confused about power & torque on a couple of cars

[danlightbulb]

Hi guys,

I'm a bit confused. I've searched the net and read up on it but don't really have an answer so asking here.

I'm looking at a Honda Accord which has has 188bhp, which seems good, but the torque figure seems really low at 164 lb.ft. It's 0-60 time is 7.9s, which also sounds good. My mondeo makes 210 lb.ft, and I know its a diesel which make higher torque at lower revs, and obviously its 0-60 time is alot longer at 10.8s. But still I'm confused about how the torque works. What I'm most concerned about, as its a VTEC engine, is having to red-line the engine all the time to get the acceleration out of it.

Another car I'm looking at is a Saab 9-3, the 150bhp 2.0 litre turbo version. Despite being lower power it makes 177 lb.ft of torque which is more than the Honda. I assume the turbo is helping here. For an £80 remap, that torque figure climbs to 265 ft.lb at 220bhp.

I've driven a Saab 9-3 but the engine was a dog so I couldn't get any useful information from that test drive, and I haven't driven a remapped version. I should be seeing the Honda shortly. I'd like an idea of what to expect from the Honda and how it might compare to the Saab.

Can anyone help?

Edited by danlightbulb on Thursday 26th November 23:46

[danlightbulb]

Renovation said:

Highly tuned NA engines make high power at high revs and relatively low torque

Right so does this mean they are significantly slower at low revs? The Honda has a 0-60 time of 7.9s, which is pretty good, but to get this is it driven right up above 6k revs which is where the VTEC kicks in?

Renovation said:

Which is why when driven in normal use diesels feel fast but when you need to overtake you find they aren't as fast as you thought.

Yeah my current car is pretty quick off the lights but dies by the time its hit 25mph.

Renovation said:

Vtec - yes you have to thrash the nuts off them - rewarding on the right roads, tiresome in City traffic.

This is what i'm worried about, that the car will feel dead during normal driving.

[danlightbulb]

Thanks. I'm not going to be buying another diesel was just using it for comparison. But yeah, it has a very small power band but does pull well at low revs.

In the two cars I'm referring to, the Honda is a 2.4 litre Vtec and the Saab is a 2.0 litre turbo. The Saab gets quite a bit better mpg than the Honda according to the official figures. According to the guy who remaps them, fuel economy is improved further after a remap as well (assuming you don't then thrash it everywhere I guess).

I'm concerned the VTEC will have nothing at the low end and everything at the high rev end which I'll mostly never use. I do need to drive it obviously and see for myself. But the headline torque number seems quite low.

It would also be nice to drive a car that can just rev and rev in one gear all the way up the speedo. I'm wondering whether the turbo'd Saab will suffer from a drop off of power at higher revs once the turbo is exhausted, maybe not as bad as a diesel does. Whereas the VTEC will (I assume) rev all the way up without breaking a sweat, and even kick up when the VTEC kicks in at 6k. Problem is I'll never be up at those revs.

Confusing stuff.

Edited by danlightbulb on Friday 27th November 01:46

[danlightbulb]

Martin_Hx said:

With 188hp the Honda wont be slow, i wouldn't get hung up about torque! You will not have to "rev the tits off it" to go 30mph to the shops

I can remap the saab though for a measily £80 and it will have 220bhp and 360nm of torque.

If the honda needs revving high to get the most out of it, wont that kill the fuel economy as well? Wheras more power out of the turbo engine at lower revs will help the economy?

Ive been looking for power curves for both cars but cannot find.

[danlightbulb]

TA14 said:

That's my vote as well. (IMHO for the SAAB, or any car, thinking that you can get a 50% increase in both power and torque and better mpg is living in dreamland.)

According to the remapper you do, and he has a very good reputation.

[danlightbulb]

Pablo16v said:

But he would say that but my experience mapping a couple of diesels is improved economy is marginal at best. I also had a petrol SAAB 9-5 2.0t re-mapped from 150bhp to around 210-220bhp and I didn't see any improvement in economy.

But you didnt get a decrease though either? Thats the point. I am a bit concerned about the honda's low 29 mpg official figure which means the actual will be lower still, but dont want to turn this into an mpg thread.

[danlightbulb]

The 150bhp saab 9-3 is heavily detuned/restricted in stock form apparantly. The remapper has a good reputation ive no reason to doubt him. If using the power it will use more fuel i understand that. What i dont want is high fuel consumption just wafting around in mormal conditions.

[danlightbulb]

^^ thanks. Don't want to turn this into a re-run of my previous thread so won't go any further on car choices.

I will be testing the VTEC on sunday. The problem is I can't test drive a remapped Saab 9-3 so am going off owners reports.

However I'm fairly sure I won't want to drive everywhere at 6k revs plus, and I am used to the low down torque of a diesel so that's why I'm thinking the mapped Saab will be a good middle ground between the two.

At a 29mpg quoted, I'm concerned I'll end up getting 25ish as opposed to low 30's in the Saab which is £40 per month more in fuel for me (£500 a year). Over two years of ownership that offsets the Saab which is a grand more to buy but also 4 years newer and lower mileage.

But Ive no doubt the Honda is the better quality car overall. Its bigger, better specced, looks nicer, probably drives better.

Edited by danlightbulb on Friday 27th November 13:52

[danlightbulb]

HustleRussell said:

Danlightbulb- this is not a game of top trumps why are you always judging cars by numbers? It seems every time you post on here you're wittering on about statistics.

I guarantee that most of the time when you buy by numbers you'll end up with the wrong car.

If you're interested in a car, go and drive it. If you're interested in comparing two cars, drive both. It really is that simple.

Because i need to be happy with my choice on paper first and then ill go and find that car.

I am driving the vtec on sunday as i said, but its not possible to test drive a remapped 9-3. And i wont be able to tell the mpg of the car on a short test drive so the numbers on paper are involved in the decision.

[danlightbulb]

Squirrelofwoe said:

As an owner of a 2.4 Accord Tourer I can confirm this is the case! It does go extremely well, even at lower revs. I rarely feel the need to go above 4,000 rpm in daily use which isn't even engaging the V-Tec, and that allows it to more than keep pace with most traffic. If you want to wind the revs all the way up it just gets even better. This also means it will sit in 6th gear at 70mph in cruise control barely doing 2,000rpm which is obviously fantastic for economy when you're sat on the motorway. I think it's an absolute peach of an engine.

It depends what you want in terms of performance though- because if you are after outright acceleration you are better off looking for something other than a 2.4 Accord or a 2.0 Saab, re-maps or no re-maps!

Edit: And as an owner of an Accord Type R as well, and ex owner of a DC2 Integra Type R, the 2.4 feels livelier than either of the Type Rs up to 3,000/3,500 rpm. As Martin says above, most of the decent Honda engines will give more than sufficient performance at lower revs. It just depends what your reference points are- if you are used to high torque diesel engines then it might take a little bit of acclimatization, but don't think you will need to be constantly sitting at the red-line in order to go anywhere!

Edited by Squirrelofwoe on Friday 27th November 16:24

Thanks for this. Its hard to find reviews of this particular car. What mpg do you get?

[danlightbulb]

aka_kerrly said:

7200rpm as standard, vtec from 6000rpm , remap allows revs to 7800 rpm an vtec from 4500

Which i have read is not worth doing as the vtec cam lobes are optimised for 6k revs so just changing the ecu setting doesnt help.