AcuraFan

It's the image. Honda is percieved at a more Earth friendly company. More so than Toyota...and I think largely because of their use of V8s.

Says you. You don't know how much it will cost Honda to develop such a platform, how much it would cost them to build new factories or retool existing ones, how much they might lose in image, etc vs how much more they might make off this proposed platform. You're not a accountant...you're only going on what you would like to see...and that's not going to pay the corporate bills.

Honda might go to a front biased AWD system in future but most likely not RWD. Audi did the same thing at one point. They decided the over all costs weren't worth the return so they chose to stick with FWD and offer AWD.

Colin

They make V-8s and V-10s because the formula requires it. This is the only reason. IRL (and CART before) require a V-8 in a purpose built race engine, and F-1 dictated that all engines will be N/A V-10 several years ago to help curb costs.

ClutchPerformer

You're right. I don't know how much that will cost. But what I DO know is that this cost must be less than developing a platform, factory, and ALL-NEW tooling for a gas turbine engine, since they've never made anything remotely close to that before.

You're right on the first part, at least. I'm a mechanical engineer, but what I'm "going on" is what the arguments were that justified Honda not making a V-8 (cost) and what it will take to make a gas turbine (more cost).

phile

Though it says ULEV and LEV, those two cars are not as clean as Civic or a 4-cylinder Accord with ULEV or LEV ratings. They may not be gas guzzlers, but they're not exactly the type of "green" that Honda wants, maybe that's why Honda won't built a V8.

ClutchPerformer

Yes they are. All engines must adhere to the same emissions standards in grams of NOx, uHCs, and CO per unit time. They're not measured per displacement, or per power output, but in absolute terms. So these V-8s are exactly as clean as the Civic or 4-cylinder Accord with the same emissions ratings.

I will not argue about this.

AcuraFan

You're right, building a factory to produce a turbine engine will be higher than a factory to build a RWD car. But it's very possible that Honda would make more on the jet engine then they would on a RWD V8 car. Remember, Honda already makes some of the top selling cars in the world...it's likely that they decided possible increase in sales wouldn't justify that cost. Their ROI (Return On Investment) wouldn't be great enough. ROI = Income - Expense. If ROI is negative, it's a bad thing. And I think Honda decided the ROI on a Jet engine will be positive whereas the ROI on a RWD V8 would be negative or negligible...but that's just an assumption.

ClutchPerformer

I hope you can see that this statment is illogical.

So you're allowed to make assumptions and I'm not? That's unfair...:P

phile

But if you look at the actual ratings, they're not the same. The Lexus LS430 is ULEV rated, but look at the rating: 12.3-12.9 pounds of smog-forming pollution per 15,000 miles, 6 out of a possible 10 in most states.

http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/E-LEXUS-LS430-04.htm

An Acura MDX, also ULEV rated, is: 5.3-6.3 pounds of smog-forming pollution per 15,000 miles, 8 out of 10 in most states.

A Honda Accord 4-cylinder is rated at 0-1.0 pounds of smog-forming pollution per 15,000 miles, 8 out of 10 in most states.

How can you possibly say the Lexus LS430 is exactly as clean as the 4-cylinder Accord based on these numbers?

It even says on the epa site: "The emissions/air pollution score contains an absolute scale from 0-10 that can be used to compare all classes and model years of vehicles against each other. It is designed to give the most complete information in an easy-to-understand format."

This numerical rating is the rating that can be compared across all vehicles, not the ULEV or LEV ratings.

I'm not arguing, just pointing out some things that need clarification.

AcuraFan

I don't see how that would be illogical. Honda has already said one of the reasons why they won't build RWD is due to cost (re: ROI is too low)...yet this corporation, that has stockholders to answer to, has gone ahead with building jet engines which means to me, they are able to document and justify the ROI of the project.


When did I say you can't make assumptions?

ClutchPerformer

Thanks.

dom

I'm really starting to like Clutchperformer. I guess great minds think alike

Thats the key right there. US customers, which for the record comprise over 50% of Honda Auto sales. Wake up and smell the V8 fumes Honda !!!

phile

Well I still think that if Acura wants a model more expensive than the RL to compete with the Lexus LS430, Audi A8L, BMW 745 or M-B S430, they would need a V8. But I don't think the RL needs one, nor do any of the models in the Honda lineup, including the Pilot.

ClutchPerformer

How about the NSX?

phile

The NSX is hard for me to say. One part of me wants it to be a V8, even a V12 just for bragging rights. But if Honda can make it a V6 and do 0-60 in under 4 seconds and handle like a surgeon's knife using lightweight body panels and frame, I'd rather have that.

AcuraFan

I actually didn't say you can't make assumptions...I'm just not a fan of assumptions without backing. You're making assumptions based on nothing but personal opinion and conjecture that these changes would help sales and that, without any backing from Honda or the numbers, it's cost effective to do. Honda hasn't said "well, we could make more money if we do this...but we just don't want to." My assumption is based on what Honda has said...that making these changes will cost more money than they are worth.

What I'm getting at is you seem to essentially be saying is: "they should make these changes because it's what people in the US want...and look, they're making airplanes, they have the money to do these thing." And all I'm saying is: "It's not about having the money it's about making the numbers work first." Honda has gotten to be the size they are by making the right decisions...I'll give them the benefit of the doubt here.

That's all.

AcuraFan

...oops...hit the wrong button...sorry.

ClutchPerformer

Um....This will never happen. Sorry.

ClutchPerformer

You're right. That's why Honda is so much smaller than every other major automobile manufacturer. But some people would just call that "more efficient".

phile

You never know, Honda could do it with IMA for instance.

EuphratesTheAlmighty

You know... I can't wait until every honda has IMA... and then every car has a problem with battery leaks, ruining the whole "green image".



So why race in those formulas in the first place? Wouldn't it just be cheaper to make a bid to enter stock car racing?

phile

The bigger concern with IMA is the cost in the long run, those batteries supposedly last for only 7-8 years...how much would it cost to replace them? And are they recyclable?

Colin

Well, F-1 is the pinacle of motorsports, and Mr. Honda decided that this was the best way to train young engineers, and compare themselves to the best. CART was the the premier (technology wise) racing series in North America, and this is a very important market for Honda.

As for Stock Cars, are you talking about Nascar? Do you know anything about Nascar? I'm certainly not a fan, so someone correct me if I'm wrong but ................

The cars are anything but stock, and if I remember correctly all the cars are using the SAME template now. This is to negate any aerodynamic advantage one manufacturer could gain by making a more aerodynamic car (I'm talking the real car that consumers buy). Nascar also requires that you have a OHV V-8 in production that you can use as a "basis" for the racing engine. The reality is that the engines are all purpose built racing engines BUT since Honda does not make a V-8 they cannot enter. I'm not sure if the requirement that your production engine be OHV still applies since I here Toyota wants to go Nascar and if memory serves me, none of their V-8s use OHV.

phile

OK, well apparently Honda has been researching the plane since 1986:

Honda has been researching compact business jets since 1986, when it began by using and studying the engines of other manufacturers. More than 15 years later, Honda has no jet on the market to show for itself. Only now, in the HondaJet, has it paired a Honda aircraft with a Honda engine--and the HondaJet is an experimental prototype with no production plans and only one test flight under its belt.

http://www.forbes.com/2003/12/23/cx_dl_1223vow.html

dom

Toyota announced a while ago that every car they sell will be IMA by 2012. Wheather they've changed their mind on that now. I'm not sure.

tsxer.ca

honda jet engine?! or the jet belong to honda co.