Civic VTi-R 0-100 times?

[Setanta]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

118 kw (for the Oz spec) x 1.3405 = 158.18 hp

Wrong.

118kW x 1.3592233 = 160.38hp

From http://www.markhorrell.com/tools/power.asp

1 kilowatt = 1.34102 UK horsepower
1 kilowatt = 1.35962 metric horsepower

Honda Australia uses metric figures and quote 160bhp for the EK6 hatch as does Honda US with their EM1 VTiR coupes. Actually, Honda US doesn't quote KW at all, just bhp - go tell them they are wrong :P

I wouldn't normally carry an insignificant point this far, but a certain mag racer has questioned my knowledge and made a nice generalisation about the posts I make.

If I was a lesser person, I'd call him a tosser.

[Setanta]

118 kw (for the Oz spec) x 1.3405 = 158.18 hp, SAME as the UK VTI for the same body shape.

But our EK6 is a JDM SiR, not the Euro spec.

The simple fact (and we do have to keep it simple for some poeple around here)

I'm sorry you consider yourself simple.

is that European fuel is better than Australian fuel, and that Japanese fuel is even better than UK/European fuel.

Unfortunately, you have shown nothing to prove this at all other than to quote some vague comments about a magazine in the UK that you have read (I'm interested to see why they compared to Aussie fuel to tell you the truth)

Like the sky being blue, this is indisputable. If you believe otherwise, you are the one being ignorant. Or maybe your IQ is inversly proportional to the redline of a S2000. :twisted:

I believe in proof, you have offered none. Ignorance is blindly accepting a viewpoint.

BTW - my IQ was 153 last time it was tested. But given your ability with maths, I'll simple accept your "ignorance" and trite attempts at a put-down.

In any case, you have (again and again) ignored the point of this post.

Actually no.

I have been on the road for 20 years myself.......and not for nothing.

No comment needed.

[SiR]

1 kilowatt = 1.34102 UK horsepower
1 kilowatt = 1.35962 metric horsepower

Honda Australia uses metric figures and quote 160bhp for the EK6 hatch as does Honda US with their EM1 VTiR coupes. Actually, Honda US doesn't quote KW at all, just bhp - go tell them they are wrong

Very well said - that should keep some people quiet :P

[greecegun]

You are the one that is simple, yet again.

The UK article did not mention anything about comparing fuel from the UK with anywhere else. It didn't need to. I mentioned it because it is one of many factors that contribute to disparate accelleration figures when comaring similar models in different markets.

Aust Fuel < Euro Fuel < Japanese Fuel - this is common knowlege for people that are informed about the world car and petroleum industries, except for some arguementative types..... To say otherwise is akin to saying that the Amercians build the best handling cars on the planet.

There is no such thing as "proof" for the above fuel scenario. However for example, to tell someone that the yanks build amongst the worst handling cars without offering "proof", and then having the other person discounting this due to the lack of the aforementioned "proof" would reveal that disbelieving person to be a sad anal retentive type - a well as having a great lack of common sense.

Last time I checked 118 x 1.3405 stiil equalled 158 - sorry left out the 0.179 but - that might upset people. Using 1.34102 one gets 158.2439 UK HP. Sure if you used the metric miltiplier you get 160, but the UK doesn't use this (yet) and that is what is quoted.

If 160 is quoted for the Oz spec which it does - I found a brochure - you then get 160, using the Metric HP multiplier of 1.35962. So 158 UK HP is basically the same as 160 Metric HP, or 118 kW, both the latter figures being what the Australian brochure quotes. So if the rated output is highly comparable, then the UK car will be expected to be very slightly quicker in a comparison with a Australian car running local fuel. The highest commercially available RON of the fuel available in the UK at that time was higher than what was available locally. That is all.

So that has nothing to do my "supposed" lack of mathematical ablity. You are talking to someone who uses numbers everyday at work and has earned high distinctions at uni for math and statistics subjects, but I can't "prove" that so I won't continue on that thread.

The US won't use KW - as they are not a metric country

Your IQ is 153 - but that's what you tell me. You have shown nothing to prove this. You could be even more ignorant than you make out. That would be quite scary.

"But our EK6 is a JDM SiR, not the Euro spec" Where is the "proof" of that? It is a contradiction - since when is a JDM and Australian model the same spec these days? Maybe they were in 1968, if ever.

No further comment needed ..

I am sorry that you have a vastly inflated opinion of yourself. An as I am a greater but nastier person I will not hesitate in calling you a tosser.

[SiR]

Last time I checked 118 x 1.3405 stiil equalled 158 - sorry left out the 0.179 but - that might upset people. Using 1.34102 one gets 158.2439 UK HP. Sure if you used the metric miltiplier you get 160, but the UK doesn't use this (yet) and that is what is quoted.

If 160 is quoted for the Oz spec which it does - I found a brochure - you then get 160, using the Metric HP multiplier of 1.35962. So 158 UK HP is basically the same as 160 Metric HP, or 118 kW, both the latter figures being what the Australian brochure quotes.

Seeing that me use the metric multiplier in Australia and in Japan (ps), then the VTi-R (B16A2) is quoted at 160hp for the Australia market.

You, on the other hand, kept ramming home that it is 158hp and not 160hp. You were wrong - just admit it . "UK HP" is called british horsepower for you, so in fact, you should have said 158bhp from the start and this confusion and debate wouldn't have occurred in the first place!

[Setanta]

Really? I supsect theirs is still better than ours, if not as good as Japan's. I have been reading UK as well as Oz car rags for years.

The UK article did not mention anything about comparing fuel from the UK with anywhere else. It didn't need to. I mentioned it because it is one of many factors that contribute to disparate accelleration figures when comaring similar models in different markets.

So first you imply that your knowledge comes from your UK magazine, then you state it doesn't

Aust Fuel < Euro Fuel < Japanese Fuel - this is common knowlege for people that are informed about the world car and petroleum industries

Show me the proof - you still haven't shown anything. Lets look at the fact that pump fuel here is 98 Octane - what rating does UK fuel have?

I just went to Shell UK's website where they claim that their Optimax "It has the highest octane rating of any petrol in the UK which enables advanced modern design engines to work more efficiently and deliver more power"

Further research on their site states that they place it at 98+ (but not 99 etc)

Strangely enough, Shell Australia says pretty much the same thing but states that it is "only" 98.

Now I may not be a smart man, but I have a feeling that < one point in rating (if that) is going to play little difference in the acceleration of a car.

The US won't use KW - as they are not a metric country

Exactly - and so is the UK... but the US quotes their EM1 B16A at.... oh let me see... what was that figure again? Oh that's right... 160bhp... NOT the UK 158bhp. Gee - even the Yanks seem to have a better engine with more power than the UK. On their fuel too :P

You could be even more ignorant than you make out. That would be quite scary.

I may not be a smart man, but I know what a mag racer is.

[Setanta]

BTW - before you even get started, Shell UK quotes the RON, not the MON figure - Shell Aust simply states it as "Octane" level which implies RON (no way would they quote the lower MON figure from an advertising viewpoint).

[genesis]

My car had 160hp on the showroom floor