# BobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyT
**URL:** https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581
**Category:** Shift518 Automotive
**Created:** [July 1, 2008, 9:04pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581 "2008-07-01T21:04:26Z")
**Posts on this page:** 14
**Page:** 2
### Author:  [@bennyfizzle](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/bennyfizzle)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2008, 9:17am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/21 "2008-07-02T09:17:21Z")
lots of theory itt
---
### Author:  [@OsoiNA6](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/OsoiNA6)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2008, 9:17pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/22 "2008-07-02T21:17:43Z")
> [@BENNYFIZZLE](#):
>
> I’m thinking if they had given the extra effort of adding 2 more slugs to that motor they’d have an AWESOME powerplant.
>
> Just going STRICTLY off of math.
>
> 240/2L=120hp/liter
>
> 4cyl=2L=.5L per cyl
>
> .5L\*6 cyls=3.0L
>
> 3.0L\*120hp/L=360hp :wow
>
> Me thinky they should have done that :nod
I have a couple ideas as to why they didn’t do this… Honda wanted a roadster with 50/50 balance. In order to get most of the engine behind the front axle centerline, pretty much an inline four or V6 is all that would fit with these constraints.
V6 would have added a ton of complexity, weight- the big issue here- mass of added valvetrain components would have made it difficult to achieve the high revving necessary to make a nice HP number out of the displacement… That’s assuming there’s enough width in there to fit a V6 in the first place.
---
### Author:  [@bennyfizzle](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/bennyfizzle)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2008, 9:19pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/23 "2008-07-02T21:19:35Z")
Who said anything about a V6?
Why couldn’t they get a 50/50 (which by the way is NOT always the perfect weight distribution) weight distribution out of 6 cyl roadster?
---
### Author:  [@OsoiNA6](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/OsoiNA6)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2008, 9:29pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/24 "2008-07-02T21:29:04Z")
> [@BENNYFIZZLE](#):
>
> Who said anything about a V6?
>
> Why couldn’t they get a 50/50 (which by the way is NOT always the perfect weight distribution) weight distribution out of 6 cyl roadster?
I didn’t say it was perfect, I am just giving you my opinion as to why they went with the four.
In most cases a six weighs more than a four… I gave the V6 as an example because even though an inline six fits in there (we’ve all seen the 2JZ swaps), this configuration would push the center of mass forward. Even if it didn’t, more weight would then be needed at the rear of the car to recreate the balance.
I think Honda wanted light weight and a balanced chassis above all, plus I’m sure the bean counters didn’t want the car stickering at $50k so a six just was not in the cards…
---
### Author:  [@bobbyt](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/bobbyt)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2008, 10:10pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/25 "2008-07-02T22:10:18Z")
Your comparing 50k cars to a 35k car lol :wtf put 15 k a s2k and running 10’s ,IT and looks and handles like a dream.The onlY thing wrong with this car is that it was not a turbo car :wtf,but then it would cost how much more?We need a sports car with a turbo like the 90’s(supra,300zx,vr4,rx7) :headbang
---
### Author:  [@bennyfizzle](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/bennyfizzle)
#### Post date: [July 3, 2008, 4:48am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/26 "2008-07-03T04:48:00Z")
> [@bobbyt](#):
>
> Your comparing 50k cars to a 35k car lol :wtf put 15 k a s2k and running 10’s ,IT and looks and handles like a dream.The onlY thing wrong with this car is that it was not a turbo car :wtf,but then it would cost how much more?We need a sports car with a turbo like the 90’s(supra,300zx,vr4,rx7) :headbang
what the FUCK are you babbling about :rofl
---
### Author:  [@GranMassaX](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/GranMassaX)
#### Post date: [July 3, 2008, 4:53am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/27 "2008-07-03T04:53:34Z")
> [@bobbyt](#):
>
> The onlY thing wrong with this car is that it was not a turbo car :wtf
dood… what?!
---
### Author:  [@bennyfizzle](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/bennyfizzle)
#### Post date: [July 3, 2008, 4:56am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/28 "2008-07-03T04:56:07Z")
Seriously :rofl
That whole post was full of :wtf
---
### Author:  [@Shawn96VR-4](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Shawn96VR-4)
#### Post date: [July 3, 2008, 9:45am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/29 "2008-07-03T09:45:04Z")
> [@bobbyt](#):
>
> Your comparing 50k cars to a 35k car lol :wtf put 15 k a s2k and running 10’s ,IT and looks and handles like a dream.The onlY thing wrong with this car is that it was not a turbo car :wtf,but then it would cost how much more?We need a sports car with a turbo like the 90’s(supra,300zx,vr4,rx7) :headbang
Google Translation: I am a ricer, my car is slow as balls, Travis is faster, and I got own3d on video.
---
### Author:  [@Swifty](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Swifty)
#### Post date: [July 3, 2008, 9:52am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/30 "2008-07-03T09:52:20Z")
> [@Shawn96VR-4](#):
>
> Google Translation: I am a ricer, my car is slow as balls, Travis is faster, and I got own3d on video.
:crackup
---
### Author:  [@silverandslow](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/silverandslow)
#### Post date: [July 3, 2008, 10:07am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/31 "2008-07-03T10:07:07Z")
Where is the video?
PS Quiet down fanboi…know whats wrong with s2k’s? they are slow as balls and teh owners think they are fast…just like most 1.8 owners…at least i know my a4 is slower than shit.
---
### Author:  [@Shawn96VR-4](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Shawn96VR-4)
#### Post date: [July 3, 2008, 10:11am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/32 "2008-07-03T10:11:00Z")
> [@silverandslow](#):
>
> Where is the video?
>
> PS Quiet down fanboi…know whats wrong with s2k’s? they are slow as balls and teh owners think they are fast…just like most 1.8 owners…at least i know my a4 is slower than shit.
:lol
---
### Author:  [@Boost\_Creep](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Boost_Creep)
#### Post date: [July 3, 2008, 11:23am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/33 "2008-07-03T11:23:04Z")
Mid 90’s turbo sports car days are over. Emissions and the current fuel epidemic sealed that deal.
---
### Author:  [@OsoiNA6](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/OsoiNA6)
#### Post date: [July 3, 2008, 4:20pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581/34 "2008-07-03T16:20:31Z")
> [@RBakerian](#):
>
> Mid 90’s turbo sports car days are over. Emissions and the current fuel epidemic sealed that deal.
Not to mention, the (relatively) steep price of entry for these vehicles.
[Previous page](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyyyyyyyyyt/237581.md?page=1)