Just talking about the engine, I would say Nissan VQ is most reliable. It just never quits, and feels so smooth even after 115K miles. The tranny is nowhere near as good as new, but the engine is just silky. Also, timing chain is a big plus IMO. Honda is second, and toyota is last because of the sludge fiasco. Toyota V6 is very unremarkable IMO. Their auto trannies are great.
Evadman
Administrator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
- Feb 18, 2001
- 30,990
- 5
- 81
I'm sure it was a V6 auto...those are a dog. And I'm sure a LS1 in *ANY* gear will smoke a stock 240SX. Damn V8 with its damn stump-pulling torque!
Excuse me, would you like me to pull your house off its foundation now?
I will allways favor torque over HP, but not everyone does. HP has been beat into too may people's heads as "performance" when it is actually 1/2 of the info.
My opinion on the actual question in this thread:
Honda: Awesome power to weight ratio for the engine itself. Huge advances in engine technology. Way over Nissan and Toy's IMHO.
Toyota Awesome reliabality, IMHO, over honda. But less power, and less refinement.
Nissan Middlegound on both power / weight / refinement and reliability. Not sucky, but not awesome either.
Originally posted by: Evadman
I'm sure it was a V6 auto...those are a dog. And I'm sure a LS1 in *ANY* gear will smoke a stock 240SX. Damn V8 with its damn stump-pulling torque!
Excuse me, would you like me to pull your house off its foundation now?
I will allways favor torque over HP, but not everyone does. HP has been beat into too may people's heads as "performance" when it is actually 1/2 of the info.
My opinion on the actual question in this thread:
Honda: Awesome power to weight ratio for the engine itself. Huge advances in engine technology. Way over Nissan and Toy's IMHO.
Toyota Awesome reliabality, IMHO, over honda. But less power, and less refinement.
Nissan Middlegound on both power / weight / refinement and reliability. Not sucky, but not awesome either.
You do know that Nissan VQ is aluminium block? If Honda engine is way over Nissan, how come Nissan's VQ has been in Ward's 10 best for every single year since introduction?
BTW, for this year 10 best are:
Engine (and tested vehicle)
-- BMW AG 3L DOHC I-6 (330 Ci)
-- BMW AG 3.2L DOHC I-6 (M3)
-- DaimlerChrysler AG 5L SOHC V-8 (Mercedes-Benz ML500)
-- Ford Motor Co. 5.4L SOHC V-8/5.4L sprchg SOHC V-8 (F-150/F-150 Lightning)
-- General Motors Corp. 4.2L DOHC I-6 (GMC Envoy)
-- General Motors Corp. Duramax 6.6L OHV trbdisl. V-8 (Chev. Silverado HD)
-- Honda Motor Co. Ltd. 2L DOHC I-4 (Acura RSX Type S)
-- Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Altima 3.5 SE)
-- Porsche AG 2.7L DOHC H-6 (Boxster)
-- Volkswagen AG 1.8L turbocharged DOHC I-4 (Jetta 1.8T)
Notice how Honda V6 is nowhere to be found, and the Nissan is the only V6 winner?
Link
Notice how in the past years winners:
Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. "VQ" 3L DOHC V-6 Maxima 95 96 97 98 99 00 01
And Honda V6 is nowhere to be found as well. You have much to learn
NFS4
No Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 72,636
- 48
- 91
I can tell you that Toyota's 3.0 liter V6 is smooth and has awesome power delivery in all area. The one in our '02 Highlander Limited puts out 220HP/222 lb-ft and is smooth as butta from idle to redline (all while pulling 22.8 MPG from a 3,800 lb SUV). The engine has some serious bite as I have found out on a few occasions. I tend to floor the thing around corners and through traffic and VSC and TC has saved my butt a few times in those occasions.
The same engine in the Camry is only putting out 192 HP...pretty meager if you ask me.
I'd like evidence to back that up. I don't just tell me b/c you "think" it's that way or give me "sludge" from Toyota engines. I want to see some hard numbers saying that the VQ is the most reliable followed by Honda and Toyota.
That being said, there is no question that the VQ V6 has the most balls out of the group though. That thing just pulls from all over the rev band.
The same engine in the Camry is only putting out 192 HP...pretty meager if you ask me.
I'd like evidence to back that up. I don't just tell me b/c you "think" it's that way or give me "sludge" from Toyota engines. I want to see some hard numbers saying that the VQ is the most reliable followed by Honda and Toyota.
That being said, there is no question that the VQ V6 has the most balls out of the group though. That thing just pulls from all over the rev band.
We won't know for sure which one is most reliable in terms of lifetime, but I think the Nissan is right up there based on the smoothness of my engine after 115K miles of abuse. It's not only bulletproof, but it stays smooth as butter. And no timing belt to change, which to me means lower maintainance cost. And engine sludge is a possibility with toyota V6's, like it or not.
Originally posted by: Evadman
I'm sure it was a V6 auto...those are a dog. And I'm sure a LS1 in *ANY* gear will smoke a stock 240SX. Damn V8 with its damn stump-pulling torque!
Excuse me, would you like me to pull your house off its foundation now?
I will allways favor torque over HP, but not everyone does. HP has been beat into too may people's heads as "performance" when it is actually 1/2 of the info.
My opinion on the actual question in this thread:
Honda: Awesome power to weight ratio for the engine itself. Huge advances in engine technology. Way over Nissan and Toy's IMHO.
Toyota Awesome reliabality, IMHO, over honda. But less power, and less refinement.
Nissan Middlegound on both power / weight / refinement and reliability. Not sucky, but not awesome either.
good post
It's a known issue, and Toyota changed the design in response. That tells you something.Originally posted by: NFS4
Sludge is a problem if you don't change your oil in 10,000 miles like that dumb b!tch with the Sienna in the link that you posted about a while back
Does VQ develope sludge without oil change for 10K miles? I don't think so.
Originally posted by: NFS4
Sludge is a problem if you don't change your oil in 10,000 miles like that dumb b!tch with the Sienna in the link that you posted about a while back
No sludge problems here. I don't know sh1t about engines, but I would like to add that it's really hard to tell if the engine on my v6 Camry is on often. I forget if I turned it on or left it on just the battery power, so I have to turn it off and back on again.
Passengers also have noted this... none of us are car gurus, but just personal experience.VQ is one of the most reliable V6 engines and this is backed by Consumer reports. It's almost impossible to show reliability with hard numbers. I am not sure if its more reliable than Honda or Toyota.
On paper I think Honda makes the most efficient engines. The only DOCH vtec is the C30 (NSX). The Accord uses regular gas while the VQ needs premium gas.
So if Honda were to make the Accord engine DOCH and with higher compression, not to mention add 0.5L it would most likely kick some serious ass.
The main thing with Honda is the super narrow torque and HP band. Not very practical in daily city driving.
I think Toyotas engines are comparble to Nissans. I think the IS engine was designed by Yamaha though..same engine as the NA Supra AFAIK.
On paper I think Honda makes the most efficient engines. The only DOCH vtec is the C30 (NSX). The Accord uses regular gas while the VQ needs premium gas.
So if Honda were to make the Accord engine DOCH and with higher compression, not to mention add 0.5L it would most likely kick some serious ass.
The main thing with Honda is the super narrow torque and HP band. Not very practical in daily city driving.
I think Toyotas engines are comparble to Nissans. I think the IS engine was designed by Yamaha though..same engine as the NA Supra AFAIK.
NFS4
No Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 72,636
- 48
- 91
Changed their design how and do you have a link?
As to the second part, what's your point? What dumbass drives their car for 10,000 miles without changing their oil (unless stated that you can drive that long btw changes like some Mercedes models)?
That's like saying that you can drive 100,000 miles on a set of 40,000 mile all season tires. Sure, you could POSSIBLY do it, but what kind of idiot does that?
Do we have to rehash this again?
USA today story
And yes, the maximum life limit is a good indicator of reliability, even if you never use it. Using your example, which all season tire is better? One that could last 100K miles or one that lasts 50K. Even if both say they are only only desinged 40K miles, in all likelyhood, the first one is better and more reliable till 40K miles as well.
hmm I wonder which of these three car companys offer the best factory stock tires and wheels.I dont mean the one you can pay extra for ethier just the one that come with a specific model.
NFS4
No Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 72,636
- 48
- 91
All that quote says is that Toyota is changing the design to appease dumbasses who don't change their oil.
I wouldn't feel sorry for the idiots and I wouldn't warranty it either
As for the tires example, tires are rated to last for a certain amount of miles given normal driving conditions. Driving a car over that mile limit by an EXTREME amount is not safe by any means. 100,000 miles on 40,000 rated tires is just a bit dangerous IMHO. A friend of mind found that out the hard way when his front tire about gave way on our trip the mountains of NC. We were driving from Banner Elk down to Ashville and his front tires were down to the cords ("only" 60,000 miles on 50,000 mile tires). I kept hearing his tires squealing like crazy as I was driving behind him in my car. He ended up having to get both front tires replaced at the nearest Sears.
Anyway, the point is, going to extremes on any kind of critical component (in regards to service) on your car is pretty damned stupid. If you have 40,000 mile tires, don't drive them 100,000 miles. If you oil is supposed to be changed every 3,000 miles, don't think that you're gonna drive 10,000 miles on a change just b/c you feel like it.
It's just idiotic
Originally posted by: NFS4
All that quote says is that Toyota is changing the design to appease dumbasses who don't change their oil.
I wouldn't feel sorry for the idiots and I wouldn't warranty it either
As for the tires example, tires are rated to last for a certain amount of miles given normal driving conditions. Driving a car over that mile limit by an EXTREME amount is not safe by any means. 100,000 miles on 40,000 rated tires is just a bit dangerous IMHO. A friend of mind found that out the hard way when his front tire about gave way on our trip the mountains of NC. We were driving from Banner Elk down to Ashville and his front tires were down to the cords ("only" 60,000 miles on 50,000 mile tires). I kept hearing his tires squealing like crazy as I was driving behind him in my car. He ended up having to get both front tires replaced at the nearest Sears.
Anyway, the point is, going to extremes on any kind of critical component (in regards to service) on your car is pretty damned stupid. If you have 40,000 mile tires, don't drive them 100,000 miles. If you oil is supposed to be changed every 3,000 miles, don't think that you're gonna drive 10,000 miles on a change just b/c you feel like it.
It's just idiotic
You are missing the point. Let's say two tires are ridden till they pop as a scientific experiment. One tire pops at 50K miles, another pops at 100K. Which one is going to be more reliable to 40K miles?
I am an engineer. I design CPUs. My job is to make a CPU work within certain parameter box. I design it to work at voltage that is double what it's supposed to run at, and to work at voltage that is half what it's supposed to be run at. It's about giving enough margin to account for variations. Of course, I could assume ideal conditions, and just test my processor at the ideal voltage and temperature, and call it a day. But if I want it to be reliable under various conditions, I don't do that.
IIRC, a stock '98 Toyota Supra puts out 330 HP from a 3.0L i6. Of course that is FI... My '87 puts out 230 from a 3.0 I6, also FI. The N/A put out 200 from the same 3.0L. I love Toyota's engines simply because they are so hard to kill.
THOOSE SUPRA ENGINES ARE ABSOULUTE OPPOSITE OF TODAYS THRASH TOYOTA NEW PHILLOPSY
IS MAKE LARGE DISPLACEMENT INLINE 4S AND V6S AND DONT TUNE THEM AT ALL AND SINCE THE ENGINES ARENT DOING ANY REAL WORK THEYLL LAST THE SUPRA HAS ONE OF THE MOST OVER ENGINEERED ENGINES AND WAS GREAT TRANNYS WOULD GO OUT BEFORE IT DID.
IS MAKE LARGE DISPLACEMENT INLINE 4S AND V6S AND DONT TUNE THEM AT ALL AND SINCE THE ENGINES ARENT DOING ANY REAL WORK THEYLL LAST THE SUPRA HAS ONE OF THE MOST OVER ENGINEERED ENGINES AND WAS GREAT TRANNYS WOULD GO OUT BEFORE IT DID.
NFS4
No Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 72,636
- 48
- 91
I think YOU'RE missing the point. Manufacturers set service intervals for their cars for a specific reason. Going outside of those boundaries is NO guarantee.
If Porsche says that you are supposed to change your oil every 4,000 miles in your Boxster, you had damned well better do it. It's not a matter of the engine being "weak" or "sludge prone," it's b/c for optimum performance and for the health of the engine that's what you should adhere to.
Porsche owners are keen enough to adhere to these intervals for their cars. You won't hear many stories of Porsche owners going way past their service intervals for their cars. OTOH, your typical Accord, Camry, Altima owner might think otherwise and just keep going and going. They aren't as "in tune" with their cars. But that DOESN'T mean that servicing your vehicle isn't as important as it is to the Porsche.
Also, your tire example is not quite valid in real life terms, at least IMHO. You shouldn't ride your tires until they are ready to pop (sure, the scientists can test them to this extreme, but the customers shouldn't if they want to drive safely). Once they are down to the wear bars, it's time for those bastards to go. When you have no tread left on your tires, you're risking the handling/stopping/wet performance of your car which is a danger to you and everyone on the road. Scientists testing the tires in a lab have that luxury to test; customers doing this in the REAL WORLD are just putting their lives (and everyone else on the road) at risk.
Simarly, changing the oil in your car is a common sense thing. JUST DO IT!! I just don't think it's reasonable for a customer to look in the instruction manual and see 3,000 mile service interval for oil and then say "Hmmm, I'll go 10,000 miles just for the hell of it."
If you don't put gas in your car, your sh!t is gonna konk out once it goes a ways past "E." It's up to YOU to watch that "E" closely. You know that once you get to E that you have a few miles left to go (typically 25-30 miles) and that you HAVE to get to the gas station and fill up. Same way with oil. Once you get to 3,000 miles, you better be ready to change your oil soon.
I think the MKIV TT was 320Hp and the NA was 220HP. That engine is a like a rock. Anyways...Toyota is still using that engine in their Lexus line.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter