How much power can the new type r engine make if the turbo wasnt

why not s2k turbo w/ anti-lag

>>17802016
because honda wouldnt have balls to do that.
it would be z5 price at that point and id way rather get one of those when faced with that choice.
I wouldn't mind but just doesn't seem cost effective

>>17802008
More compression doesn't make more power fuckwit.

>>17802073
Uhhhh.... you sure about that? Because I'm pretty sure running higher compression is how you get more power from N/A once you've done all you can to make it breathe.

>>17802073
youre pretty stupid to really not understand how different compression would change how an engine works. Have fun trying to rev it when you have low compression set up for a turbo but no turbo to give it boost.
/o/ is so fucking stupid why do i try to have serious discussions hear instead of actual honda racing forums...

>>17802073
>more air
>more boom
>more zoon

>>17802073
compression and timing

>>17802008
literal ecoboost copy paste lol

File: hqdefault.jpg (11KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 480x360px

>>17802073

>>17802073
In an important way, boost is compression. It's all about compression. More squeeze, more push.

>>17802008
Probably similar to a normal k20. Once tuned with higher compression, would probably do 220-240 hp on premium.

The direct injection is the only thing that makes it so different from the other k series. With that, it brings a lot of potential to the table, but only fully exploited with a turbo.

>>17802199
This

>>17802008
you'd have to design the engine very differently if you want to make the most out of N/A

>>17802199
considering what the S2K did with the K20/K22 at 11:1 compression in 1999/2004, a modern version would likely have higher compression and direct injection. the 2.0l from Mazda is 13:1 in the US, and 14:1 in other regions. give an engine like that a 9k redline and barely scrape by emissions and mpg standards (like the K20 did) and you might see north of 250.
>>17802222
also this

>>17802043
The original s2k was already in the z3/z4 price bracket. We only retroactively think of it as a miata competitor

>>17802016
Rumors say that the S2K successor is going to be a turbo with an electronic supercharger to make up for the lag similar to the Mitsubishi's tech

>>17802275
This whole paragraph made me so erect Anon. If only they keep it lightweight

>>17802275
F20C/F22C irrc

>>17802275
I don't think it carries over like youre thinking (at least to me).

Direct injection's evaporative cooling allows higher compression as well as better volumetric efficiency from no air displacement from fuel. The result is better power and torque in the low rev range.

However, atomization becomes poor at higher engine speeds since there's no time to evaporate well in DI. This is why the new Honda engines can have dual injection, but the port injectors aren't big enough to completely compensate, so they stick turbos on and keep revs below 7k to optimize for the direct injectors.

If you went for a high revving engine (as a way to make power) , you would likely find the compression ratio not to be that crazy as port injection becomes more useful in that area. Without the beloved direct injectors being useless, the higher compression ratios are no longer obtainable. Also, the port injectors would be too small to carry over into the high rev range. The new skyactiv engines don't rev for this/these reasons.

Thus, I think the engine peak power won't be as high as 250hp or even 230 (if on premium). But it would have much better torque and power bands than the s2k ever did. You could get around this if you installed larger port injectors I bet.

File: 73895_156.jpg (44KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 320x240px

>>17802073

>>17802685
So do what Toyota did with the 86 and have port injectors and direct injection. Best of both worlds.

>>17803037
>>17802685
Wait, I'm a potato and missed that paragraph.

You could possibly run a lean but homogeneous mix with the port injectors and get the proper mix with the DI, in any case.

>>17802008
But does it have direct injection?

>>17803052
It already does that. If speed is high enough speed, DI is moot.

>>17802685

You're wrong.

DI is beneficial at high-rpm and high load due to the extra evaporation cooling. Look up any MPFI/DI system like Toyota's one and you'll see the MPFI system is for low rpm/light load and the DI system for full load.

>>17803918
http://wardsauto.com/news-analysis/toyotas-twofold-strategy

>>17802199
All this

And dont forget torque would be in 160-170ft/lb range at best

>>17802073
Go put 8.0:1 dish pistons on your 11.1:1 S2000 and see where that gets you.

>>17802554
People seem to forget about inflation and look at 10 year old new prices and compare them to current prices, yes the S2000 cost the same in 2007 as the Miata now but in real terms it was almost double that cost.

File: D4D4S_DirectInjection_30Jan17-4-876x643.jpg (34KB, 876x643px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 876x643px

>>17803952

>>17803918
combined system also has the added benefit of curing the carbon problem.

>>17802008
>I believe they should try when putting an engine in the s2k successor.
The S2K successor should either have a 2.0L I4 with a CVT-centrifugal (if it needs boost at all), or it should become a Honda pony car with a 4.0 V8.

>>17803952
And you will notice that it's peak engine speed has to be kept lower than its competitors to allow that operation. It's not binary. At low speeds, it uses MPFI since it gives more time to evaporate fuel. At "full load" (sub 6500k), it uses DI. If it ever wanted to go further than what every car on the road already has a redline at, MPFI would work better again (for raw power).

There's a reason F1 was using MPFI before FIA told them they had to use DI for economy purposes. DI allows better BSFC overall, but it will always limit raw power potential.

>>17803962
There are no quanitative axis to this, and reverse image searching gives me nothing credible. What is this from?

>>17804050
>A Honda V8

I just creamed myself

>>17802008
>How much power can the new type r engine make if the turbo wasnt on it and the compression was upped?
probably a little north of 220hp like the old 2.4L civic SI engine

File: oh bby.jpg (100KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 500x375px

>>17806610
>tfw you'll never V8 swap your civic with a few simple mods

>>17806634
why not just put an LS1 in a civic or an S2k

>>17806647
>someone is this autistic

>>17806680
they do it with shit like brz's and rx7's

what retard buys a type-r new

File: 17022009120x.jpg (60KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 640x480px

>>17805583
And even then, another set of injectors can give more power potential at higher revs. Port injection for lower range, then "shower" injectors for higher RPM. And now we're full circle to a type of throttle body injection. Air and fuel and the timing associated with moving them into the cylinder at high RPM makes shower injectors work for high RPM.

>>17806681
That doesn't make it okay

>>17806685
don't tell me you would buy type r used after snap back faggots abused it to hell and back

>>17806681
Yeah, and they fuck them up. Why molest a beautiful Rx 7 like that? Just get a camero.

>>17802073
higher compression -> lower dead volume -> higher volumetric efficiency -> more power

higher compression -> higher expansion -> higher efficiency -> more power

higher compression -> higher pressure at top dead center -> faster burn -> more power

There is a reason racing engines tend to have insane compression ratios over 12:1

>>17808463
>12:1 is insane
Pro Stock runs over 16.