RT

944 I-4 has two balance shafts and is pretty damn smooth ....

Gernby

I have had a lot of smooth 4 cylinders, including my S2000. My point (if I'm remembering correctly) was that an inline 4 cannot be mathematically balanced with any number of balance shafts. I think a V-6 can be mathematically balanced with balance shafts.

On the other hand, my experience with Nissan was not a very good one (or three). I don't think their engines hold a candle to Honda's, so the theoretical stuff kind of goes out the window, in my book, as far as longevity is concerned.

cdelena

I really don't thing there is much to think about here. The Nissan is tuned to put out 82HP/liter at a moderate rpm, the Honda 120HP/liter at a high rpm. Honda has a great rep for engines but this one has had a few issues; the Nissan VQ is considered one of the best and I am not aware of any problem in the five years it has been around. I have both engines at my house (the VQ in a Maxima) and would put my bets on the Nissan for longevity.

Station

I wouldn't be so quick to write off the S2000 when it comes to longevity.

Forgive my lack of knowledge of the VQ's redline, but I would assume it's around 6K+, right? Okay. The S2000 has a far higher redline, and I agree at 9000 revs the engine is working much harder than the VQ. But consider how little time the engine actually spends at those stratospheric revs in relation to it's lifetime. A vast majority of its life is spent below 6K revs. Take this into consideration: when we compare the two engines at identical rpms, the VQ is working harder.

Due to the f20c's 1.82 rod/stroke ratio, the piston speeds at a given rpm are actually significantly slower than they would be in the VQ at exactly the same RPM. I don't have the specs handy to calculate feet per second on either car at a certain rpm, but I'm sure UL can chime in with the specifics

Also, the VQ actually has a higher torque per liter output than the f20c. So the VQ is working harder than the f20c most of the time. If I am wrong, don't hesitate to correct me.

Having said those things, I believe it's far too early to tell which engine will last longer. I really don't think you could go wrong with either one.

ultimate lurker

Way too hard to even begin to predict anything on this one with any certainty. But a few things to consider:

1. The VQ has a shorter stroke than the F20C. That means that for any given rpm, its piston speeds will be lower - and since it runs a much lower redline, it has much lower piston speeds. Rod ratio only determines sidewall loading and the acceleration profile of the rod and piston as the crank rotates. Since we don't know the rod ratio of the VQ, we can't make a comparison, but generally most V6's I've seen have pretty good rod ratios since they aren't as concerned about engine height (and have short strokes) compared to I4's. While the F20C is exceptional for an I4, I doubt has much of an advantage in rod ratio (if any) over the VQ.

2. Generally, for a given amount of hp, the larger the number of cylinders you spread it out over, the better. The caveat to this is that more parts means more chances for failure, but modern manufacturing and assembly techniques make this a lesser problem IMO. The Z's VQ is making 48 hp per cylinder. The F20C is making 60 hp per cylinder. Not only that, but the F20C has less ring surface than the VQ since it runs a smaller bore (87 vs. 95.5 mm). That's better for friction on the part of the F20C, but not necessarily for wear. By comparison, the LS1 is making 40-45 hp/cylinder and the LS6 is making 51 hp/cylinder, the new Accord engine makes 40 hp/cylinder and D-series engine in the Civic makes a paltry 32 hp/cylinder.

There are other things to consider, like bearing design/size, oiling, cooling, etc. but its all guessing. I think a combination of power/cylinder and power/liter gives a pretty good indication of which engines will last longer assuming similar build and design quality (more power for either metric is worse for wear).

Of course, this is all simply theory, and application is far more important since everyone pretty much works from the same theory. I think Honda applies the knowledge better than any other manufacturer, but that simply allows them to get away with engine combos that would not last long enough, or be reliable enough, if other manufacturers built them. But if you were to ask me which engine would last longer, all things considered, I'd say the VQ. It simply isn't as stressed as the F20C.

UL

Nobody

I've not owned a 350Z, but my "Bulletproof" and "Overbuilt" 3rd gen Z had a lot of expensive problems.

Thank god, too....if I wasn't so fed up with my Z I never would have sold it to buy my S2000!

VTECPHIL#6829

The Nissan VQ engine has nice hard parts inside also. Triple forged, microfinished crank, hollow microfinished camshafts, etc. I seen other versions of the VQ at 170K miles still going strong. I'll say the S2000 motor wins the fun factor but the Nissan for longest lasting.

PS. This VQ in the new Z is 100X better than the old Z motor.

PilotChris

I know it might be kind of off the subject, but just out of curiousity who has the highest milage S2000 to date? And have you had any signs that the engine is showing wear (ex: blue smoke out the exhaust, drinking oil, low gas milage, etc.)

I've only got 21,500 on my '00, and of course it's running like new.

Gernby

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PilotChris
[B]I know it might be kind of off the subject, but just out of curiousity who has the highest milage S2000 to date?

Pinky

I have heard of a couple owners(not here on the board) breaking the 100K mark easily!!! Highest I heard was 130K! Though it was most all highway driving. So its not like it was tracked and auto-x'ed and really pushed hard for its life so far.

Though these engines will run for a while!!! Its a HONDA!