for... sorry, anything more and it will be a disaster! :frown:
I have to agree with this one in terms of price. I feel as though I can't really offer much input or opinion as to what I want from the Next Gen NSX because quite frankly, if it is more than $80k I simply cannot afford it. There has been much talk that the Next Gen NSX will run around $150k. I can't help but wonder how many people who can afford that price range will actually buy this car since it is ONLY a Honda. Mind you, I don't share that opinion, if I could afford it, I would skip like a little girl to the dealer the day the Next NSX is released; however, that has been the sentiment of some other individuals who are wealthy enough to buy a $150k car :cough: Jay Leno. They would rather buy a Lambo or F-car for that much money. So, I too hope that Honda will price the NSX lower for us...um....common folk.:redface:
You have to remember the light weight is a positive factor (think lotus). I think pushing more towards the 400hp range with light weight would be nice. As far as this car being a F430 competitor...well :redface:
So, Toyota has presumably resolved the vibration issue. If they can do it, I hope Honda can as well. The Acura Vigor, was that not the same as the legend? Wasn't the TL a replacement for the Legend? I've heard many Legend owners comment on how reliable their beloved Legend was. Honda must have resolved the vibration issue there to attain that reliability. So, the vibration doesn't cancel out with 2 In-line 5, however, the vibration does not increase either. So it shouldn't be that difficult for Honda to duplicate the reliability they found in their Inline 5s right? What Toyota cars, if any, used the Inline 5 engine? I wonder what car out there is the earliest example of a V10 engine; or rather, what car has proved itself as a long lasting reliable V10?
Similar threads
