a response to some misinformation
Jul 22, 2002, 11:26 AM
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a response to some misinformation
Hmm - just wanted to clear a few things up.
First:
That W8 diagram would only work in a vehicle with 2 crankshafts which would just be weird.
Heres how it works - it uses a standard V like a regular V8, but instead of having the cylinders in each bank in a line it offsets them, enabling a much shorter front to back profile for the engine. It uses a 4 cam design with overhead cams and rocker arms. If you want to see for yourself follow this link here and help dispell useless mis-information
http://www.vw.com/w8/engineering.htm
Second:
The suspension package on the Hotchkis Celica is comercially available for a couple grand not 10. Also the BONE STOCK GTS with the gimpy rev limiter ran the slalom at 70.1, the EVO was 72.6... not really a huge difference especially considering all the technology on the EVO and the likely cost difference between the cars. BTW - Hotchkis is done prototyping and that Celica is for sale right now in case you guys want to see for yourselves
Third:
The Toyota VVTLi system is actually considerably more advanced than than most VTECs out there as it employs both a dual cam profile and continuously variable intake cam timing as opposed to using just a second cam lobe. Does this make it better? Well... it makes 100 HP / liter which by ANY standard is not too shabby for a NA production 4cyl. Its also at least marginally better than most VTEC setups.
Now as for styling I think that anyone that says that either the EVO OR the Celica is ugly is hitting the pipe a little too hard. I think they both look great and in different ways which is cool. Who would want all the cars on the road to look the same?
Anyways I'm not going to say anything bad about the EVO (and not just because I think that they are pretty cool)- I've never driven one so it would be pointless and stupid. Kind of like you guys that have never even been in Celica trashing them is stupid....
The reason I chose the Celica (aside from the fact that I like the looks) was that it was just a blast to drive. Between the really nimble stock handling and the kick in the pants when the lift kicks in, it plastered a huge smile across my face that comes back whenever I drive it. It doesn't HAVE to be the fastest car on the road, it just has to be the one I like the most and have the most fun with. Likewise if thats what your Mitsu does for you guys then for YOU that is the best car in the world you could possibly have.... none could be better. Now when August rolls around go test dive the hell out of a 2003 Celica GTS before you come back and insult them anymore. Hopefully you will have fun and come away with a big smile and respect for both cars and liking yours even more than before. If not trade in and come join us at NC.org
Griffin
Afterthought: Fact is anyone driving a 4 cylinder, especially an un-modded NA one, that thinks their car is the fatest thing on the road is a moron. Most Celica owners are all too well aware of this fact, and you will find that if you hit www.newcelica.org you will find mostly discussion of improvements, mods, repair questions, styling etc, and none of the gay *** kill stories that many other boards are riddled with... "Oh yeah I smoked a 1000 HP Supra TT with my VTEC" (It was parked...)
2002 Celica GTS
&
1990 Celica Alltrac Turbo*
(*currently undergoing metamorphosis to a 500 HP beast**)
(** Okay so its in like 1000 peices in my garage till I pry some more money out of my wife)
First:
That W8 diagram would only work in a vehicle with 2 crankshafts which would just be weird.
Heres how it works - it uses a standard V like a regular V8, but instead of having the cylinders in each bank in a line it offsets them, enabling a much shorter front to back profile for the engine. It uses a 4 cam design with overhead cams and rocker arms. If you want to see for yourself follow this link here and help dispell useless mis-information
http://www.vw.com/w8/engineering.htm
Second:
The suspension package on the Hotchkis Celica is comercially available for a couple grand not 10. Also the BONE STOCK GTS with the gimpy rev limiter ran the slalom at 70.1, the EVO was 72.6... not really a huge difference especially considering all the technology on the EVO and the likely cost difference between the cars. BTW - Hotchkis is done prototyping and that Celica is for sale right now in case you guys want to see for yourselves
Third:
The Toyota VVTLi system is actually considerably more advanced than than most VTECs out there as it employs both a dual cam profile and continuously variable intake cam timing as opposed to using just a second cam lobe. Does this make it better? Well... it makes 100 HP / liter which by ANY standard is not too shabby for a NA production 4cyl. Its also at least marginally better than most VTEC setups.
Now as for styling I think that anyone that says that either the EVO OR the Celica is ugly is hitting the pipe a little too hard. I think they both look great and in different ways which is cool. Who would want all the cars on the road to look the same?
Anyways I'm not going to say anything bad about the EVO (and not just because I think that they are pretty cool)- I've never driven one so it would be pointless and stupid. Kind of like you guys that have never even been in Celica trashing them is stupid....
The reason I chose the Celica (aside from the fact that I like the looks) was that it was just a blast to drive. Between the really nimble stock handling and the kick in the pants when the lift kicks in, it plastered a huge smile across my face that comes back whenever I drive it. It doesn't HAVE to be the fastest car on the road, it just has to be the one I like the most and have the most fun with. Likewise if thats what your Mitsu does for you guys then for YOU that is the best car in the world you could possibly have.... none could be better. Now when August rolls around go test dive the hell out of a 2003 Celica GTS before you come back and insult them anymore. Hopefully you will have fun and come away with a big smile and respect for both cars and liking yours even more than before. If not trade in and come join us at NC.org
Griffin
Afterthought: Fact is anyone driving a 4 cylinder, especially an un-modded NA one, that thinks their car is the fatest thing on the road is a moron. Most Celica owners are all too well aware of this fact, and you will find that if you hit www.newcelica.org you will find mostly discussion of improvements, mods, repair questions, styling etc, and none of the gay *** kill stories that many other boards are riddled with... "Oh yeah I smoked a 1000 HP Supra TT with my VTEC" (It was parked...)
2002 Celica GTS
&
1990 Celica Alltrac Turbo*
(*currently undergoing metamorphosis to a 500 HP beast**)
(** Okay so its in like 1000 peices in my garage till I pry some more money out of my wife)
Jul 22, 2002, 11:48 AM
#2
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Up to 80 miles north of Gilroy
Posts: 2,722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: a response to some misinformation
Originally posted by Griffin
Third:
The Toyota VVTLi system is actually considerably more advanced than than most VTECs out there as it employs both a dual cam profile and continuously variable intake cam timing as opposed to using just a second cam lobe. Does this make it better? Well... it makes 100 HP / liter which by ANY standard is not too shabby for a NA production 4cyl. Its also at least marginally better than most VTEC setups.
Third:
The Toyota VVTLi system is actually considerably more advanced than than most VTECs out there as it employs both a dual cam profile and continuously variable intake cam timing as opposed to using just a second cam lobe. Does this make it better? Well... it makes 100 HP / liter which by ANY standard is not too shabby for a NA production 4cyl. Its also at least marginally better than most VTEC setups.
On the W8 note, that was a very good video.
Jul 22, 2002, 04:31 PM
#3
Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we just think the Evos are better cars because you can impress 3 passengers at once, with groceries in the back 
I've just always wanted a 4-door car that carries all the characteristics of a small 2 door sports car, plus the cargo room. But besides that fact, there are plenty of differences between the two cars that have been in comparrison lately, and I think it is somewhat useless to compare and to make sense out of the argument.
I've just always wanted a 4-door car that carries all the characteristics of a small 2 door sports car, plus the cargo room. But besides that fact, there are plenty of differences between the two cars that have been in comparrison lately, and I think it is somewhat useless to compare and to make sense out of the argument.
Jul 22, 2002, 05:42 PM
#4
Re: Re: a response to some misinformation
Originally posted by pjal84
They continue that tradition with the S2000 with it's 220 HP out of 2.0L using the F20 block.
They continue that tradition with the S2000 with it's 220 HP out of 2.0L using the F20 block.
...although I do disagree with most Honda owners that VTEC in all of it's incarnations, is not the end all be all of tuning.
Jul 22, 2002, 08:02 PM
#5
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by octalon7
I think we just think the Evos are better cars because you can impress 3 passengers at once, with groceries in the back
I think we just think the Evos are better cars because you can impress 3 passengers at once, with groceries in the back
Yeah - theres a lot to be said for a true 4 door sports car. I love the IS300 for that same reason. Just couldn't quite justify the extra $$$ for the lease since my wife already has a grocery getter (Rav 4).
Griffin
Jul 22, 2002, 08:13 PM
#6
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Re: a response to some misinformation
Originally posted by pjal84
The only problem with this statement is the fact that while the VVTLi system is very impressive, Honda's engineers have been squeezing out 200 HP out of a 1.8L (Integra Type R) engine for quite sometime. They continue that tradition with the S2000 with it's 220 HP out of 2.0L using the F20 block. Even now, Honda's own iVTEC running in their new K series engines which replace the venerable B series are doing the same feat, with the same results. It's only now though that Toyota catches up in the small displacement/high rev/big power arena that Honda has dominated so much, although I do disagree with most Honda owners that VTEC in all of it's incarnations, is not the end all be all of tuning. While true that most VTECs on the street currently are running the uiVTEC (unintelligent), it's only a matter of time before more and more of Hondas newer powerplants receive their newest technology.
The only problem with this statement is the fact that while the VVTLi system is very impressive, Honda's engineers have been squeezing out 200 HP out of a 1.8L (Integra Type R) engine for quite sometime. They continue that tradition with the S2000 with it's 220 HP out of 2.0L using the F20 block. Even now, Honda's own iVTEC running in their new K series engines which replace the venerable B series are doing the same feat, with the same results. It's only now though that Toyota catches up in the small displacement/high rev/big power arena that Honda has dominated so much, although I do disagree with most Honda owners that VTEC in all of it's incarnations, is not the end all be all of tuning. While true that most VTECs on the street currently are running the uiVTEC (unintelligent), it's only a matter of time before more and more of Hondas newer powerplants receive their newest technology.
Griffin
Jul 22, 2002, 08:31 PM
#7
Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Honda's engineers have been squeezing out 200 HP out of a 1.8L (Integra Type R) engine for quite sometime.
But you also have to understand that the Type R engine is not a mass produced engine. At one time, there were only one person who transform (port and polish) the Type R engine. Honda could not have factory build it, it had to be hand assemble and made.
The Type R engine in the states made between 190-195 hp.
The Celica engine in Japan made I think 198 or so. And its mass produced.
I think the Type R engine is better, but only because it was hand build and port polished.
Last edited by nyoneway; Jul 22, 2002 at 08:33 PM.
Trending Topics
Jul 22, 2002, 09:41 PM
#8
Evolved Member
MIVEC
Didn't Mitsu do it first ten years ago with MIVEC, getting 173hp out of 1.6L? Now they've deemed the system obsolete and have gone to GDI, when/if they decide to build a high output specific NA 4cyl, they may suprise everyone.
I still maintain that 2 grand worth of suspension is not a light mod, especially when it is tuned by the company that built it. The manhours and experitise of the engineers at Hotchkis setting up their own equipment is worth far more then the purchase price of the equipment. And is infinitely better then me, a friend, a case of beer and a couple of floorjacks in my garage on a Sunday afternoon. Not to mention the expert drivers behind the wheel. Give the EVO the same attention and I think it would have been a different story. 2.5mph is 2.5mph, if you look at any high speed shootout amongst performace cars, the differences are usually about that. What was the difference between the Hotchkis car and the EVO, about the same right?
As far as styling is concerned, well, again that's purely subjective and has nothing to do with this argument.
The suspension package on the Hotchkis Celica is comercially available for a couple grand not 10. Also the BONE STOCK GTS with the gimpy rev limiter ran the slalom at 70.1, the EVO was 72.6... not really a huge difference especially considering all the technology on the EVO and the likely cost difference between the cars
As far as styling is concerned, well, again that's purely subjective and has nothing to do with this argument.
Jul 22, 2002, 10:10 PM
#9
Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you could put a set of suspension in a car that runs 15 seconds and for it to beat a Evo 7 that runs low 13's on the track by 1 second. That by itself is impressive. The person who drove the Evo 7 is no slouch either. The Evo comes from the factory with 4wd, lsd, Brembo brakes, great suspension and excellent power.
By no means I am comparing the Celica vs Evo, nor do I think its a better car by any means. I am just trying to point out that the Celica is much BETTER than most people say or think. Given more power and LSD, it is something to be respected on the track.
By no means I am comparing the Celica vs Evo, nor do I think its a better car by any means. I am just trying to point out that the Celica is much BETTER than most people say or think. Given more power and LSD, it is something to be respected on the track.
Jul 22, 2002, 10:34 PM
#10
Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
good points. especially considering john hotchkis himself drove the celica. but then again, it didn't edge the EVO out, it was a second faster a lap. in a 60 lap race, that would result in the EVO being lapped.
that confirms your position and my thoughts that the celica had an advantage, seeing as how the car itself was designed more for circuit racing, and it had so much attention from capable tuners/drivers. but not only can hotchkis build/drive cars, they do it for US, the consumers and average enthusiast, trust me, they've developed their suspension so anybody can bolt it on and notice a clear difference in handling, and if one decided to experiment more and learn about the car, they could modify the suspension as needed. it's not something revolutionary, it does basic suspension stuff, lower it, make it stiffer. but it also gives you a lot more control over how to tune the car for its environment. this is what a lot of real race teams do.
if this comparison were to be furthered, fairly, the celica would need engine modifications (they changed a street suspension to a track suspension, but they left the engine identical to a street engine), particularly n/a modifications. TRD has some prototype parts in Japan which would put power output closer to 230-240hp n/a, and do some weight reduction. and the EVO would have to be modified as needed to be suited to a track instead of a mountain.
i think there's hope yet for the celica. i mean, even with an advantage, i don't think anybody expected it to perform so well. that's a credit to toyota. and the fact that the EVO was 2nd, but was ahead of all the other stock supercars like porsches, z06s, etc. is a bigger credit to the EVO i think. it particularly made mincemeat out of the modified WRX (not STi however).
that confirms your position and my thoughts that the celica had an advantage, seeing as how the car itself was designed more for circuit racing, and it had so much attention from capable tuners/drivers. but not only can hotchkis build/drive cars, they do it for US, the consumers and average enthusiast, trust me, they've developed their suspension so anybody can bolt it on and notice a clear difference in handling, and if one decided to experiment more and learn about the car, they could modify the suspension as needed. it's not something revolutionary, it does basic suspension stuff, lower it, make it stiffer. but it also gives you a lot more control over how to tune the car for its environment. this is what a lot of real race teams do.
if this comparison were to be furthered, fairly, the celica would need engine modifications (they changed a street suspension to a track suspension, but they left the engine identical to a street engine), particularly n/a modifications. TRD has some prototype parts in Japan which would put power output closer to 230-240hp n/a, and do some weight reduction. and the EVO would have to be modified as needed to be suited to a track instead of a mountain.
i think there's hope yet for the celica. i mean, even with an advantage, i don't think anybody expected it to perform so well. that's a credit to toyota. and the fact that the EVO was 2nd, but was ahead of all the other stock supercars like porsches, z06s, etc. is a bigger credit to the EVO i think. it particularly made mincemeat out of the modified WRX (not STi however).
Last edited by t2000gts; Jul 22, 2002 at 10:37 PM.
Jul 22, 2002, 11:20 PM
#11
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats all these fuss over VVTLi, VTEC and iVTEC...??..
According to SCC (from the mag that this hotchkis celica was brought up
numerous times), next to BMW's new Valtronics made VVTLi, VTEC
and iVTEC look like pushrods...
And lets stop talking about celica for a moment... any of you toyota guys
know anything about the new supra???
According to SCC (from the mag that this hotchkis celica was brought up
numerous times), next to BMW's new Valtronics made VVTLi, VTEC
and iVTEC look like pushrods...
And lets stop talking about celica for a moment... any of you toyota guys
know anything about the new supra???
Jul 22, 2002, 11:33 PM
#12
Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by JT-KGY
Whats all these fuss over VVTLi, VTEC and iVTEC...??..
According to SCC (from the mag that this hotchkis celica was brought up
numerous times), next to BMW's new Valtronics made VVTLi, VTEC
and iVTEC look like pushrods...
Whats all these fuss over VVTLi, VTEC and iVTEC...??..
According to SCC (from the mag that this hotchkis celica was brought up
numerous times), next to BMW's new Valtronics made VVTLi, VTEC
and iVTEC look like pushrods...
And lets stop talking about celica for a moment... any of you toyota guys
know anything about the new supra??? [/B]
know anything about the new supra??? [/B]
the 4000GT is rumored to be MR format, with a 400hp n/a V8 engine, possibly using VVTL-i.
no clue about the supra. toyota has hidden this stuff very well. i don't like the concept shots of the supra, looks ugly. the 4000GT looks cool, celica crossed with a lamborghini. but they're both probably photoshopped pics.
Jul 22, 2002, 11:52 PM
#13
Evolved Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: CA
Posts: 1,290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great Thread
Hey Griffin,
Great thread, I loved all the info on the W-8 and have learned more reading this thread and going to vw.com than I usually do here in the forums.
I have a question, does the evo use a form of VTEC? and if not can you add VTEC to the motor?
Great thread, I loved all the info on the W-8 and have learned more reading this thread and going to vw.com than I usually do here in the forums.
I have a question, does the evo use a form of VTEC? and if not can you add VTEC to the motor?
Jul 23, 2002, 12:07 AM
#14
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Great Thread
Originally posted by Guack007
Hey Griffin,
I have a question, does the evo use a form of VTEC? and if not can you add VTEC to the motor?
Hey Griffin,
I have a question, does the evo use a form of VTEC? and if not can you add VTEC to the motor?
Jul 23, 2002, 12:22 AM
#15
EvoM Community Team Leader
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: chicago, michigan, arkansas
Posts: 3,135
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Re: a response to some misinformation
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Griffin
[B]Hmm - just wanted to clear a few things up.
Second:
The suspension package on the Hotchkis Celica is comercially available for a couple grand not 10. Also the BONE STOCK GTS with the gimpy rev limiter ran the slalom at 70.1, the EVO was 72.6... not really a huge difference especially considering all the technology on the EVO and the likely cost difference between the cars. BTW - Hotchkis is done prototyping and that Celica is for sale right now in case you guys want to see for yourselves
2.5mph is big difference in the slalom. Even a Ferrari or a Corvette cannot muster a 80mph or a wide margin of difference. I think a Mazda MP3 did a better run.
[B]Hmm - just wanted to clear a few things up.
Second:
The suspension package on the Hotchkis Celica is comercially available for a couple grand not 10. Also the BONE STOCK GTS with the gimpy rev limiter ran the slalom at 70.1, the EVO was 72.6... not really a huge difference especially considering all the technology on the EVO and the likely cost difference between the cars. BTW - Hotchkis is done prototyping and that Celica is for sale right now in case you guys want to see for yourselves
2.5mph is big difference in the slalom. Even a Ferrari or a Corvette cannot muster a 80mph or a wide margin of difference. I think a Mazda MP3 did a better run.