Honda Truck?
|
Anonymous | Hey guys, I've saw on the Super Bowl that Honda has come out with a truck! I know some of you guys probably knew about it ahead of time, but that's a new one for me. What do you think of it, I mean I'm sure it's better than POS americans because it's a Honda and better built and everything, but have any of you looked into it? |
|
Anonymous | Saw a link of info here: http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosconsumer/0502/02/G01-76895.htm |
|
ThatGuyYouKnow Unregistered guest | my first question will be "So who will rice it up first?" |
|
Silver Member Username: InvainMichigan United States Post Number: 409 Registered: Aug-04 | POS American's? Better built Honda. Wow. I think the Japs need to stick to cars and leave the pickups alone. |
|
Silver Member Username: InvainMichigan United States Post Number: 410 Registered: Aug-04 | POS American's? Better built Honda. Wow. I think the Japs need to stick to cars and leave the pickups alone. |
|
Silver Member Username: SolacedagonyNew Jersey US Post Number: 252 Registered: Oct-04 | Yea I agree. My dad's diesel F250 would crush that thing. |
|
Silver Member Username: InvainMichigan United States Post Number: 411 Registered: Aug-04 | Exactly. And then my dad's 04' Diesel Ram would take a crap on the wreckage. Did anybody read the Article? The best engine option puts out 250 horse. Wow, I think our Minivan has that much power. |
|
Silver Member Username: HdubbFarmington, Nm Usa Post Number: 609 Registered: Nov-04 | you guys know that the japs already make trucks? toyota, nissan? not saying i like them, well the older toyotas i do but id rather take a srt-10.  |
|
Silver Member Username: HdubbFarmington, Nm Usa Post Number: 610 Registered: Nov-04 | well the older 5.0s mustangs only had 240hp. from a V8. and thats just as much horse power as the f-150s. i dont think it has the torque it will need. thats what is the crucial part about trucks. |
|
Silver Member Username: SubfanaticWalton, Ky Usa Post Number: 163 Registered: Dec-04 | that truck will be eaten alive by my truck....and my truck is a 82 ford f100 haha....the japs should stick it to cars as joe said it...trucks are american...simple as that and the toyota T1 lines have nothing on us....and dont even get me started on that nissan garbage |
|
Gold Member Username: Jonathan_fGA USA Post Number: 3175 Registered: May-04 | "well the older 5.0s mustangs only had 240hp. from a V8." But it had 300+ lb/ft of torque. People forget, horsepower is very poor indication of true power, it is an equation. Torque equals force x distance, which means power. Horsepower on the other hand, is TorquexRPM/5454, meaning torque and RPM are variables. Anywhere above 5454 rpm will show high horsepower numbers because it is the point that horsepower surpasses torque. It works out good for the Honda marketing department because you can have a decent horsepower number with an anemic 4 cylinder motor, and thus deceive unknowing car buyers. You can increase horsepower by increasing either variable. So if you're wondering why all these Hondas boast about horsepower, it's because they are deceiving you into thinking they actually make a powerful motor, which they don't. All they do is make a 4 cylinder rev to high RPMs, you can make horsepower numbers look good at 8,000 rpm, but the engine still is an anemic motor lacking the necessary torque to actually get a car somewhere. You have to look really hard to find a torque figure for a Honda motor, they don't want you to see it. Torque will ALWAYS be torque, at whatever RPM, and THAT is what makes a powerful vehicle. "I mean I'm sure it's better than POS americans because it's a Honda and better built and everything, but have any of you looked into it?" You people are so easily decieved it's not even funny. My 83 C-10 had 350,000 trouble free miles on the engine when I rebuilt it, and the only reason I rebuilt it was because I planned to make more power, I wanted a fresh engine with new bearings and fresh valvetrain to handle the power added. People tend to compare Hondas to Dodge Neons, Ford Escorts, and Chevy Cavaliers, and yes, I agree Honda is better than those vehicles. These cars are considerably more expensive than a Ford Escort, Chevy Cavalier, and Dodge Neon. Before you say "that's because it's an import", just shut up. Hondas, Toyotas, and Nissans are built IN AMERICA, with American steel, American electronics, by American workers. The Japanese built Hondas were the biggest pieces of crap you could ever drive, hence why you don't see that many 15+ year old Hondas on the road, now do you? Another misconception is that Japanese cars use more intelligent electronics. Far from the truth. The "intelligence" of the modern automobile lies in the PLC, in which I program them every single day. It's not a computer, it is a processor that works on relay ladder logic. It can only run a single program in sequential steps. I could build a more intelligent electronic system in the spare parts bin I have at work, honestly. Every import I've had has ended before the 200,000 mile mark with catastrophic failure, my g/f had Hondas, I had a 93 Toyota Camry (biggest piece of sh*t I ever drove in my life), and it's ridiculous the money I wasted fixing those cars. The reason Honda and Toyota have a good reputation is because you don't see recall information on your nightly news, because these companies send recalls in the mail, they don't want you to know that they make mistakes. In the end it'll end up killing somebody. My girlfriend had over 10 recalls on an Accord she had, and they weren't exactly little quirks, a couple were seatbelts, one a brake issue, others electrical issues. There are also a lot less Hondas being bought, the less buyers you have, the fewer complaints you'll hear. These cars aren't perfect. Every American vehicle I've had has cranked out more than 200,000 miles, but I also maintain my vehicles well and don't go about with the mentality that I'll get by if I just change my oil every 3,000 miles. "What do you think of it?" I think it's the most pitiful excuse for a truck ever made. It has no power, no payload capacity (1,550 lbs), and very low towing ability (5,000 lbs). Just look at this quote, taken from the site you listed: "The trouble with most pickups is that the husband feels like he's made a selfish purchase," explained Jim Keller, Ridgeline's assistant large project leader/design. "A guy struggles when he buys a vehicle that doesn't address the lifestyle of the whole family. We wanted a vehicle a wife would approve of." Yes that's right, I really felt selfish when I bought my truck, I'm sure American men out there will be so happy to get a truck that will make their wives happy, after all, when I was hauling 15,000 lb trailers full of tile, lumber, and general building supplies so that me and my wife could have a roof to live under, I was secretly hoping for a truck that would make her happy, because she was upset that the seat pattern just totally clashed with the dashboard. Please. I think the Fab 5 created the design emphasis of this vehicle. It is basically a pussified Avalanche. Why must these companies want to take all the balls out of a vehicle, really? It is supposedly designed to be lightweight and good on gas, but in reality it uses an inferior chassis design and underpowered engine that offers no benefit in fuel economy. It's only 100 lbs lighter than the F-150 and barely better on gas. A UNIBODY chassis, yep that's right, Honda is so innovative because they made their own spin on a chassis design that was used in 60s musclecars to save weight. There is a reason trucks aren't unibody, because the chassis will completely snap under heavy load, that is why that Honda truck can't pull anything. If you're going to get a reliable truck that is better on fuel than other trucks and can perform LIKE A TRUCK, then get an American diesel and be done with it. It is not uncommon for a diesel to crank out 1 million miles, they're simple, reliable, and if I chained that little Honda POS to a Powerstroke, I'd snap that weak unibody frame in half. |
|
Anonymous | hehehe go Jon!!! |
|
Bronze Member Username: Tdeaton1021Near Tampa, Florida USA Post Number: 53 Registered: Sep-04 | yeah i would never buy a honda.... my sister just bought one over a navigator ... escalade... anything she wanted... my parents were paying... she bought an 05 pilot... i got an escalade 8-) .. i think i have the brains in the family lol... but yeah i love american cars and german cars... f*ck japenese sh*t ... we build badasss vehicles whi;le they build the cheezy stuff... f150... f250... ram with a hemi... silveradoSS ... wow nice cars... honda truck.. i think of a little pansy when i hear honda... the only jap truck i have respect for is a titan... but id rather have an f150 ... ... you want a real CAR not truck... get a viper or a benz E55 or SL65 or heck there tons of great american cars... ford GT ... oh and i like them italian ferraris and maserattis... those are some nice cars... and bentley... but japs just make cheap things... thats why they dont brake.. the have nothing else but working capability for ppl who cant afford the above cars...and do buy a honda or w/e... i dont have anything against you or your car really... just dont say its better then mine or any other cars like the ones above... if you had a honda s200 running a 9second 1/4 mile... i would rahter have the ford GT or a bently GT .maseratti quattroport...etc.. hands down |
|
Silver Member Username: SubfanaticWalton, Ky Usa Post Number: 166 Registered: Dec-04 | jon and trevor...honestly...just beautiful...jon you just simplified all the hate i feel against hondas....but one thing i didnt like about what you said...the dodge neon...you cant compare neons to honda's anymore...neons are better and faster now because of the srt4 design.....lol...not trying to say your wrong in any way because i have a 98 plymouth neon expresso and it is about perfectly equal to any honda ive raced and over the cavalier idk about the escort...but what you said was absolutly inspiring lol....thank you |
|
Silver Member Username: InvainMichigan United States Post Number: 412 Registered: Aug-04 | Yeah. I don't know were you find the words for stuff sometimes John. My god. Well done. |
|
Anonymous | JOE SMOE DRINKS HIS OWN PE E |
|
Bronze Member Username: Rick_mcfarlandPalm desert, Ca Usa Post Number: 39 Registered: Jan-05 | Simply beautiful jon. |
|
Silver Member Username: InvainMichigan United States Post Number: 414 Registered: Aug-04 | "Is it necessary for me to drink my own p*e. No. But it's sanitary and I enjoy the taste." And your a retard for calling American made car's POS. Go ahead and buy your little Honda. Don't cry when you go to pull an RV or something and the truck stalls out or the hitch rips off it. |
|
Anonymous | Yeah, but Honda still has the HP/Liter. The Integra with it's 1.8L engine made 195 horsepower, more HP/Liter than any Ford is capable of. And it has V-Tec. How's that for technology? |
|
Silver Member Username: InvainMichigan United States Post Number: 415 Registered: Aug-04 | Just like Jonathan said. Horse power doesn't mean everything. |
|
Silver Member Username: InvainMichigan United States Post Number: 416 Registered: Aug-04 | And also, at how many RPM's was that 195 horse really calculated at? I just read an article on modern Harley's and other 'cycles, and the debate between horsepower and torque. Like John said, above 5252 rpm's the car produces more horse. This is because the engine rpm is going up faster than the torque is going down. And the higher rpm's you get, the higher the horse spikes. Yes, this can equal higher speeds, which is why people can rice up little 2 liters and race with them, but we are talking about pickups. When are you ever gonna have your pickup doing super high rpm's? Your gonna want low rpm torque, and rated horsepower doesn't always matter. It's not that hard to take a small engine and make it produce high horse power. But try to put a 5th wheel behind your Honda, and your gonna take forever to accelerate and have horrible gas mileage. With my Dad's Dodge Ram 2500 with the Cummins diesel, you would never even guess we were pulling a 30 foot travel trailer. We also live on a farm, and have twice pulled a John Deere 4440 out of a foot or so of mud. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jonathan_fGA USA Post Number: 3177 Registered: May-04 | Don't be so sure of yourself. You really don't know a lot about cars, do you? The Acura Integra 1.8 Liter engine: 195hp @8,000rpm. 130 ft/lbs at 7,500 rpm. So that equals 108 hp/liter So, the way they made that horsepower was to rev the motor to an ungodly RPM. To prove my point to you about Honda using RPM as a crutch to make horsepower look good, I'll take the Ford F-150 engine (since this is a truck thread). Ford 5.4L engine: 300hp@4,750 rpm 365lb/ft at 3,750 rpm. As you can see, this engine is designed to provide low end torque, after all it is a truck motor. So for beginners, the engine's horsepower occurs below the 5454 crossover point of torque and horsepower, making HP/Liter look bad at 55.5 hp/liter. Now, if we were to put that same engine in the same RPM range as that Integra, it would be this: 365 lb/ft of torque at 7,500 rpm. HP at that RPM would be 501.92 HP. So now, that engine makes 92.9 hp/liter. Closing the gap, aren't we? Now if we applied that much torque at 8,000 rpm, like the Integra: 365 lb/ft at 8,000 535 hp at 8,000 rpm That makes 99hp/liter. Not bad at all really, now that were comparing apples to apples. A little camshaft improvement and induction modification would easily sling this motor into the 100+ hp/liter category at that RPM. It's not that they can't do it, it's because when you actually have an engine that is capable of making power, you don't have to rev it to 8,000 unusable RPMs. Now, what would the Honda look like at the trucks RPM range? 130 lb ft of torque at 3,750 rpm. Horsepower would be 89 Hurts, doesn't it? The fact of the matter is that a 4 cylinder won't even make this much power at that RPM, so it's being optimistic. By the way, the HP/Liter in that configuration would be 49.4 HP/Liter, less than the Ford truck engine. So your little Honda engine doesn't win the day. Even if you moved the HP up to 4,750 rpm, it still would only make around 60hp/liter at best, so it's not anything to scream about. Oh yeah, and the Honda engine uses a 10.6:1 compression ratio, requiring premium fuel. Raise the Ford's compression even more, and you'll see even more power from it. But it didn't have to use that much compression to make it's power. "And it has V-Tec." Ah, V-Tec, Honda's rendition of variable camshaft technology. Variable cam timing is used by manufacturers all over the world, Honda just put a nametag on it. Ford has an even better version variable cam timing, used in the new 4.6L V8 in the 2005 Mustangs. Unlike Honda's VTEC, which activates a second set of "high-lift" lobes on the engine's cams, Ford's Dual Equal Variable Cam Timing system mechanically alters cam timing through the use of a solenoid-activated hydraulic circuit linked to the camshaft's chain sprocket. In Ford's version, an actuator attached to the camshaft's drive sprocket adjusts the camshaft's physical position in response to various loads rather than activating a second set of lobes. Another new technology debuting in the Mustang is the Charge Motion Control Valve (CMCV), which is basically a two-position flapper valve installed in a spacer between the intake manifold and the siamesed intake ports in the new 4.6L's three-valve cylinder heads that controls flow into the port. When it's closed, calibrated slots in the valve block part of the airflow through the head, increasing charge motion, or turbulence, in the cylinders to promote better combustion. At heavy loads and high rpm, the valve opens to allow high-velocity flow. In short, it optimizes your cam AND your cylinder heads for the RPM you're running. So, I'll ask your own question, how's that for technology, b*tch? |
|
Silver Member Username: InvainMichigan United States Post Number: 417 Registered: Aug-04 | Dang. John posted right after me and stole my thunder. lol. |
|
Silver Member Username: SubfanaticWalton, Ky Usa Post Number: 170 Registered: Dec-04 | THIS IS THE ABSOLUTE BEST THREAD EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
Anonymous | I bet that Integra would still spank that new Mustang in a race. It's lighter, and weight matters. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jonathan_fGA USA Post Number: 3178 Registered: May-04 | Will it really? After all, 1/4 mile times speak for themselves, don't they? 0-60 of the Type R Integra was 7 seconds. 1/4 mile time was 15.3 seconds. 0-60 of the new Mustang is 5.1 seconds, 1/4 mile time is 13.8 seconds. So go ahead and believe that the Integra will "spank" the new Mustang. The fact of the matter is that the only Acura that will equal (and NOT surpass) this car is the NSX, in which it's 1/4 mile times were exactly the same, and 0-60 time was lower than the new Mustang. Don't believe me? Go here: http://www.ssmoparmuscle.com/speedcomp.htm Not to mention the NSX is nearly 4x the cost of a Mustang at 90,000 bucks, so really it should be compared to Vipers and Corvettes, which will REALLY hand it's a$$ to it. And you think you're getting good value with these cars. |
|
Silver Member Username: FfxdevilarmsPost Number: 153 Registered: Jul-04 | This is somewhat off topic but if i would buy any car these days i would get the Chrysler 300C, that car really kicks A$$. |
|
ThatGuyYouKnow Unregistered guest | BMW M3 (fav car) has better run times for almost half the price. 47,300 MSRP. johnathan can u do a conversion real quick? (pls) Nominal output/rpm: 333/7900 Max. torque/rpm: 262/4900 lb-ft Fuel grade: Premium unleaded and compare that with those trucks? |
|
Bronze Member Username: Tdeaton1021Near Tampa, Florida USA Post Number: 56 Registered: Sep-04 | yes sir! the 300C is a bada$s vehicle ... i cant wait til the 300C SRT-8 comes out... 6.1 liter hemi producing 425 horsepower! 0-60 in 4.9 seconds ... put that b*tch on 22s also... and your integra will be on what? 19s? .. i want my mom to get one so bad but i dont think the seats will satisfy her :-\ ... ima try to get her into a E55 or CL55 or maybe a STS-V when they come out... those seats should be comfortable ... but still not the style of the 300C ...lol .. black 300C ... 22s... painted black grill ... one word... SICK! .. the black grill looks better than the E&G grill .. as does the bacl grill look better on my escalde than the people who spent 800 on a billet...i spent 94.... my dad went to SEMA... they had so many bada$$ 300Cs there i wihs i could show you guys the pictures but they are 4 MP so i cant send them over ecoustics...sry guys... oh yeah... hondas are punanny |
|
Gold Member Username: Jonathan_fGA USA Post Number: 3179 Registered: May-04 | Oh, correction of above, BTW. I meant to say that the NSX has a higher 0-60 time than that Mustang (aka slower). You'll see that on the website listed above That Guy you know, I'm not sure what type of conversion you want, but here goes: At that RPM, the HP/Liter will be 104 hp/liter. So if that truck made it's peak torque at 7,900 like that BMW, it would make 528 Hp, equalling around 98 hp/liter. If it made the same torque that it did at horsepower peak, which is 344 lb ft, then it would make 499 hp, equalling 92.3 hp/liter. You've got to remember that this were if that truck's engine were optimized for high RPM, assuming that the torque peak fell at high RPMs, which is accomplishable with altering the design of the motor and optimizing it for high RPM torque. If that truck engine had a higher compression, it would make even more power than it already does, it would just require a higher grade fuel. Trucks don't get that good mileage, so people don't want a truck that will require premium fuel. If that BMW was put in the trucks RPM range, making the same torque that it did at it's current horsepower peak, then it would make 200 hp, equalling 62.5 hp/liter. HP conversions are pretty simple. TorquexRPM/5454 equals horsepower. Horsepowerx5454/RPM equals torque. So, that BMW would make 333hpx5454/7,900. That equals 229 lb ft of torque. 229x4,750 (trucks peak HP)/5454 would equal roughly 200hp, just so you know how I got that figure. If it made peak torque at 4,750 rpm, then it would make 228hp, equalling 71hp/liter. You can see how RPM and torque both affect horsepower numbers. |
|
Silver Member Username: HdubbFarmington, Nm Usa Post Number: 620 Registered: Nov-04 | well the only type of american cars that japs compare to are small compacts. in which that case these cars are usually made with japenense parts. |
|
Silver Member Username: HdubbFarmington, Nm Usa Post Number: 621 Registered: Nov-04 | i just looked at the link to that truck....that is the ugliest new truck ive ever seen. |
|
Silver Member Username: InvainMichigan United States Post Number: 433 Registered: Aug-04 | Exactly. |
|
Silver Member Username: Erik123456Arlington, Tx Post Number: 395 Registered: Aug-04 | this thread is retarded cars are all about prefrences as far as torque and hp who really cares anyways cars are to get you to and from work 99 percent of the time i have a honda civic, yea it has like 120 hp or something really low compared to a mustang but it also never needs maintenance and it gets 33 mpg for me I drive it to work and that suits me just fine civics are always a best pick and they have phenomenal reliability ratings let honda have their truck its a cool vehicle and they arent trying to market it as a construction truck just like the sport trac wasnt meant to be put to work in the lumber yard any vehicle can be fast with the right mods its 100 percent opinion whether to like a 11 second s2000 or an 11 second old mopar car |
|
Gold Member Username: Jonathan_fGA USA Post Number: 3193 Registered: May-04 | http://www.jdpower.com/cc/auto/index.jsp Choose vehicle advisor, and then "help me choose". Leave the price range open and set mechanical quality and long term dependability as the only priorities. Go ahead and experiment with different categories. The category that Japanese automakers took by far were compact cars and minivans, I stated that Hondas were better in the compact category above. American cars dominated the sports car, midsize car, and pickup (compact and full size) lists, while Honda and Toyota were far down the list. JD Power ratings aren't based on opinion either, they are based on people and problems experienced in vehicles. You're doing a fair comparison of products and listening to true fact instead of a bunch of snotty carbuyers who turn their nose up at every car but their own, and people who aren't happy if they aren't b*tching about something. Most problems encountered with a vehicle are caused by poor maintenance, even the CEO of Honda USA stated that there is minimal, if any, difference in the quality of vehicles being made by the varying companies. Pretty bold statement from a manufacturer that boasts "It's a Honda" on their commercials. There isn't anything wrong with Honda, Toyota, or the Big 3, it's just that biased opinions tend to steer people in 50 different directions. No car can accomodate everyones needs, no matter how hard a manufacturer may try. Same story as car audio, choose based on what you like. ALL cars are less reliable than they used to be, simply because everyone wants a car that will wipe their a$$ for them. The more equipment you add and the more complex systems get, the more failures that will happen. When you had real steel, a cast-iron motor and transmission, simplicity in engineering with solid build quality, you got a car or truck that will last years upon years as opposed to getting a car with the throwaway mentality that everyone has about their vehicles nowadays. |
|
Silver Member Username: James1115Wilton, Ct Post Number: 611 Registered: Dec-04 | man Jonathan you brought a tear to my eye. lol! you sound like you have been waiting a year for this type of thread. anyways well put. I have an american made Jeep cherokee and I love it. I take good care of it as I did with my last one that I sold with just under 265,000 miles. its all about the care you put into your car. Like you said everyone wants a car tese days that will wipe their own a$$ for them and after they buy it and find out its not everything they cracked it up to be they sell it with 24000 miles and buy something new just to say they have a new car. It's pretty pathetic if you ask me. well I enjoyed reading this I just wanted you to know that John you made my night. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jonathan_fGA USA Post Number: 3199 Registered: May-04 | Really he dug his own grave, simply due to misinformation and being consumed by his own biased opinions. I've had plenty of vehicles in my day, but the Toyota I had and the Hondas my girlfriend had were all nightmares. My biggest gripe with the so called "imports" is working on them, and that the parts are extremely expensive even though the cars are built in the USA, plus the cars initial price is higher. Really, they're not any better so I see no point in spending any more money than I have to. I also have no desire in funding a corporation that produces in the USA, uses our steel and our electronics and our workers, but has it's headquarters in Japan so that the profits and most of the taxes go to them instead of us, in which America is where they net their biggest profits. And then the same people that buy these cars will b*tch about outsourcing. Glad you can see that jackass, way to do your part. It just isn't worth having one to me, and I really didn't feel like buying all the necessary tools to take care of stupid stuff like CV Joints, transaxle replacement, suspension work, etc. I just plain out don't agree with the engineering of newer cars. Front wheel drive is one of the stupidest designs out there anyway, there is just too much going on up there for it to last a long time. That's the biggest thing you have to look for in cars today, the CV joints and the transaxle are the first things to go and are one of those things you really can't prevent from happening. PLCs are fairly reliable and really you won't have a lot of trouble from the processor itself, it's all the sensors and input devices that go out. Your typical diagnostic and check engine light doesn't show you anything extremely important, it can only show you what errors occur within the electronic system and the sensors attached to it, and those problems are typically generated by the electronic system itself and could be prevented if they didn't put all that worthless crap in there to begin with. Engines and trannies aren't really any more advanced than the used to be, the only improvements that were beneficial are roller camshafts and rockers, and overdrive transmissions. |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics