Is the VVT-I underrated?

Which one?

VVTL-i is the goat valvetrain system.

Basic timing adjustments which are hydraulically actuated have been around since the early/mid 80s, its simple tech, its not even granular, just staged.

that would be the VVTL-I

I need a 2z in my MR2

Attached: dsc_0086.jpg (1122x1600, 1.55M)

but it IS all the same shit. All the tech is is a system to alter the valves open/close timing. The only difference is HOW its done. The performance differences between systems is not enough to matter.

Nope, other systems also vary inlet length and or volume as well as valve lift and that's ignoring the fact that the system is an on off switch rather than a constantly varying system.

Depends on which engine.

1ZZ is an oil burning heap of shit, but the 2ZZ isn't too bad.

your over complicating the issue just to try to look smart (and failing).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_valve_timing

it all does the same shit, just fucks with valve timing.

Nope

This and the actual real world delivery of power is much different as well

I’ve owned superlative examples of both technologies, and in multiple generations. Vvti is great. It’s much more passive and smoother. Vtec is more aggressive and abrupt. I feel it performs better at its peak. It is also far simpler in all aspects

>exact same thing as vtec.
how does it feel to be absolutely wrong.

Wrong, look at what things like Vtec, VVTL and Mivec do. Valve timing is just one of a raft of changes and even within valve timing you can vary overlap, inlet and/or exhaust timing individually and interlobe angle.

>hondafags that thought VTEC made them special.

>being unironically dense

VVT adjust the timing of the valves at all RPMs based on the demands of the engine. VTEC does not do that. Its not the same.

read

yes negro, i fully understand that they both adjust timing, but they do not do it in the same manner, therefore they are not the same.

I did, still not correct.

2zz is godly reliable I still daily my 2000 Celica GTS just over 270k miles . The base GT is an oil burning slower POS .

read
and then
again, since your clearly stupid.

You do understand that VTEC changes the lift of the valves and that VVT doesnt? Right? You know that right?

>i agree they're both methods of variable valve timing but they're not the same

is a propane bbq the same as a microwave? they both heat up food.

I think the issue is honda really muddied the waters on what vtec means. Late 90s, early 2000s it was a cam shift at ~6000rpm. Later implementations are cam phasing, which changes timing but not lift. VVT is also a phasing system and you'll find it's a really common engine feature from a lot of manufacturers now.

There's also a vtec used on the the cb400. It operates as a 2-valve motor below ~6000 rpm, when two more valves open up, giving it an effect like cam switching, though I think it actually works on the rockers.

I'm not sure if he understands the basic function of a cam in enough detail to comprehend it desu.

VVTi is treated like VTEC should be except hondas are all FF only so insecure fags who buy hondas need to toot their own horn about the engines having a feature everyone else has too

have you used up the full potential of 1zz or are you just shitter looking to get yet another advantage in a car that beats everything else in everything but power?

my 1zz has been reliable for 100k km without a single drop of oil being burnt. the sw20 guys burn more oil each in an hour than I burn in 6 months.
One time one of their engine had burnt literally 2 litres of oil making the oil dipstick dry. After a few hours of hooning.
But both me and my pal with 2000mrs with 300k km our 1zz's run flawlessly.

they are both methods of cooking food, both appliances, both available in the home. in principle they are the same.

2zz is really a straight upgtrade from the 1zz, guzzles less oil, more power, higher redline and im pretty sure it weighs less at 115kg than the 1zzs 135 kg
it isnt like an ls swap that changes the entire cars characteristics, it keeps them mostly the same while improving its capability massively

Revving higher has no disadvantages, stockman.

Vtec, VVTL or Mivec are buzzwords.
Fighting over names without reffering to exact engine is stupid
Systems vary from very simple to super complicated ones while carrying the same name.
t. Mitsu engine owner with very basic "mivec" that only rotates intake cam just a little bit (1) and has nothing in common with full blown advanced mivecs (2).

Anyway even basic variable valve timing that I have is a great improvement in my opinion. For people that never drove one: On low revs car feels like it has 5000rpm redline, nice low end torque, from 4000rpm up it feels completely different and pulls nicely to 6500rpm.

Attached: mivecvsmivec.png (800x600, 66K)

You essentially just agreed with me and supported my point, VVT-i isn't underrated simply because it's an entry level system which does nothing that hasn't been done before for decades.

Nah, don't flatten yourself
Dunno much about how VVT-i werks and If there are any variations like with mivecs so I am not hopping on your meme bandwagon just to trigger toyota drivers.
If someone benchraces fixed timing engine to variable timing one by comparing only hp/torque numbers then yes vtecs,mivecs,vvt-i are underrated. Idiots can't even read basic hp/torque curves.

Only vtec makes difference you can feel.

Can't feel shit with vvt-i.

With bmw vanos only thing I felt was difference in my pocket when shit broke down.

yeah but 1zz is 100kg and 2zz is 15kg heavier.
It is a great swap since it stays true to the original while adding an insanely nice high redline and makes 100hp per litre While being all around stronger and more reliable engine that can be boosted to shit and back wtihout breaking.
But 140hp is more than enough for my car and I dont see a reason to get a new engine in the car is plenty fast, why make it fasterer when it is perfect for learning right now? So I can benchrace on some anonymous image board full of retards?

If my 1zz blows I'll fucking jump to 2zz the first instant.

I have VVTLI in my Celica, I love it to death.

i honestly do feel avcs and vvtl kick in with my ez30

vvti is proven for lower end torque and a flatter torque curve in general. The difference isn't earth shattering but its there and its a very simple system(for 1jz its just 2 wires and oil pressure)

"number or configuration of pistons or rotors doesn't matter, all engines are the same shit, its just using internal combustion"

Dunno about VVT-i but I guess (apart from the JZs with VVT-i) it's not on engines people care about or are on engines where variable valve timing is expected.

My Nissan shitbox's engine has NVTCS and you can feel it come on, doesn't have much of a difference but you can feel it anyway.

And the difference these systems have with VTEC is that VVT-I and the NVTCS only affect timing, not valve lift or duration like VTEC which mean they are not as effective as VTEC.

ITT: Honda fags get mad because VTEC meme

>With bmw vanos only thing I felt was difference in my pocket when shit broke down.
Vanos is constantly variable, you shouldn't feel it, the other two are staged.

>Dunno much about how VVT-i werks
This is evident. If Toyota drivers are triggered by my assertion that VVT-i isn't underrated then they should probably have a look at themselves.

Once again in the interests of clarity.
VVT-i is a simple system, it's type has been in use since the early 80's. It cannot be underrated because it doesn't do anything to differentiate itself from the commonplace.

>The Toyota VVT-i system replaces the Toyota VVT offered starting in 1991 on the 5-valve per cylinder 4A-GE engine.

nigga literally what?

Point out where I said Toyota have used it since the early 80s.

>mechanical VVT
>ECU operated VVT

pick one my friend

VVT-i is hydraulically operated and actuates a single cam, just like the earliest examples of this tech.

Yes I did word that wrong. I meant actuated not operated. Excuse my bad englando

Why? They're both stepped to actuate at a certain rpm, VVT-i isn't advanced.

My 2010 Accord k24 has both vtec and vvt, they aren't the same thing because my 99 v6 only had VTEC and it was only on the exhaust, no vvt at all.

I'd take a high revving 200hp NA engine over a peaky and laggy 220hp engine any day of the year

Attached: 1520116667754.jpg (500x457, 54K)

Specially in something with a short wheelbase