Mx5 mze 2.0 vs s2000 f20 2.0

I wana know the difference between the two engine mze 2.0 and f20 engines ... how does the f20 make 240ps against the 2.0 liter mze engine that making 160ps ..??

RPM, a really good head and VTEC, yo. And the MZR makes 167 hp, don't shortchange it!

In reply to Keith Tanner: second gen MX5 NB have vvt similar to vtec and RPM i think they are similar to each other bottoming out at 8000 rpm ...

The F20C is a pretty special engine--when new it produced the highest specific power output for any naturally aspirated inline-four production automobile engine. Compared to the Miata engine, it features higher compression, revs higher, and has a more aggressive vvt cam profile. The F20C wasn't shared with other Honda models and went into a more expensive automobile, so the engineering requirements were focused entirely on suiting the character of a performance car and the higher per-unit cost was offset by the higher vehicle price.

neily wrote: In reply to Keith Tanner: second gen MX5 NB have vvt similar to vtec and RPM i think they are similar to each other bottoming out at 8000 rpm ...

VVT is not the same as Vtec or anything close, unfortunately. The S2000 also redlines almost 2000rpms higher than the VVT 1.8 Miata.

You can make a LOT of power with the Mazda MZR family of motors, they have a rather large aftermarket.

neily wrote: In reply to Keith Tanner: second gen MX5 NB have vvt similar to vtec and RPM i think they are similar to each other bottoming out at 8000 rpm ...

Variable cam timing (which is what the duratec/mzr motor has) and VTEC are very different animals. VCT just allows one to change the timing of the cam profile, whereas the VTEC allows for a completly different cam profile as an alternative. So it can give you more lift, more duration, and different timing.

One big thing- the MZR/Duratec is designed to be mass produced (and it's in a HUGE amount of cars), whereas the Honda motor is just in the S2000. Which is why the car cost $10k more than a Miata.

having owned both, the S2000 mill is amazing, but the 2.0 in the MX-5 is so torquey and usable that I don't feel like it is the 70hp down that the spec sheet would indicate....the MX-5 does with its engine exactly what it does with the chassis...compete and many times embarrass cars at much higher price points.

Yup, as noted VTEC is a very different beast from anything out there. It's basically a cam swap, which means you don't give up anything for that top end. It also means there's a step change in the nature of the engine. And the redlines are dramatically different: 7200 vs 9000. When it comes to naturally aspirated power, that's critical.

I wonder if the S2000 motor would still pass 2014 smog?

what i was trying to say is that both the mzr and f20 are inline-four , both are 2.0 liter but the bottom line is that the f20 is making more horse power then mzr. so how is the f20 making more horse power ..?? is it displacement ,better compression , etc

In reply to alfadriver: So do you think vtec is the only reason why f20 as more horse power compared to the mzr 2.0 liter....

neily wrote: In reply to alfadriver: So do you think vtec is the only reason why f20 as more horse power compared to the mzr 2.0 liter....

Only? No, but it's a big contributor. It is the main reason the engine is spins to 9000 rpm- there's a cam profile that works at that high speed. And it's combined with a cam profile that works down to 700rpm.

That's huge- if an engine can maintain torque from 6000 rpm to 9000 rpm, that's an increase of 50% HP, so a 160hp engine at 6000rpm would be making 240 at 9000 rpm.

Then there's the ports that flow the air, the valvetrain that can spin that fast, the pistons/rods/crank/ block- all capable of spinning that fast, etc.

The #1 thing for the engine is the speed capabilty and it's abilty to maintain aiflow/stroke as it speeds up.

neily wrote: what i was trying to say is that both the mzr and f20 are inline-four , both are 2.0 liter but the bottom line is that the f20 is making more horse power then mzr. so how is the f20 making more horse power ..?? is it displacement ,better compression , etc

It engages a totally different cam profile, as opposed to just adjusting timing. This allows the engine to rev to a higher RPM, breathe more fuel/air mixture at high RPM.

In simple terms, it is just able to combust more fuel/air mixture within a given space of time.

What they should be making equal amounts of for being the same displacement is roughly equivalent torque at low to mid RPM. Which they do (not exactly the same, but close). Then the S2000 gets a torque boost of around 10ft-lbs. when VTEC kicks in, yo.

I was wondering about this when driving to work this morning. VTEC is so effective at giving an engine a dual nature, why hasn't any other manufacturer followed suit? VVT (or some variant) is pretty much standard on modern engines, even pushrod Chevy V8s now. But that can't change the duration, lift or the ramp. Fiat's Multiair is interesting in that it can simply bypass part of the cam profile if desired. BMW has Valvetronic, which also gives full control over the intake valves. But these are pretty complex setups from a mechanical and a programming standpoint. VTEC is just so simple, with the downside of being a binary system.

Keith Tanner wrote: I was wondering about this when driving to work this morning. VTEC is so effective at giving an engine a dual nature, why hasn't any other manufacturer followed suit? VVT (or some variant) is pretty much standard on modern engines, even pushrod Chevy V8s now. But that can't change the duration, lift or the ramp. Fiat's Multiair is interesting in that it can simply bypass part of the cam profile if desired. BMW has Valvetronic, which also gives full control over the intake valves. But these are pretty complex setups from a mechanical and a programming standpoint. VTEC is just so simple, with the downside of being a binary system.

They have... Toyota had VVTL-i which gave a very Jekyll/Hyde type experience with the 2zzge. (Celica GTS motor, Lotus Elise/Exige)

They also had dual variable VVTi on the BEAMS motors that did somewhat the same thing, but gave a much smoother curve instead of feeling like someone gave you a light tap in the rear like the other variants.

Nissan had the Neo VVL system. (SR20VE)

Mitsubishi had something similar that was used in the... Cyborg hatch overseas i think? Some performance version of MiVec i think?

[edit]

I completely missed the point of your post at first read, my apologies. Yeah, Vtec is pretty simple. Oil level good? RPM point reached? Here's more power, you're welcome.

Other companies have done similar things in terms of simplicity, just not with cams specifically i don't think. Mazda VRIS, Mazda VICS, Toyota TVIS, etc.

It's interesting to note that Mazda dumped VICS on the Miata when they added VVT.

For those who don't know the acronym, VICS essentially changed the volume of the intake manifold at about 5000 rpm by opening up a second chamber via butterflies. Very simple. Gave a little 4-5 hp bump at the top end, nothing massive and you can't feel it open/close. VVT didn't add any more power to the engine, but it made it run cleaner so that Mazda could reach more aggressive emissions standards with fewer cats than the VICS engine.

All that variable intake volume technology seems to have been popular in the late 80s and then quickly died out. Toyota had TVIS on many of its engines for a while and then suddenly dropped it like a hot potato. I get the feeling that if you're getting gains from variable intake volume, you could get more gains from a better designed intake of fixed volume.

alfadriver wrote:

neily wrote: In reply to alfadriver: So do you think vtec is the only reason why f20 as more horse power compared to the mzr 2.0 liter....

Only? No, but it's a big contributor. It is the main reason the engine is spins to 9000 rpm- there's a cam profile that works at that high speed. And it's combined with a cam profile that works down to 700rpm. That's huge- if an engine can maintain torque from 6000 rpm to 9000 rpm, that's an increase of 50% HP, so a 160hp engine at 6000rpm would be making 240 at 9000 rpm. Then there's the ports that flow the air, the valvetrain that can spin that fast, the pistons/rods/crank/ block- all capable of spinning that fast, etc. The #1 thing for the engine is the speed capabilty and it's abilty to maintain aiflow/stroke as it speeds up.

the f20 is making 240 horse power 80 more ponies then the mza witch is 160 horse power I find it hard that vtec can achieve that much horse power

In reply to Keith Tanner:

A lot of the reason is the actual mechanism.

The same idea is what "powers" the variable displacement engines, too- oil powered solenoid that is basically a clutch for a rocker arm.

Honda's valvetrain has been a rocker system for as long as I can remember, so putting a device into that so that the arm engages or not isn't that hard. Why? Their rocker system is basically a beam that has all of them on it, which mounts over the cam. When assembling that captured system, it's not hard to integrate a valve that switches between rocker selection.

Other rocker systems don't have the same kind of package design that makes it that straight forward. Say on the old modulars, the rocker was under the cam, and that pressed down onto the valve to open. When you package it like that, with basically floating rockers, trying to put a reliable switching device is actually really hard.

I think the other reason that it's never been widely adapted is that Honda had the patent. Which expired well after whoever had the VCT patent. So given the choice between pay honda a licence fee or develop your own VCT on an expired patent, well... Cost-benefit is pretty clear.

I think.

As mentioned, many times already, compression, the combustion chamber design, ability to run a much more aggressive profile and turn more RPMs.

neily wrote:

alfadriver wrote:

neily wrote: In reply to alfadriver: So do you think vtec is the only reason why f20 as more horse power compared to the mzr 2.0 liter....

Only? No, but it's a big contributor. It is the main reason the engine is spins to 9000 rpm- there's a cam profile that works at that high speed. And it's combined with a cam profile that works down to 700rpm. That's huge- if an engine can maintain torque from 6000 rpm to 9000 rpm, that's an increase of 50% HP, so a 160hp engine at 6000rpm would be making 240 at 9000 rpm. Then there's the ports that flow the air, the valvetrain that can spin that fast, the pistons/rods/crank/ block- all capable of spinning that fast, etc. The #1 thing for the engine is the speed capabilty and it's abilty to maintain aiflow/stroke as it speeds up.

the f20 is making 240 horse power 80 more ponies then the mza witch is 160 horse power I find it hard that vtec can achieve that much horse power

So you missed the math part I pointed out.

given the same torque, 160hp at 6000rpm is just like 240hp at 9000rpm.

The Honda engine can spin and continue to delier air at 9000rpm, which is where the power is coming from.

if you can figure out a way to spin a BP engine to 9000rpm, maintain the air per stroke, it, too, will make 240hp. Not sure what it would take to do that, though.

OP, there's been 2.0 MZRs AND 1.8 BPs built that make more than 240hp.

But at the end of the day, you're talking pedestrian motors vs. one of the most race-bred motors to be seen in an under $50k car in pretty much well.... ever.

Swank Force One wrote: OP, there's been 2.0 MZRs AND 1.8 BPs built that make more than 240hp. But at the end of the day, you're talking pedestrian motors vs. one of the most race-bred motors to be seen in an under $50k car in pretty much well.... ever.

I was thinking about that last evening- how many total S2000's with this magical engine were ever made?

The Duratec/MZR first appeared in the Ranger/B2300 in '99, and I would not be shocked to find out that it's sales out did all of the S2000's in a little over a month. Then add in the Ford Focus, Fusion, Escape, Mazda 3,6, Tribute, etc- and I bet that that motor was somewhere around 800k/year in three or 4 plants (I can't remember- I know Spain, Mexico, and Japan, and think there was one here in Michigan, too).

Neily, what are you really asking? You're going somewhere with this. Because you're not actually reading the answers.

I understand that Honda has a patent on the actual VTEC mechanism. I was just curious why, since it works so well, we hadn't seen someone else do a similar setup. All the other ones seem so complex - Rube Goldberg seems to come to mind. They're certainly more flexible, and I really hope to own a car that runs on gasoline and doesn't have a throttle plate someday, but that complexity is expensive.

Why hasn't Valvetronic found its way to the high performance BMW engines, do you suppose?

alfadriver wrote:

Swank Force One wrote: OP, there's been 2.0 MZRs AND 1.8 BPs built that make more than 240hp. But at the end of the day, you're talking pedestrian motors vs. one of the most race-bred motors to be seen in an under $50k car in pretty much well.... ever.

I was thinking about that last evening- how many total S2000's with this magical engine were ever made? The Duratec/MZR first appeared in the Ranger/B2300 in '99, and I would not be shocked to find out that it's sales out did all of the S2000's in a little over a month. Then add in the Ford Focus, Fusion, Escape, Mazda 3,6, Tribute, etc- and I bet that that motor was somewhere around 800k/year in three or 4 plants (I can't remember- I know Spain, Mexico, and Japan, and think there was one here in Michigan, too).

112,642 worldwide throughout entire production run. This includes all F20C and F22C cars.

That's more production than I expected. BMW didn't make that many S62 (M5/Z8) engines by about an order of magnitude.