Quote:
Originally Posted by Mingy
By the time they pull their fingers out and try to get it here, the new model will be out and it'll be under SEVS!
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mingy
By the time they pull their fingers out and try to get it here, the new model will be out and it'll be under SEVS!
Off Topic: Is there a particular reason why honda engines always get detuned when they are sold here? can someone gimme a full recap?
Without going too much into it....Quote:
Originally Posted by Mingy
Japs have 100ron fuel. In oz they're not widely available (only 98). So car gets detuned to suit and so that Honda can ultimately warrant it!
Thats the belief anyway....better be safe than sorry they say!
you mean detuned to suit 91 Unleaded, correct?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nepolian
^ FD1/FD2 is 91ron... FD2R if ever made it to oz would be 98 or maybe 95ron.
But it won't... and I couldn't care :P
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by xtercii
Nothing that a PFC can't fix :P
PFC doesn't support the K series.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elwood
LOL :DQuote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
I wonder if the "fuel quality" is the full story? when they brought in the DC5R they specified that it is to be run on 95 ron... why not 98? I think i heard someone say that at the time 98 wasn't as wide spread. but other manufacturers brought in cars that had 98ron min specified.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mingy
I would say that it's more about cost. The american 01-04 RSX ran the K20A2 so it was probably cheaper to get that engine for our market too. then america got the K20Z1 in the 05-06 RSX and we also got the same engine in our DC5S
As for FN2R, i'm guessing that's cos the market was going the way of hot hatches and honda wanted to jump on the ship.
Marketing is one of the main factor, many customer would be concerned if a car requires min 98k, especially the car itself costs less than 50k, think about this, a car that produces 150kw (example) by using 95ron fuel as min, and another car also produces 150kw but min requirement is 98ron, almost 10% extra in running cost, which one would you prefer to buy?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hullabaloo
I know many of us here on ozhonda understands the real difference with 95 amd 98, but there are many many others on the market that only cares about $$, they thinks why should I pay extra running cost with the same performance output.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oniononline
10% extra in running costs? i think you need to revise your estimate there.
98 octane fuel is either 5 or 6 cents per litre more expensive than 95 octane fuel.
if you use, for the sake of argument, a 50litre tank every two weeks, thats $2.50 a fortnight. thats $65 a year. compared to servicing and tyres, this is not exactly significant.
many hi po cars need 98 these days, eg. Golf GTI. and it's <$50k. last time i checked, they sell better than FN2R.Quote:
Originally Posted by oniononline