V-Tec Advantage - Or Not

[CornerCarver]

It's like my wife is fat and she never stops Bitching ! Why don't I leave her ? Because I Love her and I'm so stupid I don't know anything else ?

+1 This topic has been covered a dozen times and the out come is always the same, if do not like the concept of VTEC don't buy it .

Or if you don't like the huge torque hole from 5-9k RPM that is seen in the chart Dutchy posted then do what we did buy a better looking (arguably) 6G with better suspension (no doubt) and better LBS (again, doubtless) and put in a 5G engine.

Optimizing engine breathing: how VTEC works

An elegant, simple mechanism

Switching between high and low valve lift using two cam profiles and two rocker arms per cylinder.

The switch is made using hydraulic pressure to push/release the sliding pin, locking/unlocking the middle rocker arm and the other rocker arm.

At low engine speeds, the pin is retracted, disengaging the middle rocker arm. The valves are operated by the two outside, low-profile cams for a low valve lift.

At higher engine speeds, increased hydraulic pressure pushes the pin, engaging the middle rocker arm. The valves are operated by the middle, high profile cam for high valve lift.

VTEC: a deceptively simple mechanism that uses hydraulic pressure to switch

VTEC was around BEFORE increased emissions restriction .

Dave I don't think that is the bike version as they do not have variable valve lift as the Honda (and other) car engines. They simply use the hydraulics to shut off one exhaust and one intake valve at lower rpms.

Think of more like a fat man trying to breath through a straw. The smaller the straw the faster the air has to move to get enough to fill the lungs (cylinders). A larger diameter straw (opening the other two valves per cylinder) allows the guy to pull a breathe at higher RPM if you will.

[Knight]

BiKenG asked for numbers between two bikes which is a perfectly valid and objective question. The bikes are both VFRs so one would think the question is acceptable for a...........VFR FORUM! By the way, I greatly appreciate the information provided.

As we see today, the admin purges all old archives, destroying all helpful historical information. This means that previously solved issues will keep cropping up in perpetuity. So "The Pro/Con of Vtec has been beaten to death here for the last 14 years " is irrelevant since people join this forum every single day and the 5th gen market is still very active. I've been here a very short while, and my first bike is a '99. Do you think that just maybe I come here for information about my bike?

I am astounded at the criticism of the poster. If one ignored his post and read only your responses you'd think that he insulted your mothers. Ironically given your responses, the first thing an objective observer would think is that that everyone who owns VTEC feels emotionally fragile due to their bike being a step in the wrong direction and has to personally defend it, where no defense is otherwise needed, as though someone questioned their manhood. On your own behalf, you critics would have been better off ignoring this thread than sharing those thoughts.

[Ultimatevfr]

I already explained why I asked the question and already thanked Dutchy for his information which is all I wanted. Try reading instead of trying to start an argument.

Actually you didnt address Davids question as to the point of why you wanted the comparison, are you looking to buy either model? BP also makes a good point , why not rely on private correspondence? Really seems that you had another agenda here. Have you ridden a 6 th gen for any duration? Your comments went way beyond just a constructive criticism to the realm of disparaging remarks that publicly trashed the bike in front of a group of its faithful owners while showing absolutely no social sensitivity. Respectfully Ken , whatever the point you may feel about its faults - I personally do not think you are qualified to make it here.

[CornerCarver]

The "private correspondence" that Swithcblade suggested cannot happen when the thread was started to ask if anyone had the data. Later, after Dutchy posted the graph that the OP was looking for, the thread was just like a good post ride discussion with the topic evolving a bit and everyone related their personal experience on the most recent comment.

I think most people know that the complexity, weight and onerous valve adjustments when compared to systems that do not have it make the Vtec the modern equivalent of the 16" front wheel size that Honda wanted to hang on to for too long just because it was their idea and in theory it is a positive.

I am not even going to discuss the loss of the ultra reliable gear driven cams vs cam chain tensioners as I don't want to cloud the point that Vtec, AS IMPLEMENTED ON THE VFR (not the same as their cars) is a net negative (or if you are an ardent supporter you would argue for net neutral) technology.

Many may reply that the Vtec transition is not an issue and that is the point. Dutchy's graph shows that by the time the other 2 valves per cylinder open the bike is struggling for air so much that the power has dropped and the opening is just a little more noise as the engine plays catch up from Vtec opening to 9k rpm or so. That is a big hole from 5-9k in the torque curve when compared to the previous power plant.

No intent to bash any other VFR owners just a question to Honda as to why they continue to push the bike version of Vtec...

[Iakona]

I think it goes without question that the VTEC transition should occur earlier. Just the change in 06 improved the feel of the system on 6th gen bikes. I honestly think that the implementation of VTEC that they used in these bikes was a bit, meh. It's an efficiency oriented system, rather than performance oriented, and unfortunately that does show in the power curve. I know this isn't a CBR or anything like that, but it's still a sportbike. Why is Honda using a system that they developed for commuter cars on this?

That having been said, I love my 6th gen, and I'll continue to feel that way, and I wouldn't want another bike for daily use.

[The mailman]

V-tec sounds impressive when you explain it to non-moto related people but I'm pretty sure it comes from emission related attempts at advancements and would prefer to have a more linear dyno result.

[Switchblade]

The "private correspondence" that Swithcblade suggested cannot happen when the thread was started to ask if anyone had the data. Later, after Dutchy posted the graph that the OP was looking for, the thread was just like a good post ride discussion with the topic evolving a bit and everyone related their personal experience on the most recent comment.

I think most people know that the complexity, weight and onerous valve adjustments when compared to systems that do not have it make the Vtec the modern equivalent of the 16" front wheel size that Honda wanted to hang on to for too long just because it was their idea and in theory it is a positive.

I am not even going to discuss the loss of the ultra reliable gear driven cams vs cam chain tensioners as I don't want to cloud the point that Vtec, AS IMPLEMENTED ON THE VFR (not the same as their cars) is a net negative (or if you are an ardent supporter you would argue for net neutral) technology.

Many may reply that the Vtec transition is not an issue and that is the point. Dutchy's graph shows that by the time the other 2 valves per cylinder open the bike is struggling for air so much that the power has dropped and the opening is just a little more noise as the engine plays catch up from Vtec opening to 9k rpm or so. That is a big hole from 5-9k in the torque curve when compared to the previous power plant.

No intent to bash any other VFR owners just a question to Honda as to why they continue to push the bike version of Vtec...

I believe the chart I posted is more representative of the two bikes VTEC I have riden.

I dont see any problems with the "VTEC TRANSITION" in my graph or the two VTEC's I have ridden.

[Switchblade]

As far as the pic it is of a 1989 Integra VTEC the adjusting back lash assembly is the dead give away.

[CornerCarver]

As far as the pic it is of a 1989 Integra VTEC the adjusting back lash assembly is the dead give away.

And the Vtech for the cars is nothing like the Vtec for the bikes...completely different as there is no "variable" in the valve timing.

[CornerCarver]

as far as the pic it is of a 1989 Integra VTEC the adjusting back lash assembly is the dead give away.

A dead giveaway for anyone with an '89 Integra VTEC....

[3dcycle]

01-02vfrdyno.jpg

am I missing something the 01 is non vtec correct? how do you say the vtec causes a slump in power? they are so very close in power the entire rpm range. it looks like the 02 is down what 2HP at 6500rpm just before vtec. I know everyone is expert riders and everything and can feel the difference .1 HP makes but that little bit of HP difference does not make vtec a bad concept.

I have ridden 3rd gens 4th gens 5th gens and several 6 gens, the tuned 3rd and 4th gens are just bad ass and fun as hell. not to give 5th gen owners a hard time but they just felt meh to me. not a bad bike I mean hell its a vfr, just did not do it for me. the 6 gens though, they just fit me better and I LOVE the vtec, would not want it any other way.

just my 2 cents take it with a grain of salt

I think most people know that the complexity, weight and onerous valve adjustments when compared to systems that do not have it make the Vtec the modern equivalent of the 16" front wheel size that Honda wanted to hang on to for too long just because it was their idea and in theory it is a positive.

I am not even going to discuss the loss of the ultra reliable gear driven cams vs cam chain tensioners as I don't want to cloud the point that Vtec, AS IMPLEMENTED ON THE VFR (not the same as their cars) is a net negative (or if you are an ardent supporter you would argue for net neutral) technology.

Many may reply that the Vtec transition is not an issue and that is the point. Dutchy's graph shows that by the time the other 2 valves per cylinder open the bike is struggling for air so much that the power has dropped and the opening is just a little more noise as the engine plays catch up from Vtec opening to 9k rpm or so. That is a big hole from 5-9k in the torque curve when compared to the previous power plant.

No intent to bash any other VFR owners just a question to Honda as to why they continue to push the bike version of Vtec...

I believe the chart I posted is more representative of the two bikes VTEC I have riden.

I dont see any problems with the "VTEC TRANSITION" in my graph or the two VTEC's I have ridden.

[Alaskan]

After this we can talk about what oil is best!

[Ultimatevfr]

After this we can talk about what oil is best!

Or maybe even tires........;)

[CornerCarver]

Et voila!

01-02vfrdyno.jpg

am I missing something the 01 is non vtec correct? how do you say the vtec causes a slump in power? they are so very close in power the entire rpm range. it looks like the 02 is down what 2HP at 6500rpm just before vtec. I know everyone is expert riders and everything and can feel the difference .1 HP makes but that little bit of HP difference does not make vtec a bad concept.

I have ridden 3rd gens 4th gens 5th gens and several 6 gens, the tuned 3rd and 4th gens are just bad ass and fun as hell. not to give 5th gen owners a hard time but they just felt meh to me. not a bad bike I mean hell its a vfr, just did not do it for me. the 6 gens though, they just fit me better and I LOVE the vtec, would not want it any other way.

just my 2 cents take it with a grain of salt

I think most people know that the complexity, weight and onerous valve adjustments when compared to systems that do not have it make the Vtec the modern equivalent of the 16" front wheel size that Honda wanted to hang on to for too long just because it was their idea and in theory it is a positive.

I am not even going to discuss the loss of the ultra reliable gear driven cams vs cam chain tensioners as I don't want to cloud the point that Vtec, AS IMPLEMENTED ON THE VFR (not the same as their cars) is a net negative (or if you are an ardent supporter you would argue for net neutral) technology.

Many may reply that the Vtec transition is not an issue and that is the point. Dutchy's graph shows that by the time the other 2 valves per cylinder open the bike is struggling for air so much that the power has dropped and the opening is just a little more noise as the engine plays catch up from Vtec opening to 9k rpm or so. That is a big hole from 5-9k in the torque curve when compared to the previous power plant.

No intent to bash any other VFR owners just a question to Honda as to why they continue to push the bike version of Vtec...

I believe the chart I posted is more representative of the two bikes VTEC I have riden.

I dont see any problems with the "VTEC TRANSITION" in my graph or the two VTEC's I have ridden.

There is some speculation regarding what you are getting from the 6G vs 5G engine outputs.

The chart that Dutchy posted from a noted magazine shows a marked difference in torque output from 5-9k rpm between not only the 5G and 6G but with the 3/4G also out-pacing it in torque.

I am not sure of the origin of the chart Switchblade posted but it is not uncommon for a "ringer" to be supplied for magazine testing or when a manufacturer knows their bike will be put on the dyno.

I have ridden only about 13-15 6G VFR's and the hole in the torque is less apparent on some individual bikes compared to others so it is possible that both charts are accurate.

The throttle snatchiness at low RPMs is not a characteristic of Vtec but of many fuel injected bikes. They behave this way when programmed to meet EPA emissions standards but it may be exacerbated by the fact that Honda have closed two valves per cylinder to increase the speed of the intake charge.

[Switchblade]

as far as the pic it is of a 1989 Integra VTEC the adjusting back lash assembly is the dead give away.

A dead giveaway for anyone with an '89 Integra VTEC....

Or anyone who has slimmed there VFR800 VTEC valves.

01-02vfrdyno.jpg

am I missing something the 01 is non vtec correct? how do you say the vtec causes a slump in power? they are so very close in power the entire rpm range. it looks like the 02 is down what 2HP at 6500rpm just before vtec. I know everyone is expert riders and everything and can feel the difference .1 HP makes but that little bit of HP difference does not make vtec a bad concept.

I have ridden 3rd gens 4th gens 5th gens and several 6 gens, the tuned 3rd and 4th gens are just bad ass and fun as hell. not to give 5th gen owners a hard time but they just felt meh to me. not a bad bike I mean hell its a vfr, just did not do it for me. the 6 gens though, they just fit me better and I LOVE the vtec, would not want it any other way.

just my 2 cents take it with a grain of salt

I think most people know that the complexity, weight and onerous valve adjustments when compared to systems that do not have it make the Vtec the modern equivalent of the 16" front wheel size that Honda wanted to hang on to for too long just because it was their idea and in theory it is a positive.

I am not even going to discuss the loss of the ultra reliable gear driven cams vs cam chain tensioners as I don't want to cloud the point that Vtec, AS IMPLEMENTED ON THE VFR (not the same as their cars) is a net negative (or if you are an ardent supporter you would argue for net neutral) technology.

Many may reply that the Vtec transition is not an issue and that is the point. Dutchy's graph shows that by the time the other 2 valves per cylinder open the bike is struggling for air so much that the power has dropped and the opening is just a little more noise as the engine plays catch up from Vtec opening to 9k rpm or so. That is a big hole from 5-9k in the torque curve when compared to the previous power plant.

No intent to bash any other VFR owners just a question to Honda as to why they continue to push the bike version of Vtec...

I believe the chart I posted is more representative of the two bikes VTEC I have riden.

I dont see any problems with the "VTEC TRANSITION" in my graph or the two VTEC's I have ridden.

I agree and I will never believe Honda did it for emissions.

[Skids]

Chill pill time.

I've done nearly 130,000 miles on a 5th Gen and nearly 70,000 miles on a 6th Gen so I feel reasonably qualified here;

The 5th Gen has the best engine - for smooth, progressive torque, ease of servicing and a pretty unique noise.

The 6th Gen does everything else better BUT the engine. It simply isn't as nice...less torque which is where most of us ride anyway, though the aggressiveness in the 4-valve range is pleasing, it's more complex to service and probably (slightly) less reliable overall.

I've never ridden an earlier Gen.

The 8th Gen does a bloody good job of mixing the 5th & 6th Gens. It's as close to a 5th Gen engine yr likely to get whilst still having the Vtec system yet it has superior handling and more modern ergonomics than the 6th Gen. The best of both worlds? Not a classic (yet) like the 5th Gen, but a brilliant bike to ride nonetheless....admittedly only from a test ride.

The 7th Gen....well, where do I start? Sublimely powerful engine (even without a flashed ECU) and with some good money spent on suspension it handles as well as my 6th Gen with its fettled rear end.

I've had all 3 (5/6/7) in the garage at once and every time I walked in, I wanted to ride the 7th! A bit off topic at the end there, but at least it's all VFRs, every one of them loveable!

Of course this is just my opinion, and as it is an opinion, you cannot argue it, because it is my opinion.

Cheers all.

[Switchblade]

It's amazing how both graphs show the 6th gen with more torque BUT when they hit asphalt the 6th gen loses the torque.

[CornerCarver]

It's amazing how both graphs show the 6th gen with more torque BUT when they hit asphalt the 6th gen loses the torque.

Both charts show the 5G with more torque but the 6G with peak torque occurring higher in the rev range, thereby making more peak horsepower (at least on the magazine chart from Dutchy).

The peak HP differences on your chart are so negligible as to be statistically insignificant or can be due to the ambient temp changes in the same hour on the same dyno.

[Kingmdm]

We are all very passionate about the VFR. And rightly so....it's legendary. However, there is no 2016 model in Honda's lineup and they are offering a $1,500 discount for the leftover 2014's. There are new 2014's on eBay for $7,999. The sales are no longer there. What will the future be for the VFR/Interceptor? IMO, a low-tech mass production RC-213V with VFR ergonomics and some retro styling touches would turn it around for Honda. There'd be a waiting list.

[BusyLittleShop]

After this we can talk about what oil is best!

Oh yea baby... a good oil thread should challenge your beliefs...

[3dcycle]

no vfr this year is because we are all retarded, didn't you get the memo you should be buying a Africa twin... lol the least they could do is give us the vfr800x

[Switchblade]

After this we can talk about what oil is best!

Oh yea baby... a good oil thread should challenge your beliefs...

Less friction on the VTEC valves right Larry .

[Switchblade]

I guess the 6th gen had 20,000 mile Quake State oil in it during the dyno test.

[BusyLittleShop]

Less friction on the VTEC valves right Larry .

Right... picking an oil is like picking a girl friend... thin is in!!!

[Mohawk]

Honda UK 2002 Press Pack for the VFR, take from it what you will.

http://www.hoc.org.uk/gallery/press/2002/2002_VFR.pdf