Honda going turbo?

  • Thread starter Thread starter takatasan
  • 46 comments
  • 3,021 views
Honda's going to fall further and further behind if they don't go turbo in the very near future, especially in Europe. The market is moving to smaller motors with more and more boost across the board. We're at the point where it's getting impossible to argue with the fact that turbo means more performance from less fuel. The British press is already predicting that the next Civic Type-R will be turbo.
 
Turbo is basically a done deal.

Current and upcoming regulations will require ever-lower CO2, ever-lower HC emissions, low NOx and higher power densities.

While it's possible to get that out of small engines with direct injection... witness how everyone is now finally catching up to Honda with 140 hp 1.6s and 160 hp 2.0s... the days of the screamer are gone.
 
What a shame, downsizing sucks 👎 Honda goes turbo, BMW gets rid of NA inline 6. Both brands were the only who did these things in big scales and now they do the same **** as everyone else. I was a huge fan of BMW when they even had Inline6 in a 20i, now you have to get a 35i which isn't even NA -.-
And now telling emission is the case, wrong. A german car magazine tested a 325i (NA I6), a supercharged I4 CLK and a turbocharged I4 A5, the BMW had the lowest fuel consumption and the lowest CO²-Emissions!

I do like turbos, but only on cars like Skyline, Supra and these Japanese-Racers ;)

A friend told me once:
A turbo belongs to a Diesel. And a Diesel belongs to a Tractor :lol:
 
What's wrong about it? BMW is doing the same thing.

While it's questionable whether small turbocharged engines actually do save fuel over larger, naturally aspirated motors... and questionable whether you can tell which is more efficient by comparing three completely different cars... manufacturers are downsizing precisely for reasons of fuel economy.

http://rockyroadblog.com/2012/07/downsizing-bmw-does-it-right/

According to BMW, its 2.0 Turbo is 20% more efficient than its N/A 3.0. That's apples to apples.

-

Beyond economy, having one set of engines cover an entire range of products makes more sense. Why spend more money building larger engines when they don't make for more volume or profit and cost more and more to develop to emissions requirements as the rules get tighter?

-

Turbos work. And they work well. If you think modern turbocharged engines are not fit for driving, you haven't driven any.
 
Honda prides itself on being a "Engine Company". That's why it pushed the envelope on NA cars, it's probably time for the turbo development to be pushed. Change is part of growth...
 
BobbyBRAKEaNek
Change is part of growth...
Click to expand...

Look what growth did to 2000's Toyota. Growth isn't necessarily a good thing. Bigger automakers need to make cars that tailor to more people, which makes the car worse for people like us. I'm not saying Honda is going to go soft on us (although since the S2000 they pretty much have been) but I was pointing out that growth is not always good.
 
Market share is everything. It's less important to grow volume than it is to grow market share. And not just fleet sales, as GM and Toyota target, but actual living, breathing customers. Customers who will either come back or not based on what you sell, not fleet customers who will gladly switch to Chinese if the price is right.

-

Honda needs to grow. They need to grow in order to keep market share, at the very least. If you lose market share to the competition, you shrink, you lose money for development, and you're stuck building boring, also-ran cars.

The only other way to maintain the technology edge is to go upmarket, and raise your margins high enough so that you can fund development with fewer cars.

Now, if you're GM... then shrinking is good. Focusing on core businesses with good margins rather than trying to keep several zombies afloat (Opel... cough... Isuzu... cough...).

-

Honda's problems are many.

First, it's got a big network that it needs to service by sending out many, many units.

Second, it's falling behind the technology curve, as everyone starts building better and better engines and gearboxes. About the only ace Honda has left is build quality.

Third, Hondas are expensive. They have to work very hard to keep pricing down, and that means decontenting. A Honda at the same price as the competition is a pretty sorry thing. And the cheaply made ones... I just drove two Thai-built Civics. The joins on top of the dashboard were a mess, and the rubber on the door handles was peeling off. And these cars had less than a thousand miles on the odometer.
 
Last edited:
But isn't Honda, along with Toyota and Nissan at the mercy of the Yen? I remember Toyota bellyaching about our dollar weakening compared to it, making their products more expensive to sell. At least over here in 'Murica.
 
Only for exports straight from Japan. Most of the cars sold in America are built in America. Most of the cars sold in Europe are built in Europe. And most of the cars sold in Asia are built in Asia. There are cars sold in America that are built in Japan, but Honda is being forced to move those lines to Thailand because of the yen.

And despite this, Hondas continue to be expensive.
 
To grow they need to improve, particularly their lower end cars, as now there's a lot more competition quality and quantity wise. The accord and the pilot are still on par with their class (no idea about ridgeline), though still feel very dated (5 speed autos, radio, interior and exterior design, lackluster features) so it's a reliability against living in the 80s tradeoff, but the rest....

Also honda lost both its charm and its reputation. Nowadays no one wants a honda car, and until ....8 years ago you got a lot more for your money when buying a honda.
If their hybrid/electric motors project fails the future won't be bright for the company.

And sorry about the rpm reliability/torque thing. No idea why I got both ideas mixed up as I knew that one.
 
Last edited:
SpartanG
Look what growth did to 2000's Toyota. Growth isn't necessarily a good thing. Bigger automakers need to make cars that tailor to more people, which makes the car worse for people like us. I'm not saying Honda is going to go soft on us (although since the S2000 they pretty much have been) but I was pointing out that growth is not always good.
Click to expand...
In order to accomplish growth you don't need to transform your company from unique to beige like Toyota (and, more recently, Volkswagen) did. Growth can come as a natural byproduct of focusing on what you are excellent at. Chrysler, for example, is very good at doing that inbetween buyouts and bankruptcies.
 
SpartanG
Look what growth did to 2000's Toyota. Growth isn't necessarily a good thing. Bigger automakers need to make cars that tailor to more people, which makes the car worse for people like us.
Click to expand...

And when the enthusiast, the weekend racer, and the masses are all buying less of your product, you have to come up with more than emotion to your shareholders and prospective buyers. While Honda Motor Corporation isn't anywhere near it's deathbed, neither are they to survive by appeasing consumers of used Civics and Accords, who essentially buy aftermarket parts.

Forward the automobile. That's what Honda is (and was) all about; but they've kind of hit a bump in progress by keeping to their philosophy, but trying to keep pace in world-wide sales with Toyota, creating an ever-heavier, less-simple product in a world of greater demand and creature comfort is a tricky act to balance.
 
The soul and heart of an Honda is the NA engine. Other than that will ruin the brand... 👎.
 
Horde_R35
The soul and heart of an Honda is the NA engine. Other than that will ruin the brand... 👎.
Click to expand...

How? They've had turbos before and no one was really was bothered by it.

I can argue that Honda's motorcycles are the soul and heart of Honda.

I mean without them, there wouldn't have been a honda car.
 
Funnily enough, Honda's first serious enthusiast bikes were sometimes derided for having engines that were too smooth.

Bikers... if it ain't a wonky V-Twin, they ain't happy... :D
 
Horde_R35
The soul and heart of an Honda is the NA engine. Other than that will ruin the brand... 👎.
Click to expand...

Wanna know how I know you don't know what you're talking about?

Brownkid makes an incredibly valid point about the bikes. Hell, it is such a part of Honda they made some chain drive cars even.

Honda made a name for themselves by being first to market with a truly innovative variable valve setup. But the time for that has passed and turbo motors offer far too many benefits to be over looked. More so when one considers that abundant torque with lots of ratios allows for much better gas mileage than the old dual cam profile setup that Honda has been using.
 

Latest Posts

Back