1.5L Gas Engines on MPV/SUVs

[akosijhay]

malakas po ang 1.5 engine lalo pag akyatan

Yes sir malakas naman ung Honda BR-V (compare to old diesels like Crosswind or Adventure) but observation ko lang na kelangan i-floor minsan ang gas pedal lalo pag akyatin ang kalsada at may sakay na 7pax + luggages.


Same with our Honda City (Also have the same L15 engine) na pag akyatin ang kalsada, bitin sa torque compare sa Vios hehe.

[Egan101]

Yes sir malakas naman (compare to old diesels like Crosswind or Adventure) but observation ko lang na kelangan i-floor minsan ang gas pedal lalo pag akyatin ang kalsada at may sakay na 7pax + luggages.


Same with our Honda City (Also have the same L15 engine) na pag akyatin ang kalsada, bitin sa torque compare sa Vios hehe.

Kung bitin, then push harder on the accelerator. Peak torque for most gas-fed NA engines is at 4k rpm so if you want more push, then rev it to 4k rpm.

[tarzegetakizerd]

yup... pero sandali lang yung 5K version ng FX... later pinalitan sya ng 7K (1.8)

although naniniwala naman akong mas modern na engines ngayon, hence more power.



Rush and Avanza are both RWD...

(sorry, matanda na ako)
same ba "takbong pogi" sa "drive mayaman" ?

yung naka A/C ka pero bukas ang bintana...

ano pong definition ng "takbong pogi? hehehe 60-90 kph?

[GTi]

Agree. When I was in Sagada, super daming 90s FX. That's where all old Tamaraws go to die I guess. [emoji28]

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

When I went hiking at Mount Ulap (chickened out for Mount Pulag [emoji28]) a few months ago, I had to take a habal habal FX at the end of the trail since jeepneys in the area were few and far in between. It had no aircon, no headliner and no carpeting and was the barest vehicle I have ever ridden that wasn't a jeepney. Apparently still runs great though. Driver said it used to be a mega taxi in MM before it aged out of service. Though it must be said that they usually convert the gas ones to diesel.

Sent from my SM-G965N using Tapatalk

[ice15]

Even the 7K EFI engine had less power than the current 1.5s. I think a little over 90hp? And torque is at similar levels. At sampuan ang sakay! They don't make 'em like that anymore...

Sent from my SM-G965N using Tapatalk

kaso manual yung FX... If I remember correctly, 2 & 3rd gear ng FX sobrang gamit na gamit, tapos yung RPM nya, madalas nasa 3,000-4,000 range pa palagi - compared sa 2C version na below 3,000 yung RPM

Agree. When I was in Sagada, super daming 90s FX. That's where all old Tamaraws go to die I guess. [emoji28]

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

ok lang sila sa province... di naman kasi sila naka aircon.

[_Qwerty_]

CVT kasi sir.. pag ganon lagay mo sa S.

Yes sir malakas naman ung Honda BR-V (compare to old diesels like Crosswind or Adventure) but observation ko lang na kelangan i-floor minsan ang gas pedal lalo pag akyatin ang kalsada at may sakay na 7pax + luggages.


Same with our Honda City (Also have the same L15 engine) na pag akyatin ang kalsada, bitin sa torque compare sa Vios hehe.

[grss1982]

FWD ang ecosport, brv, Tiggo at ZS 1.5L subcompact crossover SUVs that the TS mentioned. only exceptions are the rush and avanza. but yes, FWD is usually more fuel efficient than RWD.

A bit off topic but does this concept hold true for hatchbacks like the Picanto, Aeon, Wigo, atbp? Because of being FWD?

[StockEngine]

A bit off topic but does this concept hold true for hatchbacks like the Picanto, Aeon, Wigo, atbp? Because of being FWD?

yes.. no drive train losses.

[GTi]

A bit off topic but does this concept hold true for hatchbacks like the Picanto, Aeon, Wigo, atbp? Because of being FWD?

I don't think there are any RWD econobox hatchbacks nowadays. But yes, with all other aspects being equal, the FWD should be more fuel efficient than the RWD mainly because there is no need for a driveshaft to transmit power from the engine in front to the wheels at the rear. When placed on a dyno, the FWD should also make more power because of lesser driveline power losses due to absence of said driveshaft.

Sent from my SM-G965N using Tapatalk

[Lin Dan]

yes.. no drive train losses.

And no drive train noise as well [emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dr. d]

I don't think there are any RWD econobox hatchbacks nowadays. But yes, with all other aspects being equal, the FWD should be more fuel efficient than the RWD mainly because there is no need for a driveshaft to transmit power from the engine in front to the wheels at the rear. When placed on a dyno, the FWD should also make more power because of lesser driveline power losses due to absence of said driveshaft.

Sent from my SM-G965N using Tapatalk

but do they, really?

[travajante]

A bit off topic but does this concept hold true for hatchbacks like the Picanto, Aeon, Wigo, atbp? Because of being FWD?

Tiny econoboxes need space & cost optimized. FWDs have tranverse engine layout...allows shorter frontend, less sheet metal. No prop shaft, no rear differential, lesser parts. CHEAPER for manufacturers. This & the efficiency of direct drive, though great marketing points, won't outweigh the pluses of RWD. FWD, despite its practicality, has greater performance, maintenance & longevity handicap. You have torque steer, understeer, quicker front tire wear to name a few. With steer & drive chores crammed upfront, FWDs tend to wear out faster than the simpler RWDs. More frequent alignment tweaks & part swaps are expected in FWD ownership. All those make them lesser seen in the perf premium, pickup/PPV, & larger luxury segments. RWDs, however, can consume rear tires prematurely....esp if one DRIFTs.[emoji4]
With the pros/cons known, hands down, RWD>FWD.[emoji4]

Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk