Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > Vehicle Specific > Domestic Cars
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-14-2005, 06:39 AM   #46
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by pik_d
i edited my post while you were replying. go take a look.

You're missing the point and used an unrelated point not pertinent to the topic.

I'm claiming the engine IS THE SAME IN EVERY ASPECT as the Mazda 6's, and not tuned differently like the audi vs. vw 1.8T. The 2.4 in the TSX is the same as in the Accord but makes abot 40 more horsepwer, why, because it's TUNED differently, like the audi 1.8t to the vw 1.8t.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 06:48 AM   #47
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by windsonian
sounds like an assumption to me.

looking past what someone tells you doesn't mean assume some hidden meaning.

You tell us to look past what the Ford person is quoted as saying (in a non-Ford article), but expect us to treat as fact something from www.vtec.net...?

Ever think that maybe they projected it to poll lower in the new testing system (as you projected for many cars....), but then it didn't?

I never said something is always hidden, but you should always question car politics, as with any politics.

What have I presented from Vtec.net that isnt a fact (you mean those "non factual" dyno pulls right? ) when i said it was?

I almost never trust PR people, they almost always tend to bend things.

As for the last thing you said that's entirely possible, but what was mentioned earlier was said "IT BENEFITTED" from the new rating, which it in fact did not, as it's the same exact engine as the Mazda 6 has been using with the same exact power (horsepower and torque) it has had in the past 3 years. It never was "tested" at 210hp, it was projected at that (Which it does say in the article), but as we now found out, it's the same engine the Mazda 6 has been using for three years and apparently it didn't benefit at all from the new rating as the power remained exactly the same.

Hope that clears things up.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 06:49 AM   #48
pik_d
CF not-so-Freak
 
pik_d's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Eastern USA
Posts: 802
and are you backing up your claims? with a simple "oh, it has the same horsepower as the old mazda6's"... take a look at the torque. you'll see it's not rated the same in both aspects. they must be doing something different... right?


also, from motor trend
Quote:
The Mazda6's 2.3-liter four-cylinder and 3.0-liter Duratec V-6 powertrains haven't prompted much criticism from us, and further tweaking of the V-6's variable cams and intake manifold has upped the torque a skosh from 192 to 205 pound-feet.
they DID change the engine. your whole argument that it is the same exact engine is void.

i'd also like to know how how you can justify how in your last post, you claimed they had the same horsepower and torque? i doubt you can find any reliable source claiming such.

Last edited by pik_d : 12-14-2005 at 06:58 AM.
pik_d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 07:03 AM   #49
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by pik_d
and are you backing up your claims? with a simple "oh, it has the same horsepower as the old mazda6's"... take a look at the torque. you'll see it's not rated the same in both aspects. they must be doing something different... right?

I just looked up the specs of both and noticed they DO have different bore/strokes BUT both the I4 and V6 in the Mazda6 and Fusion share the exact same compression ratio, DOHC 4v/cylinder design. the displacement is a tiny bit different. I think what this comes down to is the Duratec's in the new Fusion are slightly reworked versions of the Duratec's from Mazda. So yes, they are different. But still doesn't prove how it "benefitted" from the new SAE standard, which is what was said in the beginning.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~


Last edited by thunderbird1100 : 12-14-2005 at 07:08 AM.
thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 07:06 AM   #50
pik_d
CF not-so-Freak
 
pik_d's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Eastern USA
Posts: 802
where do you get your information? pm if you dont want to "advertise"
pik_d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 07:11 AM   #51
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by pik_d
where do you get your information? pm if you dont want to "advertise"

Compared on Ford's webpage and Mazda's webpage the engine specs.

Oh, and the whole "Advertising" thing on here is ludacris, I've probably posted 250 links to other webpages selling items but it was almost ALWAYS because I was helping them out because they asked for help. I think it's easy to point out when someone is advertising (As they go and post the same link in 4 different boards) as opposed to helping someone.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 07:23 AM   #52
pik_d
CF not-so-Freak
 
pik_d's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Eastern USA
Posts: 802
so now that you realize that the 3L V6's in the two cars are different, will you admit that you were wrong in your assumptions that the 221hp/205tq figures were inflated, and that the Ford PR was telling the truth?
pik_d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 07:30 AM   #53
windsonian
Dodger65's weirdo
 
windsonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down Below
Posts: 2,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
What have I presented from Vtec.net that isnt a fact (you mean those "non factual" dyno pulls right? ) when i said it was?

I almost never trust PR people, they almost always tend to bend things.
So, your site should go as unquestioned fact, but the Ford guy must be questioned ..... something doesn't add up. Just because it's published and not just quoted, doesn't make it any more true. Someone invented the words somewhere along the way.

So, now that we know that the engines are not identical, is it so wrong for the Ford guys to make a prediction on the power that is different to previously documented Mazda stats? Do you still think they did it just so they could say "hey we exceeded expectations"? It's possible, but you're still assuming without proof.
__________________
You can only be young once. But you can always be immature.
windsonian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 04:42 PM   #54
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
The Fusion uses a tweaked version of the Ford Duratech engine in the Mazda 6. No news, even though TBird wants to think there's something nefarious going on.

And the Fusion is yes, based on the Mazda 6, which was a Ford developed chassis from the Euro Ford Mondeo to START with (like the new mazda 3 is based, like the Volvo S40, on the new European Focus platform). In the Fusion, Ford made it longer and wider, so it is NOT THE SAME CAR AS THE MAZDA !!!!!!! And since Ford designed the chassis ORIGINALLY, they get to do whatever the f*ck they want to with it, and it isn't "sly moves" or other insulting bullshit!

Sorry, Tbird, but you're being a complete f*cking tool about this and are wrong in motivation and basic assumptions. PERIOD!
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 08:04 PM   #55
pik_d
CF not-so-Freak
 
pik_d's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Eastern USA
Posts: 802
do you honestly think calling him a "complete f*cking tool" is going to help anything at all? sure, you proved him wrong, but where does that give you the right to namecall? for the last page or so, we've been having what resembled a civil conversation. maybe misguided in his part, but still civil.
pik_d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 09:40 PM   #56
Pythias
CF Extraordinaire
 
Pythias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ohio, U.S.
Posts: 1,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by pik_d
do you honestly think calling him a "complete f*cking tool" is going to help anything at all? sure, you proved him wrong, but where does that give you the right to namecall? for the last page or so, we've been having what resembled a civil conversation. maybe misguided in his part, but still civil.

Well if you look back to all of his posts for the most part he likes to find everything wrong with Ford's and bash them. Every car company has made mistakes. Somethings are in fact right and others he infact is wrong about and just would more so like them to be wrong. The right to namecall? Prolly comes from all the posts before that I just mentioned. It's just being biased but we all are in someway.

No offense to T-bird but thats just the way I see it.
__________________
"Though I drive through the valley of rice,I shall fear no turbo for torque art with me. Thy rod and piston, they comfort me."

"It is not the strong who will win, but the winner who is strong." -ROTK7
"You wrote "The World Doesn't Need A Savior" but everyday I hear people crying for one."

Last edited by Pythias : 12-14-2005 at 09:43 PM.
Pythias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 10:12 PM   #57
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by pik_d
do you honestly think calling him a "complete f*cking tool" is going to help anything at all? sure, you proved him wrong, but where does that give you the right to namecall? for the last page or so, we've been having what resembled a civil conversation. maybe misguided in his part, but still civil.

Because this is an ongoing issue between him and I, not just this thread. And sorry, but the constant bashing without actually learning anything AFTER it's been pointed out nicely earns him my wrath. I call him that because he's BEING that. You want some of it, too?
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 10:33 PM   #58
pik_d
CF not-so-Freak
 
pik_d's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Eastern USA
Posts: 802
if you think i've done enough to earn it, and that it's your place to do so, then go right ahead.

i wont contest the fact that he's earned it, because he's been pretty biased in his views, looking to a honda specific site for his facts. i just dont see it as your, or my place to dish it out to him.

if you call him names, i doubt he'll even try to learn from your posts.

i got him to agree that they were different engines. how? by namecalling? no. by displaying facts? yes. so obviously he CAN learn.
pik_d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2005, 02:49 AM   #59
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by pik_d
so now that you realize that the 3L V6's in the two cars are different, will you admit that you were wrong in your assumptions that the 221hp/205tq figures were inflated, and that the Ford PR was telling the truth?

Like it was said, they are both Duratec's, but are slightly different (slightly different in displacement, slightly different in power, same compression ratios, same DOHC 4v head designs). So, I'll give it that.

I was just thinking off the top of my head about the Mazda power figures, could of sworn it was 221hp, turns out it was only rated at 220hp. So I was off by a horsepower I'll be honest enough to say I didn't bother looking up the stuff because this past week has been finals week here at LSU, and when I have to keep information in for Calc II and Programming classes (And i mean a ton of info, even while posting on here I was studying back and forth, might not of been the best idea ) I tend to slack off in caring about other things. Sorry if I was stubborn, but that's just so you know why. I dont know where I said 221hp was an inflated figure...you must of got that from somewhere else. I was just saying the engine didn't "benefit" from the new SAE standard. Which it didn't, obviously. They projected it being LOWER, but never was it mentioned that it was actually tested on the old SAE standard. So in effect, it was only tested on the new SAE standard, therefore it didnt benefit nor not benefit from the new rating (which was originally said by Fusion my Ford).

On a side note what I found interesting was the Ford V6 Duratec in the Mazda6 actually got slashed in power by 5 hp on the new testing method (220hp before, 215hp now).

The Ford PR might of been right in saying they projected 210hp but got 221hp. But I dont know what they REALLY projected, or were just saying that to make it look better. So who knows?
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~


Last edited by thunderbird1100 : 12-15-2005 at 02:57 AM.
thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2005, 02:55 AM   #60
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by windsonian
So, your site should go as unquestioned fact, but the Ford guy must be questioned ..... something doesn't add up. Just because it's published and not just quoted, doesn't make it any more true. Someone invented the words somewhere along the way.

So, now that we know that the engines are not identical, is it so wrong for the Ford guys to make a prediction on the power that is different to previously documented Mazda stats? Do you still think they did it just so they could say "hey we exceeded expectations"? It's possible, but you're still assuming without proof.

Maybe you didn't comprehend what I said...

I said; what have I presented from vtec.net on here recently, that I claimed is factual and is in fact not (what have I posted recently, the DYNO RESULTS of certain vehicles and RACE RESULTS from thunderhill, yup no way those are facts )? I didn't say you should trust everything from that webpage, matter fact almost EVERY article on that page has a "credibility rating". So, you are trying to put words in my mouth about that.

Either way you can ASSUME the Ford PR guy said that to make the engine look better, or you can ASSUME he really predicted that way beforehand in a truthful manner. Either way it's an assumption, but dealing with a few PR guys from certain companies I've met, most of these guys are the Car Brand Political Leaders...No doubt
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.