Honda Ridgeline Owners Club Forums banner

1 - 20 of 85 Posts

·
Green With Envy Moderator
Joined
·
2,346 Posts
Very interesting. I wonder why plans for a V8 were shelved.

Or could we see a future Ridgeline with a V8?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Perhaps GM got scared. ;) They don't need anymore competition. Honda is a engine company that also makes cars. They sold some 17 million in 2003, and project 20 million in 2005. So for Honda to sell more engines is great for them, no matter where they are going. But who knows, maybe Honda will use someone else's engine in the cars, but I don't think so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
.

Thankfully it was not done .... Honda does not need a gas guzzler V-8 with
poor performance .

The current V-6 layout , with a few " adjustments " will be more than up to
putting the competition away .

Honda has successfully " trashed " 50 years of truck building with their first
venture .... the best is yet to come .

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
1manparty,

Based on the way Honda engines are scoring in open wheel racing, my guess is that they can make thier own engine if they need a V8, and continue the V6.


1manparty said:
Perhaps GM got scared. ;) They don't need anymore competition. Honda is a engine company that also makes cars. They sold some 17 million in 2003, and project 20 million in 2005. So for Honda to sell more engines is great for them, no matter where they are going. But who knows, maybe Honda will use someone else's engine in the cars, but I don't think so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion Starter #7 (Edited)
H345 said:
.

Thankfully it was not done .... Honda does not need a gas guzzler V-8 with
poor performance .

The current V-6 layout , with a few " adjustments " will be more than up to
putting the competition away .

Honda has successfully " trashed " 50 years of truck building with their first
venture .... the best is yet to come .

.
"Gas guzzler V8 with poor performance?"

Compare the performance AND the fuel economy of the new C6 Corvette to the Acura NSX & the Honda S2000 and then get back to me. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Ridge said:
If you want GM engine, buy a GM truck. I expect to get a Honda engine in my Honda truck. I'm paying the premium for Honda reliability.
So a 300 HP, 325 LB-FT, aluminum block/aluminum head V8 that yielded similar fuel economy to the present V6 would be a bad idea. :confused:

Did people who bought "Honda" Passports get Honda anything?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
996 Posts
AccordV6 said:
So a 300 HP, 325 LB-FT, aluminum block/aluminum head V8 that yielded similar fuel economy to the present V6 would be a bad idea. :confused:

Did people who bought "Honda" Passports get Honda anything?
It can have great specs, but not great reliability. I'm buying Honda and Toyota for their bullet proof reputation. I don't think GM is know for a similar reputation. If they were, their resale value would reflect it....... and I didn't buy a Passport.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion Starter #10 (Edited)
Ridge said:
It can have great specs, but not great reliability. I'm buying Honda and Toyota for their bullet proof reputation. I don't think GM is know for a similar reputation. If they were, their resale value would reflect it....... and I didn't buy a Passport.
On what set of facts are you basing your ENGINE reliability statements on?

Have you ever been in a vehicle powered by an LS1/LS1 derived engine?

I have. I owned an '99 LS1 powered Z28. The car was lacking in many areas compared to a Honda. The engine was NOT one of those areas. And it's more than just "specs;" it's also seat-of-the-pants. It made my V6 Accord seem slow in comparison while yielding real world fuel mileage that was strikingly comparable.

Ever witness 2,000 RPM @ 92 MPH (in 6th gear) without even having to think about downshifting in order to pass?

Ever see a car pull cleanly in 6th gear with 600 RPM showing on the tach?

GM could learn a lot from Honda.

But Honda could learn a lot from GM about making inexpensive, POWERFUL and fuel efficient V8s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
.

Accord

I think you missed the point - GM was not going to send any Vette parts , just the taxi cab versions .

The high tech "base line" that Honda has established with the RTL has given
the biggest advance in 50 years to the truck industry .

The weight savings with the front drive plus on-call light weight rear drive if/when traction is needed provides 4wd/awd drive with the same weight as
traditional 2wheel drive units .

Engine/Transmission Control Modules are currently upping the ante on hp to
40+ and towing to 6000+ ....... and the truck is only in the first month of
release/sales .

It would be neat if Ford , GM , Chrysler , and others would step up ,
but based on their engineering ( antiques with a new vehicle title )
standards it is not likely .

The next SEMA Show in LV will show more high tech advances from Honda
than anyone would ever imagine , and they will be available by the truck
load - pun intended .

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion Starter #12 (Edited)
H345 said:
.

Accord

I think you missed the point - GM was not going to send any Vette parts , just the taxi cab versions .

The high tech "base line" that Honda has established with the RTL has given
the biggest advance in 50 years to the truck industry .

The weight savings with the front drive plus on-call light weight rear drive if/when traction is needed provides 4wd/awd drive with the same weight as
traditional 2wheel drive units .

Engine/Transmission Control Modules are currently upping the ante on hp to
40+ and towing to 6000+ ....... and the truck is only in the first month of
release/sales .

It would be neat if Ford , GM , Chrysler , and others would step up ,
but based on their engineering ( antiques with a new vehicle title )
standards it is not likely .

The next SEMA Show in LV will show more high tech advances from Honda
than anyone would ever imagine , and they will be available by the truck
load - pun intended .

.
The modifications you discuss aren't exclusive to Hondas or Ridgelines. Virtually every modern engine can see similar power gains (on a percentage basis) with similar mods.

How do you know what engine GM was going to "send?" They would have sent whatever the signed contract specified.

I'm not aware of any "tax cabs" that use LS1/LS1 derived V8s.

But I am aware that GM is now building an aluminum block VORTEC truck engine with LS6 (z06) Corvette heads. Dubbed the 5300 VORTEC HO, it produces 310 HP and 335 LB-FT of torque. I can't even begin to list the performance parts that are available for that, but 350 REAL HP is EASILY obtainable.

GM just introduced a TRANSVERSE MOUNT verison of that same engine for front wheel drive applications (new Impala SS, Monte Carlo SS, etc).

How much does the Ridgeline engine weigh?

I'll bet that it's within 100 pound of the aluminum block/head GM 5.3 liter V8 (~ 480 pounds)

And I KNOW which engine makes more power and more torque.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
80honda said:
No way am I driving a Honda with a GM motor. I don't care how much HP or torque it has.
Exactly why is that?

How familiar are you with the Gen III smallblock engines?

Have you ever driven a vehicle that was powered by one?

They're excellent engines, admittedly in need of an equally excellent car.

That Ridgeline would rock with a GEN III V8 without ANY compromise in fuel efficiency.

Small engines in large vehicles aren't all that "efficient." That's becasue they need to rev all the time to compensate for their lack of torque.

Compare the performance and the fuel economy of the new C6 Corvette to the Honda S2000 if you need proof of that. When driven with restraint (and per the EPA), the 'Vette gets SUPERIOR mileage while producing 160 additional horses and nearly 2.5 times the torque.

If that's a "dinosaur" then I guess we need more of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Comparing the GM and Honda motors is a tricky practice at best, because both manufaturers are opposites, philosophically speaking. Neither one is better than the other in absolute terms.

GM and the American car manufaturers specialize in big, powerful engines. There's no doubt about that. The C6 engine (I looked it up on the web) is a full 6 liters big. It's powerful enough that it doesn't need to use as much fuel. It also has more horsepower and torque at lower RPM's compared to the S2000 engine.

Honda seems to be more about getting the most out of their small engines. With their VTEC, they can get more than 100HP per liter of engine displacement. As stated already, you have to rev the engine higher to get it, but that's the nature of this beast. The S2000 also has 4 cylinders less than the C6. And the S2000 costs about 10 grand less than the C6. I really think this reflects the Japanese culture and philosophy of getting the most out of thier products. Honda also designs their engines to meet stricter emissions standards, hence the Ridgeline is the first truck to claim low emissions.

And finally, as a practical matter, it was probably easier for Honda to use a pre-existing engine they're familiar with and design around it (transmission, intake, exhaust, etc.) than to take another manufacturer's engine and try to design around it.

I think we also have to remember Honda designed the Ridgeline as a complete package and they weren't trying to design a monster of a truck their first time out. Honda is betting the other features of the truck (the trunk, dentless bed, interior space, etc.) will tip the scales away from the lack of engine power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
jvacierto said:
Honda seems to be more about getting the most out of their small engines. With their VTEC, they can get more than 100HP per liter of engine displacement.
Making more HP per liter is critical in a racing series where engine displacement is limited by a sanctioning body.

It means NOTHING on the street, where displacement is essentially unlimited.

HP/pound of engine weight and HP/MPG are what I care about on the street. And the C6 Corvette's "dinosaur" V8 trounces the "high tech" @S2000's engine on both counts.

That phenomenon isn't limited to GM, either. Take a look @ the new Hemi powered Grand Cherokee. At 5,000 pounds, it's nearly 600 pounds heavier than the Ridgeline, makes 330 HP, a whopping 375 LB-FT of torque and still matches the Ridgeline's 21 MPG highway while giving up just 2 MPG city.

Honda makes some great vehicles and their overall quality is certainly superior to what one can expect from American car companies. But referring to modern American V8s such as the new Hemi and the various GM LS1 derivitives as "poor performing, inefficient dinosaurs" is just plain ridiculous.

The LS1 in my Z28 Camaro was a PHENOMENAL engine. A friend of mine with an Acura RSX Type S drove my car before I sold it. He was literally shocked @ the level of performance (and handling; mine was a 1LE car.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
996 Posts
This is purely psychological. People for the most part don't want a General Motors engine in their Honda. From a marketing perspective, I think it would be a fatal error on Hondas part. People buy Japanese because of the ick factor they have about American cars, even though most Japanese autos are now made in America. The CRV was appealing to me because it is imported from Japan, but it doesn't meet my needs. The memory of bad steel from Detroit is still burned into many peoples memories, and psychologically if you put a GM motor in my Honda, it's like putting a pile of dog crap in my chocolate cake. Honda is renown for their engines. They certainly don't need help from GM.

Business is all about building brand. Few companies have built brand better than Toyota and Honda. Few have done better at running their brand into the ground than GM, Ford, etc. I think this explains partly why people are resistant to your GM motor, accordv6
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion Starter #18 (Edited)
Ridge said:
This is purely psychological. People for the most part don't want a General Motors engine in their Honda. From a marketing perspective, I think it would be a fatal error on Hondas part. People buy Japanese because of the ick factor they have about American cars, even though most Japanese autos are now made in America. The CRV was appealing to me because it is imported from Japan, but it doesn't meet my needs. The memory of bad steel from Detroit is still burned into many peoples memories, and psychologically if you put a GM motor in my Honda, it's like putting a pile of dog crap in my chocolate cake. Honda is renown for their engines. They certainly don't need help from GM.

Business is all about building brand. Few companies have built brand better than Toyota and Honda. Few have done better at running their brand into the ground than GM, Ford, etc. I think this explains partly why people are resistant to your GM motor, accordv6
So you'd have no use for a 300 + HP/325 + FT-LB V8 Ridgeline that got the same or better fuel mileage than the current Ridgeline.... :confused:

How many 350+ HP cars that get 19 city/28 highway do Honda and Toyota build?

Answer: None
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,092 Posts
AccordV6 said:
How many 350+ HP cars that get 19 city/28 highway do Honda and Toyota build?
Answer: None
The Ridgeline would never get that milage because of it's poor aerodynamics. The reason Honda didn't put the iVTEC VCM engine in the Ridgeline was they found it would rarely be able to use the 3 cyclinder mode because it's just pushing to much air.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion Starter #20 (Edited)
vertrkr said:
The Ridgeline would never get that milage because of it's poor aerodynamics. The reason Honda didn't put the iVTEC VCM engine in the Ridgeline was they found it would rarely be able to use the 3 cyclinder mode because it's just pushing to much air.
A 5,000 pound GMC Silverado 4X4 extended cab gets 15/19 MPG (per the EPA) with the 310 HP/335 LB-FT 5300 VORTEC HO.

A 5,000 pound Grand Cherokee gets 14/21 MPG (per the EPA) with the 330 HP/375 LB-FT Hemi.

But a Ridgeline, which is 500 pounds lighter than either one, couldn't at least equal the current Ridgeline's fuel economy if it used a similar V8 engine? :rolleyes:

What about the Honda S2000? Are bad aerodynamics the issue there, too? That only gets 20 city/26 highway MPG (per the EPA) and makes a mere 240 HP and 162 LB-FT from its "efficient" 2.2 liter 4 cylinder. The 400 HP/400 LB-FT 6.0 liter V8 Corvette, which is 350 pounds HEAVIER, gets 19/28. :eek: And that 'Vette will blow the S2000 into the weeds without even trying.

The same holds true for the Acura NSX. That never got decent fuel economy, relative to its aerodynamics, weight and power output.

High revving, small displacement engines with relatively high specific outputs (HP/liter) simply aren't all that "efficient," despite the hype that people like to throw around. That's because they have to geared very LOW in order to go. And that kind of gearing equates to lots of revs, which are the exponential enemy of fuel efficiency.

I challenge you to name a single Honda or Toyota automobile that can equal or beat the "inefficient" Corvette's 6.0 liter V8 on a HP/Engine weight and HP/MPG basis.

C6 6 speed 'Vette:

400 HP/485 pounds engine weight = .825 HP/Pound

400 HP/ ((19 + 28)/2) = 17.02 HP/MPG
 
1 - 20 of 85 Posts
Top