Honda needs a production v8

[deevergote]

Agreed. Honestly, I think the Miata and BRZ/FRS have the small, sub-$30,000 sports car effectively covered.
The Mustang is an absolutely fantastic car this time around. V6 and Ecoboost models come in at $24,000 (I'd say the Ecoboost is the engine of choice for people that want to mod... V6 for people who just want a Mustang.) GT models start around $32,000, which is extremely affordable (and in a few years, they'll be easily accessible for highschool kids with a job and a cosigner.) Even the top of the line GT350R is only about $61,000 (GT350 is $50,000). As far as larger sports cars go, the Mustang covers ALL the price points!
The Camaro and Challenger are a little less versatile in terms of pricing, but both of those cars offer significant options, with decent value for the price.
All those cars are quite heavy, especially compared to the lightweight Miata and BRZ/FR-S... but still proper sports cars.

Then of course you have the other stuff... the hot hatches and tuner cars... GTi, Civic Si, Focus ST and Fiesta ST (Ford is absolutely killing it lately...) WRX, Lancer Ralliart (I think that is still a thing...), and if they ever get around to making them again, Mazdaspeed3 and Dodge SRT4. Or, for a bit more money, Golf R and STi.

I've intentionally avoided the premium brands, because they offset the price of performance a bit... though cars like the M3/4, M235i, CLA45 AMG, C63AMG, S3, S4, ATS-V... those are all legitimate performers as well, and all coming in around $60k or less.


I truly hope Honda releases some sort of sports car. $30-$40k as an S2000 replacement would be wonderful. $60-$80K as a bit of a bridge between the NSX and everything else would also be fantastic. Although I fear only one of those would be feasible, if any. Of course, they aren't necessarily without options. They have the NSX chassis to work with. It could be dumbed down with less exotic materials (I believe I read there was some carbon fiber used in there somewhere... though I can't remember what I read, and I still haven't read the new release Scott mentioned!)
They also have the S660 chassis to work with. I've heard that a beefed-up version, called the S1000, was intended for the US market. So far, it's just rumor regarding a potential 2017 model... but it would fit the S2000 void nicely. Supposedly Honda intends for it to compete with the Boxster and 4C... which is pretty ambitious!

[owequitit]

Agreed. Honestly, I think the Miata and BRZ/FRS have the small, sub-$30,000 sports car effectively covered.
The Mustang is an absolutely fantastic car this time around. V6 and Ecoboost models come in at $24,000 (I'd say the Ecoboost is the engine of choice for people that want to mod... V6 for people who just want a Mustang.) GT models start around $32,000, which is extremely affordable (and in a few years, they'll be easily accessible for highschool kids with a job and a cosigner.) Even the top of the line GT350R is only about $61,000 (GT350 is $50,000). As far as larger sports cars go, the Mustang covers ALL the price points!
The Camaro and Challenger are a little less versatile in terms of pricing, but both of those cars offer significant options, with decent value for the price.
All those cars are quite heavy, especially compared to the lightweight Miata and BRZ/FR-S... but still proper sports cars.

Then of course you have the other stuff... the hot hatches and tuner cars... GTi, Civic Si, Focus ST and Fiesta ST (Ford is absolutely killing it lately...) WRX, Lancer Ralliart (I think that is still a thing...), and if they ever get around to making them again, Mazdaspeed3 and Dodge SRT4. Or, for a bit more money, Golf R and STi.

I've intentionally avoided the premium brands, because they offset the price of performance a bit... though cars like the M3/4, M235i, CLA45 AMG, C63AMG, S3, S4, ATS-V... those are all legitimate performers as well, and all coming in around $60k or less.


I truly hope Honda releases some sort of sports car. $30-$40k as an S2000 replacement would be wonderful. $60-$80K as a bit of a bridge between the NSX and everything else would also be fantastic. Although I fear only one of those would be feasible, if any. Of course, they aren't necessarily without options. They have the NSX chassis to work with. It could be dumbed down with less exotic materials (I believe I read there was some carbon fiber used in there somewhere... though I can't remember what I read, and I still haven't read the new release Scott mentioned!)
They also have the S660 chassis to work with. I've heard that a beefed-up version, called the S1000, was intended for the US market. So far, it's just rumor regarding a potential 2017 model... but it would fit the S2000 void nicely. Supposedly Honda intends for it to compete with the Boxster and 4C... which is pretty ambitious!

An S2K replacement of some kind is coming.

[owequitit]

It better have way more than 600 ft-lbs in total. I would imagine the smaller front motors could do 200 ft-lbs each, easily. I mean, a 2004 prius motor is capable of almost 300 ft-lbs and it's relatively small. I really hope that they have a "software update" style upgrade similar to Tesla, and that they engineered a bit of extra potential in the hybrid system because that part seems lackluster on paper. I've always been of mindset that if you are going to do a hybrid performance car, go balls out and use the torque that those motors produce so easily.

Then use the engine to make the power up high, since the low end has been taken care of, reduce the number of gear ratios (9 speed auto?? Really Honda??) because of your newly increased powerband.

They had it right with the original accord hybrid. That thing could've been a monster and really changed how people view hybrids, imo. They should revisit the IMA, and throw it in a performance based car for the masses. Keep it V6, and about 3000lbs and you have a winner.

It doesn't quite work that way though.

Electric motors produce peak torque at 0 RPM (which coincidentally means they are making 0 horsepower at that point, since HP is a function of HP x RPM and HP is what moves a car).

That said, electric motors start with peak torque and then it linearly decreases to the motors maximum speed. This is in contrast to gas engines which start at a value, increase to a peak and then decrease. When you add the torques together, you can't just say 400 lb-ft + 400 lb-ft = 800 lb-ft. because of the nature of how they work together. For instance, if the electric motors are producing 400 lb-ft just off idle, but the gas engine is only producing 200, then the total at that point on the curve is only 600 lb-ft. By contrast, if the gas engine is producing 400 lb-ft at peak torque, but the electric motors are down to 150 lb-ft, then the total is 550 lb-ft, not 800. This is why Honda's "peak" ratings are lower than the Germans because Honda actually adds the two together at their peak value, while the germans just add all the totals. This is a large part of the reason why the NSX isn't going to be that much slower than the Germans, but will have less "total" power on paper.

The REAL benefit to this system is that it results in a linear power delivery like an NA engine, and not a huge kick in the ass like a typical turbo engine. This is because the electric motors provide "boost" in the bottom end then then they taper off as the turbos are picking up the slack, even though the turbos on the NSX are probably pretty big. This leaves the car feeling like a big displacement engine, which IMO, is a good thing.

[sonikaccord]

It doesn't quite work that way though.

Electric motors produce peak torque at 0 RPM (which coincidentally means they are making 0 horsepower at that point, since HP is a function of HP x RPM and HP is what moves a car).

That said, electric motors start with peak torque and then it linearly decreases to the motors maximum speed. This is in contrast to gas engines which start at a value, increase to a peak and then decrease. When you add the torques together, you can't just say 400 lb-ft + 400 lb-ft = 800 lb-ft. because of the nature of how they work together. For instance, if the electric motors are producing 400 lb-ft just off idle, but the gas engine is only producing 200, then the total at that point on the curve is only 600 lb-ft. By contrast, if the gas engine is producing 400 lb-ft at peak torque, but the electric motors are down to 150 lb-ft, then the total is 550 lb-ft, not 800. This is why Honda's "peak" ratings are lower than the Germans because Honda actually adds the two together at their peak value, while the germans just add all the totals. This is a large part of the reason why the NSX isn't going to be that much slower than the Germans, but will have less "total" power on paper.

The REAL benefit to this system is that it results in a linear power delivery like an NA engine, and not a huge kick in the ass like a typical turbo engine. This is because the electric motors provide "boost" in the bottom end then then they taper off as the turbos are picking up the slack, even though the turbos on the NSX are probably pretty big. This leaves the car feeling like a big displacement engine, which IMO, is a good thing.

Wayyyy off topic, but here goes...
All these are excellent points. It was a reaching assumption on my part that the torque of the motors and engine would overlap and "add" like I previously mentioned. I never was a fan of the power rating systems when one is comparing electric motors and combustion engines. So let's actually figure out the torque maximum this car can produce and where along the powerband it's produced:

The front motors can produce constant torque all the way to 3500 rpm and the rear to 2400 rpm. The V6 has a torque peak at 2000 rpm, so we will calculate at that point since the electric motors are producing full torque there as well.

54+54+109+406= 623 ft-lbs at 2000 rpm

So it's actually over 600 ft-lbs anyway lol, awesome. Tree stump pulling force.


Adding gearing into this equation complicated things even more. The front motors are mated to a single reduction gear while the rear engine and motor are mated to a 9-speed gearbox. Depending on the ratio of the gearbox and the voltage of the pack, the front and rear electric motor will be contributing very little power at the V6's peak at 7500rpm. So the strongest asset of these electric motors will be the negative torque generation and the vectoring system that Honda has implemented. You can tell from the calculations that this car is meant to haul ass out of corners and that relatively low speed acceleration is supposed to be blistering. Sounds like a large N/A engine to me.

[sonikaccord]

Agreed. Honestly, I think the Miata and BRZ/FRS have the small, sub-$30,000 sports car effectively covered.
The Mustang is an absolutely fantastic car this time around. V6 and Ecoboost models come in at $24,000 (I'd say the Ecoboost is the engine of choice for people that want to mod... V6 for people who just want a Mustang.) GT models start around $32,000, which is extremely affordable (and in a few years, they'll be easily accessible for highschool kids with a job and a cosigner.) Even the top of the line GT350R is only about $61,000 (GT350 is $50,000). As far as larger sports cars go, the Mustang covers ALL the price points!
The Camaro and Challenger are a little less versatile in terms of pricing, but both of those cars offer significant options, with decent value for the price.
All those cars are quite heavy, especially compared to the lightweight Miata and BRZ/FR-S... but still proper sports cars.

Then of course you have the other stuff... the hot hatches and tuner cars... GTi, Civic Si, Focus ST and Fiesta ST (Ford is absolutely killing it lately...) WRX, Lancer Ralliart (I think that is still a thing...), and if they ever get around to making them again, Mazdaspeed3 and Dodge SRT4. Or, for a bit more money, Golf R and STi.

I've intentionally avoided the premium brands, because they offset the price of performance a bit... though cars like the M3/4, M235i, CLA45 AMG, C63AMG, S3, S4, ATS-V... those are all legitimate performers as well, and all coming in around $60k or less.


I truly hope Honda releases some sort of sports car. $30-$40k as an S2000 replacement would be wonderful. $60-$80K as a bit of a bridge between the NSX and everything else would also be fantastic. Although I fear only one of those would be feasible, if any. Of course, they aren't necessarily without options. They have the NSX chassis to work with. It could be dumbed down with less exotic materials (I believe I read there was some carbon fiber used in there somewhere... though I can't remember what I read, and I still haven't read the new release Scott mentioned!)
They also have the S660 chassis to work with. I've heard that a beefed-up version, called the S1000, was intended for the US market. So far, it's just rumor regarding a potential 2017 model... but it would fit the S2000 void nicely. Supposedly Honda intends for it to compete with the Boxster and 4C... which is pretty ambitious!

The funny thing is, the 6th gen Camaro is light for what it is in this day. It's 300 lbs heavier than an Accord V6, but offers much more as a sports car. It is 100 lbs heavier than the Ecoboost Mustang. It's still a boat, imo. The Focus RS is coming for blood (Ford has been on it!). The Golf R is giving a lot of higher end cars a run. The segment is tough!!

I would've bought an S660 without hesitation if they brought it here. Your average customer base is a totally different market, unfortunately. Speaking of the average customer base...I believe because of this whole turbocharging fad, if a vehicle doesn't offer something with turbo or boost in the name it would probably be overlooked unless it's a V8 muscle car or a truck. Our kind is what...maybe 1% of the total sales volume?

[owequitit]

Wayyyy off topic, but here goes...
All these are excellent points. It was a reaching assumption on my part that the torque of the motors and engine would overlap and "add" like I previously mentioned. I never was a fan of the power rating systems when one is comparing electric motors and combustion engines. So let's actually figure out the torque maximum this car can produce and where along the powerband it's produced:

The front motors can produce constant torque all the way to 3500 rpm and the rear to 2400 rpm. The V6 has a torque peak at 2000 rpm, so we will calculate at that point since the electric motors are producing full torque there as well.

54+54+109+406= 623 ft-lbs at 2000 rpm

So it's actually over 600 ft-lbs anyway lol, awesome. Tree stump pulling force.


Adding gearing into this equation complicated things even more. The front motors are mated to a single reduction gear while the rear engine and motor are mated to a 9-speed gearbox. Depending on the ratio of the gearbox and the voltage of the pack, the front and rear electric motor will be contributing very little power at the V6's peak at 7500rpm. So the strongest asset of these electric motors will be the negative torque generation and the vectoring system that Honda has implemented. You can tell from the calculations that this car is meant to haul ass out of corners and that relatively low speed acceleration is supposed to be blistering. Sounds like a large N/A engine to me.

The front motors aren't effected by engine RPM, they are effected by vehicle speed. See the RLX SH-AWD as an example where no additional thrust is possible above about 85MPG because the motors are redlined. They can still provide the drag function you mention, but that is it.

As for the motor in the rear, I don't think it takes the place of the clutch as in the traditional IMA systems, but rather that it drives the output shaft of the transmission directly (which also makes it less effected by gearing). However, I am not sure if that is the case (and Honda hasn't directly said that I know of) as it would have made it more difficult to make the motor the starter.

[deevergote]

These high-tech cars are going to be interesting when they're 5-10 years old... or more. People say things like "stay away from a 3000GT VR4 or BMW 8 Series because they're incredibly complicated!"... those cars ain't got shit on what's coming out now!
That's another reason I'm more interested in a car lacking all the electric-motor stuff... because if I am ever to own one, it will be used, and a quite a few years old. My CTS-V has enough complicated stuff... I couldn't imagine something even more complicated!

The funny thing is, the 6th gen Camaro is light for what it is in this day. It's 300 lbs heavier than an Accord V6, but offers much more as a sports car. It is 100 lbs heavier than the Ecoboost Mustang. It's still a boat, imo. The Focus RS is coming for blood (Ford has been on it!). The Golf R is giving a lot of higher end cars a run. The segment is tough!!

I would've bought an S660 without hesitation if they brought it here. Your average customer base is a totally different market, unfortunately. Speaking of the average customer base...I believe because of this whole turbocharging fad, if a vehicle doesn't offer something with turbo or boost in the name it would probably be overlooked unless it's a V8 muscle car or a truck. Our kind is what...maybe 1% of the total sales volume?

The American sports cars (primarily Mustang, Camaro, Challenger) are indeed heavy beasts. The Mustang is the only one that seems to get consistent reviews from the major magazines as handling impressively for such a car, though. I don't know if they're comparing them to older Mustangs (that mainly handled like oxcarts), or the competition (Camaro/Challenger). It really is amazing that it's heavier than a mid-size (or is the Accord now full-size?) family car, though. Not that the American pony cars were ever particularly light. The Mustangs sold around the time of the CB7 weighed about the same as the CB7.
The souped up factory versions of "normal" cars are going crazy. So many of them are doing it now that it's almost not even all that exciting! The Golf R is faster than the STi, which is bonkers (considering what a lame duck the R32 was, despite being a fantastic car all around...) The Civic Type R is promising over 300hp in a FWD production car, which absolutely blows my mind. I'm still waiting to see if that Italian company... what was their name again? Oh yeah, Chrysler... I'm still waiting to see if they're going to do an SRT4 version of the Dart. The chassis is a perfect Neon followup, and although the lower-end models (like the Neon) are definitely low-rent feeling, an SRT4 Dart would have potential to be a monster. The last rumor I heard about it was that they were shooting for AWD and 300hp... basically, picking up where the Evo left off (the Golf R kinda snuck into that slot, though!) The Dart is getting a bit long in the tooth now, though.
I'm also hoping Mazda decides to make a 3rd generation Mazdaspeed3... as well as another rotary car. Mazda without a rotary in the lineup is like Nickelodeon without cartoons!

The S660 would've been awesome here, but kei cars will never cut it in the US market. Hopefully the same platform can be modified to comply with US needs, and a more powerful engine could be stuffed in there. It would be nice to see it as a legitimate Honda, but if they're actually gunning for the Boxster and 4C, it'll probably have to be an Acura (and Acura is a stretch in terms of exotic/luxury clout... at least Alfa maintains some of that in the US.)

Most sports cars today need a V8, turbo, or V6 making AT LEAST 300hp (Nissan and Hyundai are cranking out 350, and I believe the Camaro V6 has 330 or something... a decade ago, that was GOOD V8 power!) Stuff like the Miata and BRZ/FR-S are always called "underpowered", but that's part of their charm.

[cb7 calling]

Has nobody read the press releases from several weeks ago?

500HP (406lb-ft) TT V6 with a total system output of 573HP including the electric assist, but keep in mind that the output of electric motors decreases with RPM and if Honda rated it the way the Germans (and pretty much everyone else) rates hybrids, then it would 500+36+36+47 or 619HP.

It has 3 electric motors, 1 on each front wheel (36HP each) and one in the transmission case that also serves to replace the starter (driving the rear wheels at 47HP).

The two front motors essentially do the same thing as they do on the RLX eSH-AWD car, where they can send power to either side or they can go into regen mode and cause drag, which actually results in negative torque (similar to the system that would apply a brake on one side).

The car is expected to do 0-60 in 3 seconds or less and should complete the 1/4 mile in the low 11 second to high 10 second range.

It is a bit heavy (3800lbs) and the steering has been criticized for feel in some modes.

The rumors are that Honda is developing a Targa and a Type-R. The rumors aren't clear on whether the Type-R will still be AWD, but they tend to lean toward gas engine only, more power, several hundred pounds of weight loss, more exotic construction materials and vastly superior performance to the "stock" version. There are also rumors of that one having an MT and it would be designed to compete against such specials as the Porsche 911 GT3, etc.

I actually read it right before I read this from you. It's been a face palm sunday. Funny I check for news on it often but only today thought to check the Acura website.
As far as the hp figure goes the rear electric motor shuts down after boost is obtained is my guess, taking it out of the peak hp figure making 500 +36+36=573? They math well. If only the dealership had the same skills, I might be able to buy one.

[owequitit]

I actually read it right before I read this from you. It's been a face palm sunday. Funny I check for news on it often but only today thought to check the Acura website.
As far as the hp figure goes the rear electric motor shuts down after boost is obtained is my guess, taking it out of the peak hp figure making 500 +36+36=573? They math well. If only the dealership had the same skills, I might be able to buy one.

No, all three motors continue to work up to their relative redlines, but they gradually produce less and less boost as the wind up. Just the nature of electric motors. That said, I am sure Honda was creative with the motor control to make it work well with the boost (it probably does fade out as the gas engines gets on boost, but I don't think they just take one off line).

[rustyaccord]

Wow! I didn't expect to see this thread take off like it did! I know the v8 idea is pretty impractical especially considering what everybody is doing with a v6, 4 banger, and wasn't one of the new civic's supposed to be a turbo 3?

I'm an old muscle car guy so the sound of a rumbly, torque happy v8 is something I enjoy immensely. I'm mostly curious to see what Honda would come up with if they were given an output requirement, say 400 ft.lbs. and no more than 600 hp and build a v8 around those specifications.

[deevergote]

I would imagine that Honda would need to do two things to make that even close to rational:

1) they would need to release a large RWD V8-powered luxury vehicle, larger than the current RLX.

2) they would need to release a proper V8 powered truck that would either replace the Pilot and upcoming Ridgeline, or be slotted as full-size alternatives to the more car-like current offerings.

Those things would need to be marketed aggressively in any area where it's not thoroughly unreasonable to own a relatively large displacement V8 (so... not Japan, and not most of Europe).

Both Toyota and Nissan have already done this with a good deal of success.
Hyundai took a major gamble by doing it with a luxury car ONLY (and to add to that gamble, they did so without any real previous luxury clout... so Honda at least has that advantage with the Acura brand.)

I bet Honda would make one hell of a V8, if they chose to do so.

[MrTShoff]

I was thinking about this some more today and honestly I think if they made a v8 in a sporty car we'd have a japanese gt350. A new s2000 with such an engine would be amazing but certainly out of my price range.