Dave
 |
|
|
Toyota is using Atkinson cycle and an electric water pump in their 2012 Camry Hybrid not to mention a CVT. Honda has fallen behind in their present production models by not offering a 6 speed automatic transmission. Hyundai offers both 6 speed ATs and direct injection. Honda needs to get on the ball.
|
CarGuyLee
 |
|
|
As someone else said, these arn't new tech, however hopefully bringning them all together will make for some impressive offerings in the near future.
|
av911
 |
|
|
And yet, Honda is still competitive in the "real-world" mileage arena.
|
saitamahonda
 |
|
Honda has an internal reliability/durability requirement of 15 years for the engine/drivetrain. I doubt the other makers have conducted as strenuous testing as Honda has. The others had to rush to market, where Honda took its time to evaluate a sub-optimal approach and maximized the throughput.
So while ON PAPER 6spd and DI look great, the real world situation is such that
1.) the durability of the 6spd, how it works in combination to the engine it is mated to
2.) Direct Injection poses problems that are not immediately measurable and takes years of use to evaluate and Honda has been working on Direction Injection technology since before 2000 and in 2003 unveiled their i-vtec i engine.
What I'm wondering is how much of this design was actually copied by other manufacturers like Hyundai.
If the video was released in 2003, then development surely started before that, give or take a few years. Add the internal 15 year durability test (which I'm not 100% sure if its actually 15years or if its 10 years+ with some type of stress estimation) and you end up at around the year 2013. This timing isn't coincidence.
Toyota and other brands like Hyundai started introducing Direct Injection engines around 2008, around 5 years after Honda unveiled their technology. Given the bigger picture, I think it its pretty clear that Honda is the leader in engine technology, Toyota and Hyundai patiently wait for Honda's next big thing and rip it.
watch the video that shows extensively how Honda created its Direct Injection technology.
http://world.honda.com/HDTV/news/2003-4031127a/
|
MasterOfDaDomain
 |
|
15 years?
I don't think actual calendar time matters. You can keep the test models running for a long time to determine durability.
Toyota cares about durability too, if not more so.
|
saitamahonda
 |
|
Calendar years do matter in certain tests but you may be right about test models and how some TSB may be the result of a finding.
I know that Honda has test facilities that simulate UV exposure of various types for prolonged exposure as well as stress tests on the body, transmission, engine and electrical systems.
Given that many Honda owners own their Honda for 10 years and considering that many buy Hondas used at 5 years and will drive it for 5-8 years, it makes sense. I thought 15 years sounded quite a bit of a stretch myself, but one Honda retiree indicated so, at least for the engine/drivetrain. Its no surprise that Honda's are well sought-after used-cars thanks to this durability. Granted, the "perceived" quality may not be top notch, but 10 years later the materials quality suffer little degradation.
Toyota might CARE about durability but they care about image and reputation MORE. I believe Honda is BETTER about testing technologies and making them bulletproof. Toyota just does a better job packaging and bringing it to market faster since they have way more people, resources, and money to do it with. The problem is bringing it to market faster isn't necessarily a good thing.
This is especially the case with Direct Injection, a rather delicate and complex implementation with known downsides that need to be tried-and-tested over the long haul.
|
CarPhreakD
 |
|
saitama, for engines, the measure is usually mileage under a certain operating condition, rather than number of years. Years is probably more for interior and exterior panels.
But it's true, other automakers have been using these technologies. So Honda is not an innovation leader (except for the electric SH-AWD, that is actually quite impressive... actually, I should add the supercharged hybrid system in the CR-Z iCF as a first as well perhaps? Not sure if anyone else has that). The main thing is how well Honda could execute these technologies- you've already seen several threads talking about the inherent drawbacks of DI, and how Honda's new EGR system might fix that.
|
ipribadi
 |
|
I really do not think the tests even for drivetrain is 10+ years.
I believe this is 10 years equivalent through modern accelerated testing methods.
Every new design goes thru several iterations. What happens when your test engine fails at 8yrs? Make a fix and test another 10 yrs? that's already 18 yrs!! and that's only one feature improvement!
There are hundred if not thousands of "tweaks" that are done during product prototyping to production release. Each "tweak" must be tested to validate is effectiveness to resolve the found issue.
How many hours is your car driven? 2 maybe 3hrs? That's already a 100 mile daily commute?
What's done is accelerated testing based on a certain test model which simulates a worst case scenario.
The test unit is put thru its paces 24/7 which can accelerate testing anywhere from 5-10x compared to real world usage.
|
Dren
 |
|
Dave wrote:
Toyota is using Atkinson cycle and an electric water pump in their 2012 Camry Hybrid not to mention a CVT. Honda has fallen behind in their present production models by not offering a 6 speed automatic transmission. Hyundai offers both 6 speed ATs and direct injection. Honda needs to get on the ball.
|
Honda has stayed in competition through refining "simple" technology. They are just now coming out with what everyone else has. Honda hasn't needed to until now. I am going to go out on a limb and say A-VTEC set them back a little. The new CVT is intriguing. So is the new VCM.
|
|
|
| |