I've been reading for awhile now about how durable and efficient Honda 4 cylinders are. I have a 1991 Camry DX with the 3sfe and it has been very reliable with 274,000 miles, but does start using oil as that fill goes on, almost 1.5- 2 qts. per 5,000 miles (PYB 10w30 most of it's life). I've never owned any Honda cars before, but whenever I see one and it looks well taken care of, I wonder just how many miles they have on them and what kind of MPG's they are probally getting. I guess I'm just curious to what is the engineering difference between a Honda 4cyl. and a GM Ecotec 4 cyl. vs a Toyota 4cyl? Maybe a Honda in the driveway in the future....? Not sure yet. Thanks guys.
What makes Honda 4 cylinder engines great?
- Thread starter Tzu
- Start date
- Status
VeeeeeeTak!
Generally speaking, Honda and Toyota are regarded as using OEM parts that are of a higher quality than those used by GM and the assembly of the cars in previous model generations has been much better than their comparable GM counterparts.
I believe there was an article citing the fact that Toyotas built in America have more problems per 100 vehicles than Toyotas built in Japan. Many people attribute this to the Japanese QC being much more strict.
I believe there was an article citing the fact that Toyotas built in America have more problems per 100 vehicles than Toyotas built in Japan. Many people attribute this to the Japanese QC being much more strict.
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2024
Originally Posted By: JRed
Generally speaking, Honda and Toyota are regarded as using OEM parts that are of a higher quality than those used by GM and the assembly of the cars in previous model generations has been much better than their comparable GM counterparts.
I believe there was an article citing the fact that Toyotas built in America have more problems per 100 vehicles than Toyotas built in Japan. Many people attribute this to the Japanese QC being much more strict.
I have to ask why no mention of Ford or Mopar 4 Cyls. GM the easy target? Their 4 bangers are no better or worse.
Generally speaking, Honda and Toyota are regarded as using OEM parts that are of a higher quality than those used by GM and the assembly of the cars in previous model generations has been much better than their comparable GM counterparts.
I believe there was an article citing the fact that Toyotas built in America have more problems per 100 vehicles than Toyotas built in Japan. Many people attribute this to the Japanese QC being much more strict.
I have to ask why no mention of Ford or Mopar 4 Cyls. GM the easy target? Their 4 bangers are no better or worse.
We've had six four cylinder Hondas and they seem to hold up very well.
We now have our third 200K four cylinder Honda, so I think I can speak from experience.
Hondas never had the sludge problems that some Toyotas did.
OTOH, every Accord up to 2002 had a timing belt.
The consequences of its breaking as a result of being run past recommended replacement interval are not pretty.
Between the two, I prefer Hondas, but we've had only one 4 cylinder Toy, and it was an ancient pushrod machine that held up quite well.
I'd guess that any decent four cylinder would last a long time as long as it was given decent maintenance, or even if it wasn't.
We now have our third 200K four cylinder Honda, so I think I can speak from experience.
Hondas never had the sludge problems that some Toyotas did.
OTOH, every Accord up to 2002 had a timing belt.
The consequences of its breaking as a result of being run past recommended replacement interval are not pretty.
Between the two, I prefer Hondas, but we've had only one 4 cylinder Toy, and it was an ancient pushrod machine that held up quite well.
I'd guess that any decent four cylinder would last a long time as long as it was given decent maintenance, or even if it wasn't.
Quote:
If properly maintained, every engine has the ability to keep spinning happily for 200k+ without problems.
Well, that just isn't true; some have systemic problems like the 1998-2003 subaru 2.5s. But generally i would agree with you.
I've stayed away from honda due to timing belts; I just can't bring myself to buy a car with one.
If properly maintained, every engine has the ability to keep spinning happily for 200k+ without problems.
Well, that just isn't true; some have systemic problems like the 1998-2003 subaru 2.5s. But generally i would agree with you.
I've stayed away from honda due to timing belts; I just can't bring myself to buy a car with one.
Last edited:
A fleet of Hondas in our family and they have decent 4 cylinder engines.
Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
Quote:
If properly maintained, every engine has the ability to keep spinning happily for 200k+ without problems.
Well, that just isn't true; some have systemic problems like the 1998-2003 subaru 2.5s. But generally i would agree with you.
I've stayed away from honda due to timing belts; I just can't bring myself to buy a car with one.
My 98 Toyota Camry V6 has a timing belt. Replaced the OEM belt at 100k. Looked great.
Replaced the belt again not too long ago at 210k. Looked great as well, like it could keep going for another 40-50k with ease. I don't see what the big deal is with timing belts. I've never had a problem with it.
If anything, the timing chains get neglected more. Since you're not in there every 100k, seals start leaking, the chain stretches and doesn't get looked at, etc etc.
Quote:
If properly maintained, every engine has the ability to keep spinning happily for 200k+ without problems.
Well, that just isn't true; some have systemic problems like the 1998-2003 subaru 2.5s. But generally i would agree with you.
I've stayed away from honda due to timing belts; I just can't bring myself to buy a car with one.
My 98 Toyota Camry V6 has a timing belt. Replaced the OEM belt at 100k. Looked great.
Replaced the belt again not too long ago at 210k. Looked great as well, like it could keep going for another 40-50k with ease. I don't see what the big deal is with timing belts. I've never had a problem with it.
If anything, the timing chains get neglected more. Since you're not in there every 100k, seals start leaking, the chain stretches and doesn't get looked at, etc etc.
This could also be expanded to include Japanese in-line 4 cyl motorcycle engines. Hp per liter and reliability / durability is largely unmatched and available at a reasonable cost. Perhaps there is a relationship?
Originally Posted By: JetStar
This could also be expanded to include Japanese in-line 4 cyl motorcycle engines. Hp per liter and reliability / durability is largely unmatched and available at a reasonable cost. Perhaps there is a relationship?
Yup. Superior (and often simplified) engineering is the key.
This could also be expanded to include Japanese in-line 4 cyl motorcycle engines. Hp per liter and reliability / durability is largely unmatched and available at a reasonable cost. Perhaps there is a relationship?
Yup. Superior (and often simplified) engineering is the key.
JHZR2
Staff member
Ive never been concerned about timing belts. Ive seen more small honda cars puffing blue smoke behind them than any other make. But they do run nice and smooth, and they are tight. Our integra started decomposing around the engine, which didnt burn a drop at 188k.
Mr. Honda here....
2001 Civic: 227k when sold. Disclaimer: Zero issues until the (recently replaced Honda-brand) TB tensioner bailed out after only 30k. Head rebuilt for free by my indy mechanic. Ran better after that than when new. American made.
2005 CR-V: 171k as of tomorrow. Japanese made. By far the best vehicle I have ever driven in terms of overall reliability and cost of ownership. Zero oil consumption. Zero problems overall with the entire vehicle.
There are some things in life that just work for me, and a Honda 4-cylinder is one of those things.
2001 Civic: 227k when sold. Disclaimer: Zero issues until the (recently replaced Honda-brand) TB tensioner bailed out after only 30k. Head rebuilt for free by my indy mechanic. Ran better after that than when new. American made.
2005 CR-V: 171k as of tomorrow. Japanese made. By far the best vehicle I have ever driven in terms of overall reliability and cost of ownership. Zero oil consumption. Zero problems overall with the entire vehicle.
There are some things in life that just work for me, and a Honda 4-cylinder is one of those things.
Honda was the king of 4-cylinder engines in the 90s. Their variable valve timing technology looked ages ahead of what other car makers were doing. The wear numbers for 4-cylinder engines (the 2.4L) also look very good in the UOA section. However, Honda pretty much coasted on its reputation through the past 10 years without being a technology leaders. They are among the _last_ to transition their cars at 6-speed automatic transmission from 5-speed, two-three years behind Ford for example. They also haven't been pushing forced induction as hard as other manufacturers. Acura's RDX, first attempt at forced induction, with turbo engine supposedly had issues.
Originally Posted By: Artem
Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
Quote:
If properly maintained, every engine has the ability to keep spinning happily for 200k+ without problems.
Well, that just isn't true; some have systemic problems like the 1998-2003 subaru 2.5s. But generally i would agree with you.
I've stayed away from honda due to timing belts; I just can't bring myself to buy a car with one.
My 98 Toyota Camry V6 has a timing belt. Replaced the OEM belt at 100k. Looked great.
Replaced the belt again not too long ago at 210k. Looked great as well, like it could keep going for another 40-50k with ease. I don't see what the big deal is with timing belts. I've never had a problem with it.
If anything, the timing chains get neglected more. Since you're not in there every 100k, seals start leaking, the chain stretches and doesn't get looked at, etc etc.
All I indicated is my preference not to have an engine with one.
And right, at close to 300K "I haven't been in there" 3 times at a cost of about $1200 total.
Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
Quote:
If properly maintained, every engine has the ability to keep spinning happily for 200k+ without problems.
Well, that just isn't true; some have systemic problems like the 1998-2003 subaru 2.5s. But generally i would agree with you.
I've stayed away from honda due to timing belts; I just can't bring myself to buy a car with one.
My 98 Toyota Camry V6 has a timing belt. Replaced the OEM belt at 100k. Looked great.
Replaced the belt again not too long ago at 210k. Looked great as well, like it could keep going for another 40-50k with ease. I don't see what the big deal is with timing belts. I've never had a problem with it.
If anything, the timing chains get neglected more. Since you're not in there every 100k, seals start leaking, the chain stretches and doesn't get looked at, etc etc.
All I indicated is my preference not to have an engine with one.
And right, at close to 300K "I haven't been in there" 3 times at a cost of about $1200 total.
Last edited:
I really have no experience with either Ford or Mopar products. I assume they are fine engines too, but I know practically nothing about them. We grew up in a GM (Chevy mostly) family and that is still what we have in our driveway today, and also my first truck, a '78 C10 sitting in my brother's back yard waiting for restoration one day 
It's just when I look at the UOA's replies for pretty much any Honda, and their like ,"it's a Honda, their great, what did you expect?" and it seems to ring true very often. My sister-in-law had a tranmission failure in her Acura a couple years ago, but they traded it in on another one and she seems happy with it today. I was just curious.
It's just when I look at the UOA's replies for pretty much any Honda, and their like ,"it's a Honda, their great, what did you expect?" and it seems to ring true very often. My sister-in-law had a tranmission failure in her Acura a couple years ago, but they traded it in on another one and she seems happy with it today. I was just curious.IMHO nothing. They are good but not great.
From 1992 to 2005 I had a 2.3L Mustang LX. Bought with 58k and beat the ever living snot out of that car. When I took it to the junk yard at 175k it still started up every time and ran like a top. Problem was the body was shot but the original engine was sound. This was the engine for the Pinto, which dates to the 70's. Not a lot of power but ran forever. It lived on in the Ranger into the early 2000s where it was also a reliable workhorse.
The Ford CVH while a vibration monster, if taken care of would last a long while too.
There were some clunkers from the 70's and 80's from the D3 as well as many of Honda's early engines were also quite tempermental.
Honda's quality is average and probably has been for a long time. JD Powers and Consumers Reports bear this out. They only get a free pass based on "reputation" which is more "our memory is short and we were told they were better so they must be".
From 1992 to 2005 I had a 2.3L Mustang LX. Bought with 58k and beat the ever living snot out of that car. When I took it to the junk yard at 175k it still started up every time and ran like a top. Problem was the body was shot but the original engine was sound. This was the engine for the Pinto, which dates to the 70's. Not a lot of power but ran forever. It lived on in the Ranger into the early 2000s where it was also a reliable workhorse.
The Ford CVH while a vibration monster, if taken care of would last a long while too.
There were some clunkers from the 70's and 80's from the D3 as well as many of Honda's early engines were also quite tempermental.
Honda's quality is average and probably has been for a long time. JD Powers and Consumers Reports bear this out. They only get a free pass based on "reputation" which is more "our memory is short and we were told they were better so they must be".
- Status
