I'm not really aware of any Honda vehicles that come standard turbocharged or supercharged, (aside from a model of Acura SUV?). I am aware of some trials they did with the Honda/Acura NSX back in the day with supercharging of it's engine, but in the end the people (engineers?) at Honda/Acura decided to keep it naturally aspirated.
I'm aware of the fact that NA (naturally aspirated) engines have better response than engines that are either turbocharged and even supercharged, but the forced induction engines usually have higher torque and horsepower ratings.

Does Honda stay away from forced induction for reliability reasons? Or is it a philosophy that NA responsiveness more important than having a hundred extra horses and a bit more torque? Or is there another reason entirely?

 

My guess is Honda is focusing its efforts on fuel efficiency right now. Honda has all but discontinued all of its recreational sports models. Integra/rsx, prelude, s2000, nsx, crx(crz was a joke, hybrid really?!) all gone.

Aside from the civic si, which honestly doesn't even compare to the Type R version, honda has really strayed away from creating any performance cars. Honda's main goal is to create long lasting fuel efficient sedans, and the occasional suv/wagon.

 

Honda had a few turbo cars in JP, but we didn't get any. Honda City Turbo comes to mind... actually that's the only one that comes to mind

New Type R is turbo? We won't see it.

I think it's a Honda philosophy thing honestly, and i'm on board with that, everyone should have a "thing".

 

Forced induction is for lazy people/engineers.

 

I'm assuming you are being facetious because building a reliable force induction power plant is much more challenging than naturally aspirated. Why do you think it took so long for it to become mainstream?

Reliability is reduced when more parts are introduced. That is FACT, with everything else being equal. You can somewhat counter that by reducing cylinder count, which you see a lot of manufactures doing these days.

 

And building a reliable, high output NA powerplant is easy? Yeah, that's why the companies that do/used to do it were essentially Honda, Ferrari and....?

 

I like the idea of supercharges better than turbos because you don't have as much of a lag, I'm not very well read on the subject, but I imagine the lag on a supercharger comes from the time it takes for the air to travel through the supercharger then through an intercooler, Toyota offers TRD superchargers for the Tacoma, and other V6's of theirs, but you don't really see HPD putting anything out save for maybe some diamond cut alloy wheels... I think it'd be pretty big for Honda/HPD to have a supercharger for the V6's on the Accord and Pilot.

Though, it'd also be nice for something on the NA spectrum as well, like a 20 valve inline 4 with VTEC would probably be the stuff of dreams.

 

Who said anything about high performance? I'm talking about the bread and butter fleet. In a low RPM, torque driven application turbocharged engines have distinct advantages over their NA counterparts. High RPM power plants are another ball game.

On that note, durability is obviously a challenge with high RPM engines. However, there are other reasons you don't see them as often. Namely drivability due to the lack of torque. I'm all for revving it up to get the power but the majority of drivers don't drive their cars that way.

You can't just compare peak numbers. Force induction vehicles allow engineers to tune to the torque curve for better drivability and area under the curve. With twin charging or electrically driven compressors lag can be virtually eliminated.

The simple fact is that turbocharging increases thermodynamic efficiency when properly designed. More bang for the buck, if you will. Hence the automotive industry is finally moving in masses to adopt turbocharged power plants. Efficiency is the game and with turbos you can have your cake and eat it too because the resultant torque sure is addicting.

 

I'm sure price also factors into the equation.

 

Dreams only because of the way Honda is being run now unfortunately.

First and foremost on every manufacturer's mind right now is emissions compliance. How do you keep power and efficiency? Either turbo or batteries. It's a new ballgame now with new rules.

Lots of other companies have sports cars in their lineups though, Honda is just penny pinching it seems to me. It's like they release a bunch of sub-par sporty cars that nobody wants and they decided the market wasn't there, but if they released something that was worth a second look people would snap it up. If they came out with a 20V 4 8k screamer RWD coupe or hot hatch people would buy it. People are still shopping S2000s and paying well for them because they've got no other choices for something like that.

You'd think the company was on the brink of bankruptcy the way they're acting; only build cars that everyone will like, soul not required. I mean, even Dodge has the SRT cars, they really WERE bankrupted?

 

Honda is just sticking to their philosophy, remember they are a motorcycle company that started building cars.

If you really want to bring efficiency to the table, look up a Honda n22b or the soon to be n16. Anyone who watches anything going on in Europe sees that common rail diesel gives you the torque and high fuel efficiency. Stupid stereotypes in North America kill any chance we will have of seeing those engines on our shores. I have even looking into importing them and its massive red tape everywhere.

 

Honda's Production Car Turbo Models:

Acura RDX (no longer made as turbo)
Why Did Acura Ditch the RDX's Turbo? - KickingTires

Honda Civic Turbo
Honda Civic Type R 2015: price, release date, pics and specs | Auto Express

My Opinion: Mfrs. have gone to turbocharging in the chase for emissions and fuel economy. There have been many advances in turbo technology, but it still adds heat and complexity to a car, as well as some undesirable performance characteristics. VTEC was God's gift to mankind and automotive technology (Thank you, God). Honda is still finding ways to keep VTEC competitive.

N/A engines can give you the performance you seek in turbos, but it can get expensive. See the Ferrari comment above. Honda's S2000 got 240 hp out of an N/A 2.0L (and later 2.2L) engine. But the S2000 was a $48,000 car that Honda was gracious enough to let us have for $32,000 because Honda wanted to make a point. And the point, in case you didn't get it the first time, is that Honda is The Awesome-Est Car Manufacturer in the World.

The fly in the ointment for The Awesome-Est Car Manufacturer in the World is that they make so many poor marketing decisions, bring only ugly cars to the USDM, have become slovenly about quality control (like everyone else, you notice?), etc. When Honda wakes up and remembers who Honda is, life and the world are going to get beautiful again.

Peace out, compañeros.

 

I adjusted your post.

 

FYI Honda LOST money on every GE8 FIT sold as well... not as much, but still with the exchange rate they made the call to keep the price down to keep the market.
I believe long term goal was to make them in a mexico plant at some time...

Anyone know where the GKs are made?

 

I hate turbo engines. They are less reliable and expensive to fix when turbos have to be replaced. The day Honda will switch to turbos or 3 cylinder engines, I will switch brand.
Fuel consumption can be still improved by working on the flow and VTEC.

 

Basically following in the footsteps of a boring Toyota. Toyota also pretty much killed off anything remotely sporty, with the exception of the FRS which is still a Subaru there is nothing at a Toyota dealer worth looking at either. Im hoping Subaru brings the WRX Wagon (called Levorg in Japan) back into the USA i have my heart set on one once my fit is paid off.

 

Depends on the manufacturer, Nissan has made some of the most reliable turbo engines back in the day and turbos work good as variable displacement engine as it only gives you power when you need it. Prime example is Fords Ecoboost, small motors with turbo making good big engine power with stellar fuel economy, im not saying those are reliable in particular but it can be if its designed right. Biggest hurdle for any maker on turbo is cost, it adds quiet a bit of cost to the car which is why Honda has strayed away from it.

 

I owned a Fiesta EcoBoost for a few months this summer.

I liked the baby turbo noises. I liked the 50+ MPG. I hated everything else.

 

LOL, heck 50MPG thats nice, id still rather drive that then a Prius.

 

The engine is great. Rest of the car, not so much. Hated the transmission. Disliked the dash layout. Styling always seemed a little off.

Great example of a turbo engine done right for the masses. Gobs of torque down low and midrange, right where you want it on a day to day grind. A tune would take it to the next level. Example: