I have been to a dealer here in Las Vegas, I hope to close a deal by this weekend, and both the Tech and Salesman said that VTEC engagement was not lowered on the 04 to compensate for losing the rpm's because it was going to hurt mpg and emissions (LEV). Honda "wanted specs on the two cars to be equal" (03 vs 04).

Any truth to this?

If so, why are more people not lowering VTEC to say 5.2k?

PS The tech bet his life that the 04 CAN handle 9k, but was not allowed to have it for the same two reasons and in addition, "it would have made the 04 far superior in the stats column". Once again he claimed that they wanted a car that matched the previous model in stats, but was more suited for americans. ie. daily driving.

 

piston speeds at 9k rpm with the f22c would be astronomical.

 

I'd be willing to bet it could handle 9k also, but in the interest of real-world reliability, it was lowered. As astronomical as it would be, another 800 RPM would not blow this motor. If in fact it would, I don't feel very comfortable knowing I'm only 800 RPM away from destruction every time I rip through the gears. I agree that this motor would probably make a few more ponies if allowed to rev higher. It's barely peaking at the rev limiter.

Kris

 

Since everyone always points out increased piston speeds on the 2.2 vs the 2.0, I'd like to mention another point that I "believe" is relevant just in case someone might be tempted to push the limits on the 2.2. While I agree that it's likely that the crank and con rods will take the stress, since Honda clearly didn't intend for this engine to run at 9k rpm speeds, it's likely that they reduced the strength (stiffness) of the valve springs as a result. Such a reduction in valve spring stiffness would reduce the loads on the valve train as a whole and considering the lengths that Honda has gone to in these engines to reduce internal friction, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that they've done that.

I don't know if this is the case in actual fact but it would be interesting to find out. In the mean time, I think it's a valid concern just in case anyone has the idea of pushing the upper rpm limits on the 2.2.

FWIW,
Drive Safe,
Steve R.

 

ok...so everyone has thus far acknowledged the 9k point, but what about the Techs comments regarding lowering the VTEC point of engagement?

Please read my first post for clarification.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by NECurve
I have been to a dealer here in Las Vegas, I hope to close a deal by this weekend, and both the Tech and Salesman said that VTEC engagement was not lowered on the 04 to compensate for losing the rpm's because it was going to hurt mpg and emissions (LEV).

 

Most people who test drive a VTEC equipped car expect to feel a VTEC "kick", so Honda gives it to them. From the dyno plots I've seen, the VTEC "kick" looks similar on the '03 and '04 models. I think Honda intentionally dials in enough latency in the VTEC engagement to prevent the engagement from being smooth (unnoticeable). I don't think it has anything to do with economy or emissions, since EPA testing wouldn't be done that high in the RPM range.

In regards to the raised redline, I think that Honda lowered the redline by the same factor that they increased stroke. I think that raising the redline on the '04 would be about as safe (or dangerous) as raising the redline on the '03. I wouldn't be too scared about raising the redline on my '02 by 200, but I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable raising it by 800. Besides, my '02's redline (fuel cut) seems to be 8900, not 9000.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PilotKD
As astronomical as it would be, another 800 RPM would not blow this motor.