Honda Car Forum

> Agreed. One thing Honda engines are not known for is .... poor
> engineering. But a causual look at Honda's motorcycle engines finds low
> RPM (<8,000 redline) engines with belts, medium RPM (<12,000 redline)
> engines get chains, high RPM (>12,000 redline) engines get gears. Of
> course there are compromises and exceptions such as the Hornet 250 four
> cylinder with chain driven cams and a 17,000 rpm redline.
> --

Don't even get me started on Honda Motorcycles. They make the best
motorcycles out there - BUT - do not import anything decent to the U.S.
market. We get second and third and fourth generation recycled crud
barring the racing models(which you have to grey-market in)

Not to mention what they gouge at the dealers for parts and repairs.

Hondas are still belt driven, except for the S2000. What does that
suggest? ;^) Chain drives seem to be synonymous with interference.
--

Philip

"If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
the same way, make the design visible to the people . tis not to
be wondered that they should then rouse themselves."
- John Locke (1632-1704)


tomcas wrote:
> I was not aware that the Toyota is now chain driven, I guess it just
> makes them that much better, although I'm surprised that they are now
> an interference design. I agree chains last much longer but what
> about the Honda. Are they still an interference design and using
> belts?
>
> Philip® wrote:
>
>> Ummmmm ... you better reconsider. The Corolla starting in 1998(?)
>> has a cam CHAIN. If the chain breaks, valves and pistons collide.
>> But you'll will have some pretty high mileage by that time and LOTS
>> of chatter warning sounds beforehand.
>> --
>>
>> Philip
>>
>> "If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all
>> tending the same way, make the design visible to the people . tis
>> not to be wondered that they should then rouse themselves."
>> - John Locke (1632-1704)
>>
>>
>> tomcas wrote:
>>
>>> Given that both are great cars I'd lean towards the Toyota because
>>> its engine won't crash like the Honda if the timing belt breaks.
>>>
>>> Robert wrote:

Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
> Toyota has been making interference engines for a while. I tested it
> on my 88 Tercel when I changed its timing belt. The pistons did bump
> the valves when I hand turned the crankshaft.

NO Tercel was ever an "interference" design. (3A, 3E, or 5E). Did you
have a diesel? ;^)

--

Philip

"If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
the same way, make the design visible to the people . tis not to
be wondered that they should then rouse themselves."
- John Locke (1632-1704)

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 07:47:40 GMT, "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>Hondas are still belt driven, except for the S2000. What does that
>suggest? ;^) Chain drives seem to be synonymous with interference.

The new Honda 4-cyl in the Acura RSX, Civic Si and the Accord, the K-Series
engine, is chain driven. It's actually been in use for a few years now in
the Stream, JP only model AFAIK.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 23:00:28 GMT, "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>George Macdonald wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 06:27:59 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
>> <josephoberlander@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Philip® wrote:
>>>> Ummmmm ... you better reconsider. The Corolla starting in 1998(?)
>>>> has a cam CHAIN. If the chain breaks, valves and pistons collide.
>>>> But you'll will have some pretty high mileage by that time and LOTS
>>>> of chatter warning sounds beforehand.
>>>
>>> Belts are a cost-saving measure that gives more money to the
>>> mechanics
>>> down the road - both bad things for the consumer. A chain? I've
>>> never owned a car with a chain that even needed replacing. Maybe
>>> check it every so often to make sure it isn't stretched. As in
>>> every 3-4 years.
>>
>> Were those cars you've owned with chain driven cams DOHC? There's a
>> big difference in the chains used for pushrod engines. People have
>> reported as little as 150K miles before chain replacement on OHC
>> engines.
>
>Careful George.... Toyota is noted for making DOHC engines with a cam
>belt driving ONLY one cam while the second cam is gear driven from the
>first cam. ;^)

Uhhh - forgot about that - reminds me of our '93 Camry... and that weird
spring-loaded gear drive. Even a SOHC chain is a different animal from the
push-rod jobs though.

>>> Interference designs with a belt are asking to implode if that
>>> things breaks. Poor engineering as well.
>>
>> If properly maintained the belts don't break. I don't see the "poor
>> engineering" here - belts are easy to replace compared with chains,
>> where you have to go into the wet part of the engine, are quieter
>> when new and do not get noisy with age.
>>
>> Rgds, George Macdonald
>
>Agreed. One thing Honda engines are not known for is .... poor
>engineering. But a causual look at Honda's motorcycle engines finds low
>RPM (<8,000 redline) engines with belts, medium RPM (<12,000 redline)
>engines get chains, high RPM (>12,000 redline) engines get gears. Of
>course there are compromises and exceptions such as the Hornet 250 four
>cylinder with chain driven cams and a 17,000 rpm redline.

Well in cars I'm hoping the new engines with chain driven cams will work
out OK - Toyota with theirs and Honda with the 4-cyl K-Series engines...
the only two mfrs who really interest me at the moment. It's early yet,
especially for Honda but I haven't seen any reports of early failure or
trouble so far. The Corolla chain driven cam engine has been around for a
while now but I have no knowledge of how far they are going without
chain/sprocket replacement... any word on that?... any noisiness developing
with age? I remember the days when I could tell a Ford (Kent series engine
?) coming down the street behind me by the chain rattle.:-)

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

In article <Np5Ua.941$e4.417@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net >,
"Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net> wrote:

>Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
>> Toyota has been making interference engines for a while. I tested it
>> on my 88 Tercel when I changed its timing belt. The pistons did bump
>> the valves when I hand turned the crankshaft.
>
>NO Tercel was ever an "interference" design. (3A, 3E, or 5E). Did you
>have a diesel? ;^)
>

It was an October 1988 Tercel, 3E (single barrel carb), drivability mods
(didn't help), AC mods, and it absolutely was an interference engine. I
remember being quite startled when I hand turned the crankshaft and a
piston whacked a valve hard enough to turn the camshaft. I was scared
as hell until the car was back together and compression test came out OK.

I later found that being an interference design made replacing the
infamous valve stem oil seals much easier. All I had to do was move a
cylinder to TDC, compress the valve spring, and the keepers would pop
right out.

Around 1997, it appeared that somebody was putting cat litter in my
parking space every day. Odd. Well, it turned out to be bits of the
head gasket. I was sick of a decade of cleaning PCV crud out its
suction-piston carburetor, unjamming vacuum solenoids, replacing
scattered thermostats that leaked their wax, replacing gaskets, putting
up with its acceleration jerks and hesitation, listening to the engine
ping, unjaming the front brake calipers, welding air cleaner cracks, and
greasing it's rear wheel bearings. It was an automobile repair class,
not a method of transportation. I donated it the next year and got a
Civic. Maybe it's because it's newer, but a 97 Civic's engineering
makes the 88 Tercel look like an old Yugo.

George Macdonald wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 23:00:28 GMT, "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>> Agreed. One thing Honda engines are not known for is .... poor
>> engineering. But a causual look at Honda's motorcycle engines finds
>> low RPM (<8,000 redline) engines with belts, medium RPM (<12,000
>> redline) engines get chains, high RPM (>12,000 redline) engines get
>> gears. Of course there are compromises and exceptions such as the
>> Hornet 250 four cylinder with chain driven cams and a 17,000 rpm
>> redline.
>
> Well in cars I'm hoping the new engines with chain driven cams will
> work
> out OK - Toyota with theirs and Honda with the 4-cyl K-Series
> engines...
> the only two mfrs who really interest me at the moment. It's early
> yet, especially for Honda but I haven't seen any reports of early
> failure or trouble so far. The Corolla chain driven cam engine has
> been around for a while now but I have no knowledge of how far they
> are going without chain/sprocket replacement... any word on that?...
> any noisiness developing with age? I remember the days when I could
> tell a Ford (Kent series engine ?) coming down the street behind me
> by the chain rattle.:-)
>
> Rgds, George Macdonald

Again, there are options. Honda's motorcycle engines do use roller
chains and Morse HyVo design chains to drive the cam(s). For their
ulitimate high speed engines, the choice is Morse. Now... in car
engines, the roller chain seems to be the preferred choice, perhaps
because of lower RPMs, because of the degree of deflection needed, and
because replacement can be a "thread thru" affair because a roller chain
has a master link
--

Philip

"If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
the same way, make the design visible to the people . tis not to
be wondered that they should then rouse themselves."
- John Locke (1632-1704)

Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
> In article <Np5Ua.941$e4.417@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net >,
> "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
>>> Toyota has been making interference engines for a while. I tested
>>> it on my 88 Tercel when I changed its timing belt. The pistons did
>>> bump the valves when I hand turned the crankshaft.
>>
>> NO Tercel was ever an "interference" design. (3A, 3E, or 5E). Did
>> you have a diesel? ;^)
>>
>
> It was an October 1988 Tercel, 3E (single barrel carb), drivability
> mods (didn't help), AC mods, and it absolutely was an interference
> engine.

Ok, then you account for why in the Gates Belt cataloge that NO such
distinction exists. We also have our resident career Toyota techinician
stating Tercel was only a non-interference engine. ;^)

http://www.gates.com/brochure.cfm?brochure=981

Click on "Timing Belt Replacement Guide." ONLY vehicles with an
asterisk next to the make/model are interference engines.

Toyota has a very strong tradition (with a couple exceptions) of their
belt drive engines being non interference.
--

Philip

"If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
the same way, make the design visible to the people . tis not to
be wondered that they should then rouse themselves."
- John Locke (1632-1704)

"Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<hyZTa.1167$e4.384@newsread3.news.pas.earthli nk.net>...
> brianb wrote:
> >
>
> I have an '03 Corolla. :^) The single piece trailing arm in the
> Corolla *does* make for more roll stiffness than earlier generation
> Corolla's. The Civic's rear suspension is more sophisticated and
> probably works better thru bumpy corners.
>
> > The Corolla is quieter, mine can't really be heard at 60-70 mph.
> >
> > I have an older Corolla though. The new ones have a high door, so you
> > kind of feel like a little old lady behind the wheel. I like to have
> > windows open and have my upper arm resting on the window well, with my
> > forearm vertical and fingers on the upper part of the door. I
> > couldn't do that in the new Corolla, so I didn't like it.
>
> Gee.... I prop my arm up in the manner you describe quite often. Are you
> of short stature?
>
> > Plus the new Corolla looks ungainly and awkward.
>
> There is more head room and a more chair-like seating position. Coming
> from the line haul trucking profession, I prefer this to being slouched
> back with arms and feet extended. "Ungainly?" If that's what keeps "the
> kids" who buy Civics (and lower/chop/whatever) then I chose the right car
> ... a Corolla.

No, I'm 6'0". Maybe it was just me. I test drove a 03 Corolla. The
inside seemed cheaper than my 95. The seat adjustment for example was
one knob instead of a pull thing and a seat incling.

brianb wrote:
> "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:<hyZTa.1167$e4.384@newsread3.news.pas.earthli nk.net>...
>> There is more head room and a more chair-like seating position.
>> Coming
>> from the line haul trucking profession, I prefer this to being
>> slouched
>> back with arms and feet extended. "Ungainly?" If that's what keeps
>> "the
>> kids" who buy Civics (and lower/chop/whatever) then I chose the
>> right car ... a Corolla.
>
> No, I'm 6'0". Maybe it was just me. I test drove a 03 Corolla. The
> inside seemed cheaper than my 95. The seat adjustment for example was
> one knob instead of a pull thing and a seat incling.

Just between you and me, the interior *is* cheaper that Corollas of the
1990's. I sold off a 1990 Geo Prizm for the new Corolla. The Geo's
interior had only *two* interior rattles by the time I sold the car with
285,000 miles on the odometer. This Corolla's interior on a washboard
dirt road or driving over cobbles stones is pathetic. I recently
identified on this formun nearly 10 souces of rattles which ... really
deserves a trip to the dealer. The radio alone has two separate and
distinct noises when the car's rear axle hits a sharp road irregularity.
The *generous* use of "hard plastic" and snap interlocks with no
cushioning between them seems to be a recurring culprit. Regarding
the seats, I have a CE model which has an easy to grab bar along the
forward edge to adjust fore/aft and a easy to operate lever to adjust the
back angle. Don't know nuthin' about a "knob."
--

Philip

"If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
the same way, make the design visible to the people . tis not to
be wondered that they should then rouse themselves."
- John Locke (1632-1704)