FTO AUSTRALIA

Pretty impressive car.
What is the most powerful NA FTO?

http://speedhunters.com/archive/2011/04 ... r-dc5.aspx

RPW 6A12 had some interesting estimate. Project was never completed

I believe Aza holds the record on here... unsure of those overseas.

It's a honda and the legendary k20 series engine, which full of aftermarket parts available unlike fto with sh*tty performance parts from rpw.

Saw that teg in Sydney autosalon. It has 2.4l stroker kit in it.
Fto is never gonna achieve that with its 2.0l capacity.


PS: primary school teacher! dayummm.. she sounds hot.

Misu will be kicking themselves for life, giving Honda MIVEC ideas.
Honda used the idea into motor sport(F1,touring cars) which gave them valuable learning data.Better set-up ideas.
Turbo'ed FTO is the best bang for buck if you do the price calculation to get say 200fwkw.
N/A tuning makes you think outside the box but more head aches and insomnia

i like the dc5's, i just dont like the fact that its a honda, and you cant find a honda that doesnt have a thrashed engine lol.

I believe it is a 2.5L (bored as well).

Is it just parts/aftermarket? K series has something pretty special. I mean, not any motor can produce such power no matter what mods

BearOnFire wrote:Misu will be kicking themselves for life, giving Honda MIVEC ideas.
Honda used the idea into motor sport(F1,touring cars) which gave them valuable learning data.Better set-up ideas.
Turbo'ed FTO is the best bang for buck if you do the price calculation to get say 200fwkw.
N/A tuning makes you think outside the box but more head aches and insomnia

You serious? Mivec and VTEC YO!!!!! is old tech. Most engines these days use a more advanced gradual system and is not just n on/off switch like the Mitsubishi/Honda.

Which modern NA engine gives you 120bhp/l at stock form, bar VTEC YO!!!!!?
Don't give me ferrari/porche.

payaya wrote:

BearOnFire wrote:Misu will be kicking themselves for life, giving Honda MIVEC ideas.
Honda used the idea into motor sport(F1,touring cars) which gave them valuable learning data.Better set-up ideas.
Turbo'ed FTO is the best bang for buck if you do the price calculation to get say 200fwkw.
N/A tuning makes you think outside the box but more head aches and insomnia

You serious? Mivec and VTEC YO!!!!! YO!!!!! is old tech. Most engines these days use a more advanced gradual system and is not just n on/off switch like the Mitsubishi/Honda.

Word of mouth among the VTEC YO!!!!! YO!!!!!!! home mechanic/wrecker dealer around the Smithfield area. He hates FTO with passion. I re-payed the favor by borrowing his set up ideas. Some VTEC YO!!!!!'ers in the Cabramatta area will reuctantly agree.

Payaya, the newer ones change cam timing to and "infinite" degree (like VANOS) but they do not have lift.
The iVTEC (not all, just Type R versions) have this AND lift which is still on/off.

I recall BMW making or planning to make pneumatic valves which would make do without cams and a throttle body and allowing infinite variation in lift.

The newer MIVEC just controls timing for inlet cam (nothing special about this at all).
The FTO MIVEC controls lift/duration but not infinite cam timing

spetz wrote: The newer MIVEC just controls timing for inlet cam (nothing special about this at all).
The FTO MIVEC controls lift/duration but not infinite cam timing

wrong,

the new Mivec is constantly variable (doesnt kick in at a set RPM) and individually controls the inlet and exhaust cams...

Yes on the 4B1X series, I was talking about the Evo IX MIVEC which is just inlet.
Either way though it controls nothing else than cam timing. It has to effect on lift. So it just flattens the torque curve, as opposed to the old MIVEC which allowed short duration/low lift for normal driving (below 5,500rpm) and high duration/high lift cam profile for after 5,500rpm.

From an performance NA perspective the old MIVEC is better

spetz wrote: From an performance NA perspective the old MIVEC is better

yes and no... but i understand where you're comming from

Yes from a performance perspective it is a better system.
There is only so much timing can do, whereas lift/duration can do much more. Cam timing can be set to be most efficient at a certain rpm (high rpm in a performance application). Whereas with adjustable cam timing, as the newer MIVEC is, it just allows this efficiency to be spread throughout the revrange.
And in reality this is what new Vs old is, efficiency and performance

Personally I would stick with the "old" MIVEC for no other reason than to hear it sing when it comes on song at 5500 rpm

spetz wrote:Payaya, the newer ones change cam timing to and "infinite" degree (like VANOS) but they do not have lift.
The iVTEC (not all, just Type R versions) have this AND lift which is still on/off.

I recall BMW making or planning to make pneumatic valves which would make do without cams and a throttle body and allowing infinite variation in lift.

The newer MIVEC just controls timing for inlet cam (nothing special about this at all).
The FTO MIVEC controls lift/duration but not infinite cam timing

Man ford and a lot of other brand of vvt controls lift.

phunkydude wrote:Which modern NA engine gives you 120bhp/l at stock form, bar VTEC YO!!!!! YO!!!!!?
Don't give me ferrari/porche.

Which Honda produces 120 hp a litre stock?

Does ford control lift? Anyway I am not aware of those cars but either which way it could not be to an infinitely variable rate?

And, the F20C motor found in the S2000 makes 240bhp from 2.0L

And the ford has more power and double the torque at a much more useable rev range. No one told Honda to use 2 litres and for a 70k car is piss poor.