Those who say that CPS "fails" because the high-lift cam isn't as powerful as Japanese engines like B16A, please consider this:

Why is the Toyota Altis 1.6 with VVT-i have even less horsepower than the plain non-CPS Campro engine? Same goes to Nissan's 1.6 engine.

Engines today are not just all about power. It's also balancing fuel economy and emissions, as well as drivability (low-end torque). I have absolutely nothing against Honda engines. My dream car (realistically) is still either a 4th-gen Honda Prelude or the mid-90's Accord with a H22 engine swap.


The CPS principle works very similar to the old VTEC engines, by having 2 sets of cam lobes. However, they are not as "wild" compared to engines like B16A. Yes, it's an old tech compared to the continuous variable valve timing that VVT-i and i-VTEC has.

The VIM and IAFM principle both works similarly by altering the length of the intake manifold. This helps mix the air and fuel better. The difference is that VIM is electronically operated and IAFM is vacuum-operated, if I'm not mistaken. Again, this tech isn't very new, though it definitely helps the Campro engine.

This post has been edited by mTk: Apr 8 2008, 11:16 PM

The different cam profile causes the valve timing to be different, so yes, CPS does vary the valve timing, just not continously like VVT-i or i-VTEC (old VTEC is not continuous). You said CPS works like VTEC what. I thought VTEC = Valve Timing Electronic Control?

This post has been edited by mTk: Apr 8 2008, 11:19 PM

OK, Variable Valve Timing and Lift Electronic Control then. Still, my same point remains. VTEC = variable valve timing. Just not as continuous and advanced as today's stuff like i-VTEC, VANOS and VVT-i

I said 1.6 didn't I?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_ZZ_engine#3ZZ-FE



The 3ZZ-FE is the 1.6 L (1598 cc) version built in Japan. It is found in Asian Toyota Corolla Altis which is available in countries such as Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand and Taiwan. In South Africa the motor can be found in the Rux 160 and Corolla 160. The entire exterior design and chassis is the same as the American Corolla. Bore is 79.0 mm and stroke is 81.5 mm. Max. Output is 109 hp (81 kW) @ 6000 rpm. Max. Torque is 111 lb·ft (150 N·m). of torque (150 Nm) @ 3800 rpm.

Applications:

* Toyota Corolla (Europe, 109 hp)
* Toyota Corolla Altis 1.6E (Asian, 110 hp)
* Toyota Corolla and RunX 160 (South African, 81 @ 6000Kw and 146 @ 4400Nm)



OK I lose. The Asian version of the Altis 1.6 has 110 bhp too, with a much better torque figure (not the max torque, the curve) than the Campro. The CPS has better horsepower and same amount of max torque though I'm not sure which one has better low-end torque.

Still, my point is that horsepower numbers don't mean everything.

This post has been edited by mTk: Apr 9 2008, 02:34 PM

Oh the other person

Yea, I know CPS has better torque than non-CPS Campro. I mean... low-end compared to the Toyota 1.6 engine.

From the dyno chart I've seen on Paultan's website, it sure looks good though!