Honda chief rules out V-8 engine, for now

[Guest Josh]

Honda Motor Co. has decided not to build an eight-cylinder engine because high fuel prices are pushing buyers to more efficient motors. The company will focus instead on expanding diesel and gasoline-electric engine output.

"It's not the time to make a V-8," Honda Chief Executive Takeo Fukui said. "We need to focus on diesels and hybrids first."

Fukui told reporters in Tokyo Aug. 4 that Honda was studying whether to build V-8 engines and "will decide in three years" on using them. He said Tuesday that the company has dropped any plan to build the motors.

Honda this year expects to build 70,000 diesel motors, for models in Europe, and 30,000 gasoline-electric hybrid motors, which will mainly be sold in U.S. cars. The company plans to boost diesel output to 100,000 motors in two years and hybrid production to as many as 50,000 a year by 2007.

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0.../C04-314096.htm

[Sixty8panther]

Good, have them stick to girlie-girl SUVs and econoboxes. Edited September 15, 2005 by Sixty8panther

[siegen]

This isn't a surprise at all. Right now is not the time any company should be putting a lot of money into V8 developement, unless it is a hybrid assisted V8 or something to that effect. Regardless of how efficient a Honda V8 may be, I don't think Honda wants people to think they don't care about the environment by developing a V8 right now. Although I can't wait for the V10 to come out in the next NSX in a few years (assuming they don't go back to the drawing board like they did after the HSC).

Then on the other side, Honda is without a doubt losing sales to BMW and the like, who have V8 sedans, while Honda only has its 3.5L and 3.2L V6 sedans. And not to mention the 2.4L L4 sedans (which are still beating BMW's V8s and every other manufacturer in the Speed World Challenge). If Honda could develope a V8 powered RL with RWD or SH-AWD, I'd bet that would be a hot seller. Believe it or not, a lot of people judge the performance of a car based entirely off of how many cylinders it has, which of course is rediculous. Unfortunately these people buy cars, and there are a lot of them, so Honda has to appeal to them too.

Good, have them stick to girlie-girl SUVs and econoboxes.

I don't have any doubt that when Honda decides the time is right, they can develope a V8 that will outperform all other similarly sized V8's in every aspect. Why? They've only done it with every other high end engine they've developed. They have an abundance of technology to put into it (such as VTEC, VTC, cylinder cut, IMA, and any new technology they're working on right now), and they have the R & D and patience to get things right. Of course a large part of the American market will still reject it because it's a Honda.

We'll stick to our "econoboxes", while you stick to your polluting, gas guzzling, full-size sedans, SUVs, and trucks =P It's nice to see car manufacturers that are worried about future generations and not curent profit.

[Sixty8panther]

The McLaren F1 is proof that Honda is full of Hot Air and BMW is much superior in real world numbers. Money talks and bullshit walks. Honda is the most over rated manufacturer in the world!

[Cadillacfan]

The longer they hold off, the harder it will be for them to catch up to everyone else making a V-8. If the executives want a complete car line for Honda, they need a V-8. They could easily make a deal with GM to use the Vortec 4800 4.8L for the Ridgeline or the 5.3L V-8 for a large sedan. Maybe even the Northstar for the Acura line. Who knows. They are more fuel efficient then most of thier competitors and they are reliable. In return, GM could use some more V-6 engine options for their cars or small SUVs.

[Cory Wolfe]

And you, sir, have a problem.

With gas prices being high and such, I think anyone would rather be driving a diesel, hybrid, I4, or V6 than a V8. Especially if they can barely afford. Edited September 15, 2005 by blackviper8891

[bobo]

I'm a little disappointed with Honda not having a V-8, but I have a feeling that they will be doing some impressive things with a V-6 hybrid.

[Snate]

Might as well...its not like the "advanced" 3.5L in the Pilot and Ridgeline is the most efficient/powerful engine. A V8 would probably get similar gas mileage with more power. From a marketing perspective though you can't really blame them. Gas prices aren't going down by much anytime soon and they will only go up again next summer.

[Member55]

The McLaren F1 is proof that Honda is full of Hot Air and BMW is much superior in real world numbers.

Money talks and bullshit walks.

Honda is the most over rated manufacturer in the world!

[post="14414"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Honda F1 V10 3.0 NA engine is well above 900 hp so I'm sure they know a thing or two about making a good engine. BTW, it takes much more than a good engine to be successfull in F1.

[CaddyXLR-V]

With gas prices being so high, I would still rather have a V8.

[Newbiewar]

more efficent motors? who says v8's cant be efficent? look at the ls2... that car has seen higher gas mileage then the aveo... on the c6 it says for highway, accual results up to 66 mpg... the aveo accuall results up to 46 I think

[Cory Wolfe]

Oh yes... I'm sorry. I forgot that other than the LS Series V8s, GM can't make a fuel efficient engine. Especially when it comes V6s... GM sucks at it. That's why the ~240hp 3.9L gets worse fuel mileage than the 400hp LS2. Yeah... what a shame. I just wish GM could invest some money on the smaller engines. Refine them. If they did that... maybe V6 push-rods would be better than the V8s. Hell, maybe they could eliminate V6 push-rods all together since they are total disgraces. GM's I4s need some work too... The new 140hp Civic engine gets pretty damn good gas mileage. In comparison, The 140hp Ecotec engine looks like a V6 with its gas mileage. Needs some refinement... Another thing... if you look at the V6 in the Ridgline, what makes you think Honda would make a fuel efficient V8? Not saying they wouldn't because they have the technologies and such...

[Dsuupr]

A V-8 product doesn't fit honda's image. I think they're smart to stick where they're at.

[Cremazie]

A V-8 product doesn't fit honda's image.  I think they're smart to stick where they're at.

[post="14610"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Yeah, building underpowered econo boxes!

[wezzeles]

honda shouldnt make v8s. they dont now and theyre doing pretty good. why mess with a good thing.

[z28luvr01]

This really hurts Acura's image more than anything else. They'll never be thought of in the same sentence as Caddy, BMW, and MB without a RWD-based platform and a V8. Not that the RL isn't amazing, but it's all about perception, and we GM fans know a thing or two about how powerful that is.

[Clownzilla]

This really hurts Acura's image more than anything else. They'll never be thought of in the same sentence as Caddy, BMW, and MB without a RWD-based platform and a V8. Not that the RL isn't amazing, but it's all about perception, and we GM fans know a thing or two about how powerful that is.

[post="14679"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Even at these gas prices, V8's are still sought after, especially in the luxury and performance market. I think a company that dosen't research V8 tech is missing out on quite a few customers. As stated earlier, trading Vortecs for Honda engines would be a good deal, but how about trading production data and rights for each others select engine tech (with restrictions). Honda could get some great GM V8 tech knowledge, and GM could be helped out by some small engine tech.........makes sense to me. Win-Win for both companies(although I dislike Honda).

[nzr]

Haha, can you imagine a honda v8 with a fartcan? I bet with flowmasters it would still sound like shit. *bzzzzzzZzZZZZZZ* Edited September 15, 2005 by nzr

[siegen]

Does GM make any aluminum block V8's? If not, I highly doubt Honda would want anything to do with it. And before you say an aluminum V8 is rubbish, think about it. Honda's aluminum L4's and V6's have done just fine, why would a V8 be any different? I can't think of any technology GM has that Honda needs. The Corvette gets such good gas mileage because its light, has a small frontal area (and a low coefficient of friction), and can cruise down the freeway at less than 1500rpms. Even a gas guzzling V8 could give a car like that ok gas mileage (I assume the C6's engine is pretty well designed too).

[z28luvr01]

Does GM make any aluminum block V8's? If not, I highly doubt Honda would want anything to do with it. And before you say an aluminum V8 is rubbish, think about it. Honda's aluminum L4's and V6's have done just fine, why would a V8 be any different?

With the execption of the soon-to-be-phased-out GenIII engines currently in use in the trucks, all of GM's V8s are aluminum.

I can't think of any technology GM has that Honda needs.

Honda admitted they had a need when they asked for diesels in exchange for the V6 that's in the Vue. Their engine portfolio still has holes in it.

The Corvette gets such good gas mileage because its light, has a small frontal area (and a low coefficient of friction), and can cruise down the freeway at less than 1500rpms. Even a gas guzzling V8 could give a car like that ok gas mileage (I assume the C6's engine is pretty well designed too).

[post="14756"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The LS2 in the GTO gets 17/25 for the manual tranny. Not too much of a dropoff there, considering the nearly 700lb difference between the two cars.

[Flybrian]

Does GM make any aluminum block V8's? If not, I highly doubt Honda would want anything to do with it. And before you say an aluminum V8 is rubbish, think about it. Honda's aluminum L4's and V6's have done just fine, why would a V8 be any different?

The entire Northstar line of engines - including the 4.0l Aurora and 3.5l ShortStar - are all aluminum...

They're very powerful, very smooth, have a decade of reliability to lean on, and gets great real-world fuel economy and now does it with 87 octane.

GM knows what they're doing with aluminum-block V8s.

[BrewSwillis]

The LS2 in the GTO gets 17/25 for the manual tranny. Not too much of a dropoff there, considering the nearly 700lb difference between the two cars.

[post="14761"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The 4046 lb Chrysler 300C (designed like a brick) gets 17/25 mpg with an automatic and a 340 hp 5.7L V8 with MDS.

A V6 Honda Accord with a 244 HP 3.0L weighing 3415 lbs, get's 21/30 mpg.

Really not that big of a difference if you ask me. You will save about $400.00 per year (with gas at $3.00/gal and driving 15,000 miles), and not have nearly as much fun doing it!

[Snate]

Oh yes... I'm sorry. I forgot that other than the LS Series V8s, GM can't make a fuel efficient engine. Especially when it comes V6s... GM sucks at it. That's why the ~240hp 3.9L gets worse fuel mileage than the 400hp LS2. Yeah... what a shame. I just wish GM could invest some money on the smaller engines. Refine them. If they did that... maybe V6 push-rods would be better than the V8s. Hell, maybe they could eliminate V6 push-rods all together since they are total disgraces. GM's I4s need some work too... The new 140hp Civic engine gets pretty damn good gas mileage. In comparison, The 140hp Ecotec engine looks like a V6 with its gas mileage. Needs some refinement...

Another thing... if you look at the V6 in the Ridgline, what makes you think Honda would make a fuel efficient V8? Not saying they wouldn't because they have the technologies and such...

[post="14565"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Um...what about the 3.5L V6 in the Impala and Malibu? Any V6 that can get 35 real world MPG on the highway seems pretty efficient. Yes we all know its not rated at 35 MPG...hence why I said real world. True the 3.9L is rated lower...but in real life it will probably get just as good of mileage as its competitors.

EPA estimates are at best flawed. If you had any experience with newer GM engines...you would know their MPG usually exceeds the EPA estimates.

[siegen]

The entire Northstar line of engines - including the 4.0l Aurora and 3.5l ShortStar - are all aluminum...

They're very powerful, very smooth, have a decade of reliability to lean on, and gets great real-world fuel economy and now does it with 87 octane.

GM knows what they're doing with aluminum-block V8s.

[post="14786"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Ah, forgive me for my lack of knowledge when it comes to automotive V8's. All the new marine V8's I deal with are still cast iron (as well as V6's). Of course those are in much more unforgiving environments. In that case, I'd bet a strategic alliance between GM and Honda would be profitable for both organizations (just like Honda's alliance with GE).

Honda could use a good V8. I'm not saying that Honda couldn't design one just as good, but they probably don't have the time. The V8 in my dads 2004 Sierra gets over 20mpg on the freeway (with freeway gearing). I'm not sure what size it is, but it's the small one for the half ton trucks. That MPG is still a little lacking, but it is over 5L. If Honda wanted a V8, they'd probably go for the smaller 4.0L like you mentioned. Are these push-rod V8's still?

[CaddyXLR-V]

GM also makes aluminum 5.3s, which I think is used in the new Impala SS, and SSR. The trucks still use the iron block. Those are pushrod engines. The Northstar engines are DOHC.

[Cory Wolfe]

Um...what about the 3.5L V6 in the Impala and Malibu?  Any V6 that can get 35 real world MPG on the highway seems pretty efficient.  Yes we all know its not rated at 35 MPG...hence why I said real world.  True the 3.9L is rated lower...but in real life it will probably get just as good of mileage as its competitors.

EPA estimates are at best flawed.  If you had any experience with newer GM engines...you would know their MPG usually exceeds the EPA estimates.

[post="14836"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Yes, but what do you think the consumers look at? How do they know it will have higher fuel mileage than what's posted on the window sticker? Same goes for Priuses... How do they know it will have lower fuel mileage? The thing is... most people won't. Its the sad truth.

[Sixty8panther]

Honda F1 V10 3.0 NA engine is well above 900 hp so I'm sure they know a thing or two about making a good engine. BTW, it takes much more than a good engine to be successfull in  F1.

[post="14480"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

We can talk about 1000 horsepower Porsche 917s and 1500hp Viper dragsters wiht NOS, twin turbos and powerglide trans... let's not talk race cars. That's irrelevant and stupid.

I'm pretty sure I could make a 5.7 SBC pump out 900 natrually aspired Horsepower for short money but it's not in a production car. Honda told McLaren they COULDN'T produce a V12 with the specs they were looking for. It was "impossible" esp. for the budget and deadline.

BMW took on the assignment, made a ground up new DOHC V12 and oevrdelivederd the HP while coming ahead f schedule, under wieght and within Budget.

Moral of the story: Honda is full of bullcrap and has an inflated ego. Meantime I'd like a M3 so I could embarass a few NSXs at an SCCA meet.

[Cory Wolfe]

Yes... Well I'd like the next gen V-10 powered NSX so I could embarass your M3. :D

[Member55]

We can talk about 1000 horsepower Porsche 917s and 1500hp Viper dragsters wiht NOS, twin turbos and powerglide trans... let's not talk race cars. That's irrelevant and stupid.

I'm pretty sure I could make a 5.7 SBC pump out 900 natrually aspired Horsepower for short money but it's not in a production car. Honda told McLaren they COULDN'T produce a V12 with the specs they were looking for. It was "impossible" esp. for the budget and deadline.

BMW took on the assignment, made a ground up new DOHC V12 and oevrdelivederd the HP while coming ahead f schedule, under wieght and within Budget.

Moral of the story: Honda is full of bullcrap and has an inflated ego. Meantime I'd like a M3 so I could embarass a few NSXs at an SCCA meet.

[post="15043"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Do you know with which engine manufacturer Mclaren dominated the F1 for years a decade ago?

[Clownzilla]

The entire Northstar line of engines - including the 4.0l Aurora and 3.5l ShortStar - are all aluminum...

They're very powerful, very smooth, have a decade of reliability to lean on, and gets great real-world fuel economy and now does it with 87 octane.

GM knows what they're doing with aluminum-block V8s.

[post="14786"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I think Acura could get some seriously needed help with Northstar. People with luxury car tastes would love the smooth power and reliability, and the regular gas spec. would be icing on the cake. Plus, GM has been doing Northstar for quite some time, and constantly improving it. I don't think even Honda, with their "God like" development skills could trump the years of work GM has done to Northstar. Of coarse, I could be wrong. Working at a Cadillac dealer for years though, and experiencing Northstar first hand, I firmly beleive that Northstar is world class, and somthing that Honda would give dearly for.

[Robert Hall]

I'm a little disappointed with Honda not having a V-8, but I have a feeling that they will be doing some impressive things with a V-6 hybrid.

[post="14443"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

They have no need for one, really.

[Sixty8panther]

Do you know with which engine manufacturer Mclaren dominated the F1 for years a decade ago?

[post="15096"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

For christ's sake do you want to talk race engines? This discussion was not about over the top $2,000,000 engines made to run 6 hours between breakdowns. Your mentioning of race engines this or that is irrelevant, we're talking production. Production V8s. Otherwise I'll start talking about the Oldsmobile/Cadillac No.Star's racing success and how a smallblock pushrod Chevy enigne has kicked DOHC hi tech junk at 24 hours of Rolex, LeMans and on the street... <_<

IF Honda is SOOOOO damn good at making big powerfull engines why did they now jump at the opportunity to make a production V12 for the fastest street car of all time? Why don't they put their money where their mouth is? Acura should could use a V8.

Fu$# it. A poweerful V8 would just be wasted on Front wheel biases AWD or perhaps FWD. Honda is pathetic. Kind of like a nerd who cheats on his math quiz.

Yes... Well I'd like the next gen V-10 powered NSX so I could embarass your M3.

Yup... and that would be so meaningfull: Next day's headline:

Exotic Mid engined two seater with a V10 costing $90,000 beats a 4 passanger Gran Turismo coupe with a I6 for $45,000.

It would be as lame as the guy with a Ferrari Enzo who ends up winning against a C6 Z06 by a nose. Edited September 16, 2005 by Sixty8panther

[Member55]

For christ's sake do you want to talk race engines? This discussion was not about over the top $2,000,000 engines made to run 6 hours between breakdowns. Your mentioning of race engines this or that is irrelevant, we're talking production. Production V8s. Otherwise I'll start talking about the Oldsmobile/Cadillac No.Star's racing success and how a smallblock pushrod Chevy enigne has kicked DOHC hi tech junk at 24 hours of Rolex, LeMans and on the street...  <_<

Racing is used by manufacturers to showcase their engineering capabilities. If you can design a V10 engine spinning at 20000 RPM what makes you think that the same engineers couldn't design a nice V8 4.5L spinning at 6500 RPM(just an example). All I'm trying to say is that Honda not having a V8 engine is not due to their inability to make one. It's just a business decision. I don't even care if it's right or wrong decision. But, based on their market success they had their share of correct business decisions.

[Cory Wolfe]

Fu$# it. A poweerful V8 would just be wasted on Front wheel biases AWD or perhaps FWD. Honda is pathetic. Kind of like a nerd who cheats on his math quiz.

Anything FWD is pathetic to you... So shut up and deal with it. RWD is not always the perfect solution.

OMG!!! ..There's a FWD car in my sig!!! Oh no!!! :lol:

Yup... and that would be so meaningfull: Next day's headline:

Exotic Mid engined two seater with a V10 costing $90,000 beats a 4 passanger Gran Turismo coupe with a I6 for $45,000.

It would be as lame as the guy with a Ferrari Enzo who ends up winning against a C6 Z06 by a nose.

Wow... you can't even take a joke. :blink: :rolleyes:

Anyways, I highly doubt it would be just as lame as that as I think it'd be more than "by a nose".

[cmattson]

You want to know why this isn't much more than public relations BS? It's easy: the "255hp" (their numbers, lol), 4500lb Ridgelame gets 16/21 mpg with a 5-speed auto. The 4.8l Silverado weighs in at 5200lbs and has one less gear. Mileage? 16/21. Tell me again why Honda doesn't want to make a V8? It DOESN'T MATTER how many cylinders the engine has. What matters is the end result. The end result is that Honda produces a truck engine that puts out less hp & less torque and still manages to only match a now-6-year old truck powertrain -- even though their application has huge advantages in gearing and weight. I think I'll pass on the Honda Kool Aid, thank you very much.

[Sixty8panther]

Thanks Cmattson. Anothrer great point.

How about the fact that Honda's own real world fuel economy has ben dropping on cars like the Civic and Accord? A 1990 or 1995 Civic 5-speed would have no problem getting better fuel economy than a brand new Civic.

I bet for short change you could make a 1991 CRX gete 50mpg. A stupid Civic Hybrid or prius will never achieve that with all that dead weight of the batteries the car has to lug around.

And BV: you know I don;t hate ALL FWD vehicles, why do you always twist words around?

Here's a few NICE FWD-ers.

[Cory Wolfe]

And let me guess... if those cars weren't FWD you would like them less? That will see whether you hate it. Plus, all I ever hear is "Oh, that car is tragically flawed; it's FWD". If only I had a $20 bill for everytime you said something along those lines... So what's the deal? You always bash FWD and FWD vehicles... when I call you out for it, you bring that up... Yo no comprendo. :wacko:

Also, there is one vehicle that I think may do what it says it will... The funky, 2-door, 2-seater Insight. Not only is it rated higher than the Prius... real world mileage doesn't fall far from it unlike the Prius. And you can't deny this... :P

[Satty]

The Civics of the mid-90's achieved 45-50mpg fairly easily. MT did a road test back in 95ish with a Civic hatch that got like 48mpg. The new ones are worse because the new ones are heavier, meaning the engine has to work harder. They're not only heavier because they are bigger, but because they have loads of safety items and electrical doo-dads that weren't in many luxury cars ten years ago, much less entry-level ones.

[siegen]

The Civics of the mid-90's achieved 45-50mpg fairly easily.  MT did a road test back in 95ish with a Civic hatch that got like 48mpg.  The new ones are worse because the new ones are heavier, meaning the engine has to work harder.  They're not only heavier because they are bigger, but because they have loads of safety items and electrical doo-dads that weren't in many luxury cars ten years ago, much less entry-level ones.

[post="15206"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The 93-95 Civic HB VX could get 50mpg+ easily. It did it because it only weighed a shade over 2000 lbs, had a incredibly efficient SOHC 1.5L vtec engine, and it even came with ultra light, alloy wheels. However, no passenger side airbag, no power windows, no a/c, no ABS, etc, and if you leave it parked in a movie theatre parking lot, it will get stolen.

Like you said, it is a lot harder for current cars to get good MPG, and the only really good way is to use a hybrid powerplant.

[z28luvr01]

Thanks Cmattson. Anothrer great point.

How about the fact that Honda's own real world fuel economy has ben dropping on cars like the Civic and Accord? A 1990 or 1995 Civic 5-speed would have no problem getting better fuel economy than a brand new Civic.

I bet for short change you could make a 1991 CRX gete 50mpg. A stupid Civic Hybrid or prius will never achieve that with all that dead weight of the batteries the car has to lug around.

And BV: you know I don;t hate ALL FWD vehicles, why do you always twist words around?

Here's a few NICE FWD-ers.

--- pics cut out by z28luvr01 for brevity ----

*smacks Sixty8 upside the head*

That's for not mentioning the Cobalt as a nice FWDer. Don't let it happen again. :P

[balthazar]

Does GM make any aluminum block V8's?

With the execption of the soon-to-be-phased-out GenIII engines currently in use in the trucks, all of GM's V8s are aluminum.

General Motors' aluminum block production experience goes back to the 1960s.

[prinzSD]

The entire Northstar line of engines - including the 4.0l Aurora and 3.5l ShortStar - are all aluminum...

They're very powerful, very smooth, have a decade of reliability to lean on, and gets great real-world fuel economy and now does it with 87 octane.

GM knows what they're doing with aluminum-block V8s.

[post="14786"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

That just goes to show you how uneducated and unaware the masses are about GM building aluminum V8s. The import crowd automatically thinks everything about GM is old and low tech.

[siegen]

That just goes to show you how  uneducated and unaware the masses are about GM building aluminum V8s. The import crowd automatically thinks everything about GM is old and low tech.

[post="17975"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Whether or not an engine block is built using aluminum or cast iron does not say anything about how high or low tech the company is. GM still produces all their marine blocks out of cast iron. Someone saying:

They're very powerful, very smooth, have a decade of reliability to lean on, and gets great real-world fuel economy and now does it with 87 octane

Does not prove that GM is high tech, it is simply a statement. We can extract from that statement, that they have been building aluminum V8's for over a decade, that they run off 87, and the rest is just opinion.

[PontiacTechNJ]

Does GM make any aluminum block V8's? If not, I highly doubt Honda would want anything to do with it. And before you say an aluminum V8 is rubbish, think about it. Honda's aluminum L4's and V6's have done just fine, why would a V8 be any different?

I can't think of any technology GM has that Honda needs.

The Corvette gets such good gas mileage because its light, has a small frontal area (and a low coefficient of friction), and can cruise down the freeway at less than 1500rpms. Even a gas guzzling V8 could give a car like that ok gas mileage (I assume the C6's engine is pretty well designed too).

[post="14756"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

GM had a non production small block aluminum V8 in 1963 , a production Aluminum 427 ZL1 in camaros and corvettes in 1969, when Honda made their Laughable Motor bikes , cranking out over 500 hp , every Cadillac V8 since 1985 has had an aluminum block .
Short List of technology pioneered by GM that Honda uses -
Self Starter
Air Conditioning
Automatic Transmission
Turn Signals
Electric Headlamps
Timing Belts
Air Bags
Crash Test Dummies
The Catalytic Convertor
The list can keep going on , but hey , Honda doesn't need anybody , RIGHT ? Edited September 21, 2005 by PontiacTechNJ

[PontiacTechNJ]

Honda - Short on innovation - Long on sales *sigh*

[PontiacTechNJ]

Whether or not an engine block is built using aluminum or cast iron does not say anything about how high or low tech the company is. GM still produces all their marine blocks out of cast iron. Someone saying:
Does not prove that GM is high tech, it is simply a statement. We can extract from that statement, that they have been building aluminum V8's for over a decade, that they run off 87, and the rest is just opinion.

[post="17998"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Back when Honda was hiding the Check Engine lamp under the seat ( not good for emissions but really helps the CSI ) congress basically adopted GMs diagnstic system and mandated that EVERY car maker uses GM diagnostic system as it is the most extensive and thorough of Anyones . But Honda is high tech .
Cruise Control
Distributorless ignition
Alternators
Serpentine belts
Inertia lock safety belts
tinted glass
satellite radio
the 8 track
affordable abs
power steering
power brakes
fuel injection for the masses 1957
synchronized transmission

[PontiacTechNJ]

Sorry , Aluminum block V8 fall of 1960 , buick and olds 215

[siegen]

Self Starter
Air Conditioning
Automatic Transmission
Turn Signals
Electric Headlamps
Timing Belts
Air Bags
Crash Test Dummies
The Catalytic Convertor

Cruise Control
Distributorless ignition
Alternators
Serpentine belts
Inertia lock safety belts
tinted glass
satellite radio
the 8 track
affordable abs
power steering
power brakes
fuel injection for the masses 1957
synchronized transmission

A few technology advances and improvements on current technology by Honda (most developed in the last 6 years).

Vtec (Variable Valve Timing and Lift Electronic Control) - First car to rev to 8000rpm reliably. Also first car to produce 100hp/liter in a n/a engine in 1989.
VTC (Valve Timing Control) - adjusts valve timing up to 50 degrees. This means capability to have zero overlap at idle, but considerable overlap and scavenging at high rpm operation. Further recuding emissions and increasing mpg and performance at all rpms.
SH-AWD (Super Handling-All Wheel Drive)
SH-FWD (Same as SH-AWD except FF only)
IMA (Integrated Motor Assist) - More
Ultra-Lean burn (65:1 air/fuel) I-Vtec engine
First Hydrogen fuel-cell car
CMS (for people that suck at driving :P )
Insight (60mpg+ using IMA, first car to achieve this high MPG back in 99)
Intelligent Night-Vision
Dual-stage IM
i-CTDi (diesel)
HondaJet and Turbofan engines

Honda started its jet engine and aircraft projects in 1986, and has been developing the lightweight HF118 engine, in the 1,000 to 3,500-pound thrust class, since 1999.

[Drew Dowdell]

Every automanufacturer has it's firsts. What matters is if the inovation is an industry changing development. Much of what you listed about honda is not industry changing. IMA is a great example of this. Much respect to honda for developing it. The insight is no more interesting then GM's electric car in that both were consumer experiments. It may have been the first high MPG car in the US, but was not the first ever. The VW Lupo still has better fuel mileage. HondaJet? So? GM has been making railroad engines for 65 years. SH-AWD is honda's complex answer to a simple question. Subaru and Audi do it better still. The FWD transmission and automatic transmissions are much larger developments then anything in that list.

[Sixty8panther]

*smacks Sixty8 upside the head*

That's for not mentioning the Cobalt as a nice FWDer. Don't let it happen again.  :P

[post="15325"][/post]

You're right... although I have not driven it I'm sure from what I hear it is a great car. I didn't want to make the list 45 cars long.... I mean I even like the old '89 Cavalier Z24s with 5-speeds. I'm a child of the 80s after all. But I'd never buy a Cobalt or Cavalier over a Camaro.

Edited September 22, 2005 by Sixty8panther