Why no Direct Injection Engine yet for Honda...
#2
http://world.honda.com/HDTV/news/2003-4031127a/
not sure why Honda hasn't implemented it though. probably would help if I watched the whole video, but it gets really technical and I get bored easily.
not sure why Honda hasn't implemented it though. probably would help if I watched the whole video, but it gets really technical and I get bored easily.
#5
B A N N E D
iTrader: (4)
originally yes
but as far as no direct injection from Honda yet...
they normally like to test and prove technology (minus VTEC)(and let others work out the bugs, and get a bad rap for the technology) before they bring it out themselves, basically all so that the technology is proven and reliable before customers ever see it
there are things that Honda has brought out over the years, and really never made a mention of it till it was proven, such as SH-AWD (it's been on the MDX since it debuted or 2001, but was not named till 2005 with the RL)
but as far as no direct injection from Honda yet...
they normally like to test and prove technology (minus VTEC)(and let others work out the bugs, and get a bad rap for the technology) before they bring it out themselves, basically all so that the technology is proven and reliable before customers ever see it
there are things that Honda has brought out over the years, and really never made a mention of it till it was proven, such as SH-AWD (it's been on the MDX since it debuted or 2001, but was not named till 2005 with the RL)
#6
Senior Moderator
its honda. they are behind in many things, need any one say more?
Trending Topics
#9
Whats so great about DI, I've driven the new Sonata with DI and it not a engine that what I would call fun, my Accord is a much sweeter engine for those who are into cars.
DI is overrated just like LEDs TVs.
DI is overrated just like LEDs TVs.
#10
B A N N E D
iTrader: (4)
DI just has to be built into a purpose built engine, not just retro-fitted onto an existing engine; kinda like those flex-fuel engines with E85; but you look at the Subaru (or forced inducted cars) scene and people love it, cause they can crank the boost up, to use it's full potential
#11
Senior Moderator
Doesn't honda use DI on all of it's cars with the V6's and K series 4 cylinders? I don't think that they'd use carburetors on anything like the accord or civic...
#12
B A N N E D
iTrader: (4)
what you are probably thinking of is Port Injection, which injects the fuel into the intake manifold BEFORE the valves, where DI it injects the fuel directly into the combustion chamber (like where the spark plug is)
BTW: gators suck ass, Seminoles are better :hack: :hack:
#15
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
<-both parents are FSU Alumni
#16
Senior Moderator
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Better Neighborhood, Arizona
Posts: 45,634
Received 2,328 Likes
on
1,308 Posts
I think some of you have direct IGNITION and direct injection confused..
That having been said, there are concerns among gearheads about premature wear due to direct injection using current methods. I'm not educated enough on the issue to debate it one way or another. I'm sure Honda has its reasons.
That having been said, there are concerns among gearheads about premature wear due to direct injection using current methods. I'm not educated enough on the issue to debate it one way or another. I'm sure Honda has its reasons.
#17
'10 Hyundai Genesis Coupe
DI works more efficiently on turbo charged cars from what I gather. Something with the fact that they can pump fuel into the cylinder much easier. A DI engine can work as efficiently as a motor with 1300cc injectors from a fuel delivery perspective, from what I've been told.
#18
Your Friendly Canadian
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Age: 31
Posts: 17,428
Received 1,484 Likes
on
1,048 Posts
Considering most of Honda's engines are relatively old in design (K-series has been around since early 2000s, J-series has been around since the birth of Jesus), I'm guessing there'll be a new line of engines on the horizon, which should have DI. Patience.
On another note, how would VTEC work with DI? Would you have to have another set of cam lobes and tweak the ECU to adjust how much fuel is injected?
On another note, how would VTEC work with DI? Would you have to have another set of cam lobes and tweak the ECU to adjust how much fuel is injected?
#20
B A N N E D
iTrader: (4)
Considering most of Honda's engines are relatively old in design (K-series has been around since early 2000s, J-series has been around since the birth of Jesus), I'm guessing there'll be a new line of engines on the horizon, which should have DI. Patience.
On another note, how would VTEC work with DI? Would you have to have another set of cam lobes and tweak the ECU to adjust how much fuel is injected?
On another note, how would VTEC work with DI? Would you have to have another set of cam lobes and tweak the ECU to adjust how much fuel is injected?
biggest issue i see is packaging, but with say a new head design, should be no issue to factor it in
very well said (btw also fixed lol)
#21
Senior Moderator
Indeed: Honda on Direct Injection
#22
Suzuka Master
iTrader: (8)
pioneer was Mitsubishi with their GDI motor. it saves gas when you are easy on throttle and if you are not then its way no gas saver. look at the toyota/lexus V6 and V8 engines they have both DI and old one injection for that reason.
wikipedia
wikipedia
The major advantages of a GDI engine are increased fuel efficiency and high power output. In addition, the cooling effect of the injected fuel and the more evenly dispersed mixtures allow for more aggressive ignition timing curves. Emissions levels can also be more accurately controlled with the GDI system. The cited gains are achieved by the precise control over the amount of fuel and injection timings that are varied according to the load conditions. In addition, there are no throttling losses in some GDI engines, when compared to a conventional fuel injected or carbureted engine, which greatly improves efficiency, and reduces 'pumping losses' in engines without a throttle plate. Engine speed is controlled by the engine control unit/engine management system (EMS), which regulates fuel injection function and ignition timing, instead of having a throttle plate that restricts the incoming air supply. Adding this function to the EMS requires considerable enhancement of its processing and memory, as direct injection plus the engine speed management must have very precise algorithms for good performance and drivability.
The engine management system continually chooses among three combustion modes: ultra lean burn, stoichiometric, and full power output. Each mode is characterized by the air-fuel ratio. The stoichiometric air-fuel ratio for petrol (gasoline) is 14.7:1 by weight, but ultra lean mode can involve ratios as high as 65:1 (or even higher in some engines, for very limited periods). These mixtures are much leaner than in a conventional engine and reduce fuel consumption considerably.
Ultra lean burn mode is used for light-load running conditions, at constant or reducing road speeds, where no acceleration is required. The fuel is not injected at the intake stroke but rather at the latter stages of the compression stroke, so that the small amount of air-fuel mixture is optimally placed near the spark plug. This stratified charge is surrounded mostly by air, which keeps the fuel and the flame away from the cylinder walls for lowest emissions and heat losses. The combustion takes place in a toroidal (donut-shaped) cavity on the piston's surface.[citation needed] The cavity is displaced to one side of the piston, the side that has the fuel injector. This technique enables the use of ultra-lean mixtures that would be impossible with carburetors or conventional fuel injection.
Stoichiometric mode is used for moderate load conditions. Fuel is injected during the intake stroke, creating a homogenous fuel-air mixture in the cylinder. From the stoichiometric ratio, an optimum burn results in a clean exhaust emission, further cleaned by the catalytic converter.
Full power mode is used for rapid acceleration and heavy loads (as when climbing a hill). The air-fuel mixture is homogenous and the ratio is slightly richer than stoichiometric, which helps prevent knock (pinging). The fuel is injected during the intake stroke.
Direct injection may also be accompanied by other engine technologies such as variable valve timing (VVT) and tuned/multi path or variable length intake manifolding (VLIM, or VIM). Water injection or (more commonly) exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) may help reduce the high nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions that can result from burning ultra lean mixtures.
It is also possible to inject more than once during a single cycle. After the first fuel charge has been ignited, it is possible to add fuel as the piston descends. The benefits are more power and economy, but certain octane fuels have been seen to cause exhaust valve erosion. For this reason, most companies have ceased to use the Fuel Stratified Injection (FSI) operation during normal running.
Tuning up an early generation FSI power plant to generate higher power is difficult, since the only time it is possible to inject fuel is during the induction phase. Conventional injection engines can inject throughout the 4-stroke sequence, as the injector squirts onto the back of a closed valve. A direct injection engine, where the injector injects directly into the cylinder, is limited to the suction stroke of the piston. As the RPM increases, the time available to inject fuel decreases. Newer FSI systems that have sufficient fuel pressure to inject even late in compression phase do not suffer to the same extent; however, they still do not inject during the exhaust cycle (they could but it would just waste fuel). Hence, all other factors being equal, an FSI engine needs higher-capacity injectors to achieve the same power as a conventional engine.
The engine management system continually chooses among three combustion modes: ultra lean burn, stoichiometric, and full power output. Each mode is characterized by the air-fuel ratio. The stoichiometric air-fuel ratio for petrol (gasoline) is 14.7:1 by weight, but ultra lean mode can involve ratios as high as 65:1 (or even higher in some engines, for very limited periods). These mixtures are much leaner than in a conventional engine and reduce fuel consumption considerably.
Ultra lean burn mode is used for light-load running conditions, at constant or reducing road speeds, where no acceleration is required. The fuel is not injected at the intake stroke but rather at the latter stages of the compression stroke, so that the small amount of air-fuel mixture is optimally placed near the spark plug. This stratified charge is surrounded mostly by air, which keeps the fuel and the flame away from the cylinder walls for lowest emissions and heat losses. The combustion takes place in a toroidal (donut-shaped) cavity on the piston's surface.[citation needed] The cavity is displaced to one side of the piston, the side that has the fuel injector. This technique enables the use of ultra-lean mixtures that would be impossible with carburetors or conventional fuel injection.
Stoichiometric mode is used for moderate load conditions. Fuel is injected during the intake stroke, creating a homogenous fuel-air mixture in the cylinder. From the stoichiometric ratio, an optimum burn results in a clean exhaust emission, further cleaned by the catalytic converter.
Full power mode is used for rapid acceleration and heavy loads (as when climbing a hill). The air-fuel mixture is homogenous and the ratio is slightly richer than stoichiometric, which helps prevent knock (pinging). The fuel is injected during the intake stroke.
Direct injection may also be accompanied by other engine technologies such as variable valve timing (VVT) and tuned/multi path or variable length intake manifolding (VLIM, or VIM). Water injection or (more commonly) exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) may help reduce the high nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions that can result from burning ultra lean mixtures.
It is also possible to inject more than once during a single cycle. After the first fuel charge has been ignited, it is possible to add fuel as the piston descends. The benefits are more power and economy, but certain octane fuels have been seen to cause exhaust valve erosion. For this reason, most companies have ceased to use the Fuel Stratified Injection (FSI) operation during normal running.
Tuning up an early generation FSI power plant to generate higher power is difficult, since the only time it is possible to inject fuel is during the induction phase. Conventional injection engines can inject throughout the 4-stroke sequence, as the injector squirts onto the back of a closed valve. A direct injection engine, where the injector injects directly into the cylinder, is limited to the suction stroke of the piston. As the RPM increases, the time available to inject fuel decreases. Newer FSI systems that have sufficient fuel pressure to inject even late in compression phase do not suffer to the same extent; however, they still do not inject during the exhaust cycle (they could but it would just waste fuel). Hence, all other factors being equal, an FSI engine needs higher-capacity injectors to achieve the same power as a conventional engine.
Last edited by StreetKA; 12-25-2010 at 02:37 PM.
#23
Your Friendly Canadian
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Age: 31
Posts: 17,428
Received 1,484 Likes
on
1,048 Posts
So Honda's putting all of its resources into hybrid vehicles, instead of DI.
Honda of America, I think their priorities are a bit out of whack. What's a good hybrid system if you're mating it to a (soon to be) old-fashioned design system. Port fuel injection seems like it'll soon go the way of the carboreutor, and Honda will be even more behind in engine tech that in it now.
Sucks
Honda of America, I think their priorities are a bit out of whack. What's a good hybrid system if you're mating it to a (soon to be) old-fashioned design system. Port fuel injection seems like it'll soon go the way of the carboreutor, and Honda will be even more behind in engine tech that in it now.
Sucks
#24
Je t'aime...
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA (USC)
Age: 35
Posts: 574
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 6spd AT... Personally the TSX, I feel it doesn't need it on the I4 model. The TSX I4 with 5spd AT can pull better MPG than its rival the IS250 (6SPD AT). So in my mind giving the TSX a 6spd AT would be quite pointless when MPG are pretty good already.
#25
Your Friendly Canadian
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Age: 31
Posts: 17,428
Received 1,484 Likes
on
1,048 Posts
Meh, I don't know about you, but I'd like some extra torque at highway speeds, and I feel the space between fourth and fifth is too large. Having a 6 speed would hopefully allow for a bit more usable torque and a taller top gear.
#26
Suzuka Master
iTrader: (8)
Because Push Start is an useless feature. Granted, it would be nice to have it on every car in the line up as an option. MB and BMW offers the push start as an option, which cost nearly $700 ( I think ). In my mind that's a rip off.
The 6spd AT... Personally the TSX, I feel it doesn't need it on the I4 model. The TSX I4 with 5spd AT can pull better MPG than its rival the IS250 (6SPD AT). So in my mind giving the TSX a 6spd AT would be quite pointless when MPG are pretty good already.
The 6spd AT... Personally the TSX, I feel it doesn't need it on the I4 model. The TSX I4 with 5spd AT can pull better MPG than its rival the IS250 (6SPD AT). So in my mind giving the TSX a 6spd AT would be quite pointless when MPG are pretty good already.
#27
Je t'aime...
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA (USC)
Age: 35
Posts: 574
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can say the same on the IS250, it produces 185 lb-ft. I wouldn't consider that "torquey", but it is 15 more than the TSX. But at the end the TSX pulls better 0-60 #s and quarter mile #s. The TSX also handles better too, while the IS250 trails behind with lifeless steering. I don't get what you are trying to prove when the TSX I4 w/ 5spd AT performs better than the IS250, and still has better MPG.
#28
Suzuka Master
iTrader: (8)
I was trying to explain why is the tsx got better milage compared to is250. It has simply two cylinder less to feed. Sorry but im the last person who would buy honda/acura car with their auto tranny. Im not gonna argue but honda has better motors and toyota has better Auto trannys hands down.
Last edited by StreetKA; 12-25-2010 at 10:19 PM.
#29
Je t'aime...
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA (USC)
Age: 35
Posts: 574
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was trying to explain why is the tsx got better milage compared to is250. It has simply two cylinder less to feed. Sorry but im the last person who would buy honda/acura car with their auto tranny. Im not gonna argue but honda has better motors and toyota has better Auto trannys hands down.
I'm not going to argue with you, because I think both companies Honda/Toyota both offer good engines and transmissions.
However, the transmission I hate at the moment is Nissan/Infiniti's 6spd manual. So not smooth...
#30
B A N N E D
iTrader: (4)
I was trying to explain why is the tsx got better milage compared to is250. It has simply two cylinder less to feed. Sorry but im the last person who would buy honda/acura car with their auto tranny. Im not gonna argue but honda has better motors and toyota has better Auto trannys hands down.
but yes generally considered is the more cylinders there are, the more fuel it uses
#34
not entirely true, it's more about total displacent, and how much fuel it has to feed; and if anything the 6 would edge out, because it should be able to get more complete combustion per chamber (cause the flame front does not have to travel as far; which with direct injection, you could kinda compensate for the larger k24 bore, because you can get the fuel charge concentrated towards the center of the combustion chamber, by injecting late enough), but then again you got more drag with those two additional cylinders with the rings, bearings, valves, etc.etc.
but yes generally considered is the more cylinders there are, the more fuel it uses
but yes generally considered is the more cylinders there are, the more fuel it uses
okay i may not know everything about fuel economy, but what im certain of is:
a small v6 compared to a big I4 is a joke..
everyone knows that a small block v6 2.7L will out preform and have better fuel economy then big block I4 2.5L...
This is proven every day yet... ppl never smarten up.
doesnt matter what tranny, 4 spd 5 or 6...
if you look at an old rx6 mazda and a new vw city golf.. whos got the better numbers ?? haha
but anyways,
now on the matter of FI to DI .. its simple.. although DI technology and actual use in vehicles has been around for years. Its just not perfect yet. where as FI has no draw backs. Yes DI is said to save on fuel and increase power..but currently these engines are known to require a large increase in maintenance expense...
#35
ohh and .. only the IS350 awd and the IS F are fast.. the is250 300 and even the 350 fwd is too slow in my opinion... these cars are priced at what and go how slow???? lmao.. end of story
#36
Someday, an RS6 Avant+
Nope. I owned one of the J25 Sabers. It was a NA V6. I'd have to dig around my old computer files to find a pic, but it definitely was not a GDI engine.
#37
Banned
Think about it.
Accord V6 271HP 20/30mpg
Sonata 2.0T 274HP 22/33mpg
10% difference.
The day that Honda will decide to integrate direct injection and a 6th speed, it will match or do better than the Sonata, efficiency-wise.
Accord V6 271HP 20/30mpg
Sonata 2.0T 274HP 22/33mpg
10% difference.
The day that Honda will decide to integrate direct injection and a 6th speed, it will match or do better than the Sonata, efficiency-wise.
#38
Senior Moderator
However acura did the same thing with the RDX and it screwed them over because the car would go into boost at the slightest touch of the gas pedal!