1.8l vs.2.0l
February-27th-2003, 02:27 PM
#1
Protege Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: toronto,canada
Posts: 146
1.8l vs.2.0l
i just traded in my 2000 protege lx (es u.s.) for a protoge5 .
my previous protege was an automatic and my new pro5 is a manual.
i noticed that the pro5 engine is very loud and high revving. on the highway i might be at 3500 rpm@120km/h. the 1.8l wouldnt rev so high... maybe 3k rpm at the same speed.
i was wondering if the 2000 1.8l was a better engine or is the 2l engine better?
and in what ways?
my previous protege was an automatic and my new pro5 is a manual.
i noticed that the pro5 engine is very loud and high revving. on the highway i might be at 3500 rpm@120km/h. the 1.8l wouldnt rev so high... maybe 3k rpm at the same speed.
i was wondering if the 2000 1.8l was a better engine or is the 2l engine better?
and in what ways?
Last edited by jjac28; March-1st-2003 at 07:21 AM.
February-27th-2003, 02:53 PM
#2
2002 RX-7 Spirit 'R'
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brampton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 872
well i have my 99 1.8L
I love it....
well i'm thinking that the FS-DE (2.0L) is better, otherwise mazda wouldn't have changed it. I think primarily it has more low end torque than the FP-DE's (1.8L's)
but some people tell me the FP-DE has a better powerband than the 2.0L
and they are pretty close in performance.... I wouldn't know.... but if someone can give us more insight on this... then maybe that will be more helpful.
they are pretty much the same engine... i think its the bore or the stroke that is changed. something like that.
well i find my 1.8L to be really rev happy itself. I can spin tires through whole of second gear (i have crappy tires which are dead... I think) and i love it...... i wanna turbo it... but i love RX-7s alot more.... so my choice is either to turbo the protege, or get a second gen TII (hopefully S5).... the RX-7 will cost alot more.... but iunno....
the protege is styll my parents car... which i drive alot, and the rx-7 would be mine.... i dunno... i'm thinking the rx-7 route....
I like sedans better than hatchbacks or wagons, so I prefer the sedan better than the P5.... but the P5 don't look bad itself hehe
how bout advantages and disadvantages of both engines.... that way people can take their own opinion on which one would be better. but i'm thinking the FS-DE would have more advantages than the FP-DE. oh well... how bout gettin the 1.6L into it too hehe
i type too much... so ima stop now.... good luck on the new P5
I love it....
well i'm thinking that the FS-DE (2.0L) is better, otherwise mazda wouldn't have changed it. I think primarily it has more low end torque than the FP-DE's (1.8L's)
but some people tell me the FP-DE has a better powerband than the 2.0L
and they are pretty close in performance.... I wouldn't know.... but if someone can give us more insight on this... then maybe that will be more helpful.they are pretty much the same engine... i think its the bore or the stroke that is changed. something like that.
well i find my 1.8L to be really rev happy itself. I can spin tires through whole of second gear (i have crappy tires which are dead... I think) and i love it...
... i wanna turbo it... but i love RX-7s alot more.... so my choice is either to turbo the protege, or get a second gen TII (hopefully S5).... the RX-7 will cost alot more.... but iunno.... the protege is styll my parents car... which i drive alot, and the rx-7 would be mine.... i dunno... i'm thinking the rx-7 route....
I like sedans better than hatchbacks or wagons, so I prefer the sedan better than the P5.... but the P5 don't look bad itself hehe
how bout advantages and disadvantages of both engines.... that way people can take their own opinion on which one would be better. but i'm thinking the FS-DE would have more advantages than the FP-DE. oh well... how bout gettin the 1.6L into it too hehe
i type too much... so ima stop now.... good luck on the new P5
February-27th-2003, 02:58 PM
#3
Protege Anarchist
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 708
you have higher revs because the automatic has taller gearing
as far as the engines goes.... stock vs stock... FP-DE wins over FS-DE... however the FP-DE is no match for the FS-ZE in power output, torque output, and powerband linearity... remember the FS-DE is tuned for more low end torque/power, that's why it feels like ***
as far as the engines goes.... stock vs stock... FP-DE wins over FS-DE... however the FP-DE is no match for the FS-ZE in power output, torque output, and powerband linearity... remember the FS-DE is tuned for more low end torque/power, that's why it feels like ***
February-27th-2003, 03:21 PM
#4
Passion for Zoom Zoom!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 372
I would have to agree with TheMAN. Driving the two engines hard back-to-back and the FS feels just plain anemic. However, for the typical driver with an automatic, the FS is better because of its low-end torque. For the performance driver with a 5-spd, the FP is better because it is more rev-happy and has a relatively linear powerband. I have both... an FP 5-spd and FS auto. As long as I don't have to push the FS, it does just fine and gets a better jump off the line. But, my preference is the FP.
BP owners have it great. The BP is a rev-monster, their cars are lighter, and there are performance parts galore. I had a '91 EGT with the BP and it was a dream compared to the F series.
BP owners have it great. The BP is a rev-monster, their cars are lighter, and there are performance parts galore. I had a '91 EGT with the BP and it was a dream compared to the F series.
February-27th-2003, 03:25 PM
#5
Protege Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: toronto,canada
Posts: 146
the 2000 pro 1.8l was an excellent car. excellent handling, acceleration and a great looker. i had the touring edition which was basically "full house"...15' alloy wheels,moonroof,spoiler,abs etc.
one major flaw was that the car was very noisy. lots of noise coming from the road and the outside.
the pro5 has better suspension and superior steering ,the steering on the pro 2000 felt bit heavy while on the pro5 it's precise and sharp.
feels like a sports car..it's a great feeling!
also the pro is much more quieter on the inside ,i guess they added more noise insulation.
the cockpit looks amazing too. at night the gauges go black and you just see the amber coloured numbers. i'ts amazing. my girlfriend (she drives an echo) was very impressed.
the pro5 is a much more improved version of the older pro. i dont think the new protege has much competion out there
but the main reason why i got the car was because i wanted to switch to a manual tranny for more control/perfomance.
i'm just concerned about the engine though...the loudness of it.
maybe it just takes getting used to.
one major flaw was that the car was very noisy. lots of noise coming from the road and the outside.
the pro5 has better suspension and superior steering ,the steering on the pro 2000 felt bit heavy while on the pro5 it's precise and sharp.
feels like a sports car..it's a great feeling!
also the pro is much more quieter on the inside ,i guess they added more noise insulation.
the cockpit looks amazing too. at night the gauges go black and you just see the amber coloured numbers. i'ts amazing. my girlfriend (she drives an echo) was very impressed.
the pro5 is a much more improved version of the older pro. i dont think the new protege has much competion out there
but the main reason why i got the car was because i wanted to switch to a manual tranny for more control/perfomance.
i'm just concerned about the engine though...the loudness of it.
maybe it just takes getting used to.
Last edited by jjac28; February-27th-2003 at 03:28 PM.
February-27th-2003, 03:57 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 1,122
Originally posted by VagaBond-X
well i'm thinking that the FS-DE (2.0L) is better, otherwise mazda wouldn't have changed it. I think primarily it has more low end torque than the FP-DE's (1.8L's)
but some people tell me the FP-DE has a better powerband than the 2.0L and they are pretty close in performance.... I wouldn't know.... but if someone can give us more insight on this... then maybe that will be more helpful.
well i'm thinking that the FS-DE (2.0L) is better, otherwise mazda wouldn't have changed it. I think primarily it has more low end torque than the FP-DE's (1.8L's)
but some people tell me the FP-DE has a better powerband than the 2.0L
and they are pretty close in performance.... I wouldn't know.... but if someone can give us more insight on this... then maybe that will be more helpful.
The FS-DE does have more torque, but does NOT breathe as well as an FP-DE at high rpm, and the 2 engines actually show almost the same horsepower when tested on a dyno. Consequently, the 2.0L cars are somewhat slower than a 99-00 ES in equivalent trim.
I've driven TheMAN's 2.0L ES back to back with my 99 ES. My engine is bone stock except for a drop-in flat-panel K&N and NGK plug wires; his car has an FS-ZE intake cam and intake manifold, an HKS air intake, AND a Mazdaspeed exhaust cam. His car's powerband feels almost exactly the same as mine. This is admittedly a non-scientific test, but you can conclude that if an FS requires extensive intake mods to *equal* the high-end power of an FP, it must be pretty anemic in stock trim.
February-27th-2003, 04:33 PM
#7
2002 RX-7 Spirit 'R'
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brampton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 872
so in conclusion the FP is wikid... ye I'm happy....
i've never driven an FS, but an auto FS did try to race me a bit back.... wasn't much of a match... kinda ripped it by him... they did kinda stay with me... behind me that is... until i shifted a couple of times
ye but i love my fp... and i love the engine sound.... and i love pushing it hard into the higher part of the rev band!!!
I geuss i made a good choice with the FP.... I wonder what a mazdaspeed FP would be like
Does anyone have a turboed FP... i wanna know now... damn its got me curious... hearing so many people say the FP is a lil better
EDIT : hmm if the FP breathes better at higher RPMS.. would it be better for turboing or not... would that make it a lil better on aftermarket mods.. and would they give it a lil more increase in hp and torque or not... damn i ask too many questions... wanna know alot about the FP now
i've never driven an FS, but an auto FS did try to race me a bit back.... wasn't much of a match... kinda ripped it by him... they did kinda stay with me... behind me that is... until i shifted a couple of times
ye but i love my fp... and i love the engine sound.... and i love pushing it hard into the higher part of the rev band!!!
I geuss i made a good choice with the FP.... I wonder what a mazdaspeed FP would be like
Does anyone have a turboed FP... i wanna know now... damn its got me curious... hearing so many people say the FP is a lil better
EDIT : hmm if the FP breathes better at higher RPMS.. would it be better for turboing or not... would that make it a lil better on aftermarket mods.. and would they give it a lil more increase in hp and torque or not... damn i ask too many questions... wanna know alot about the FP now
Last edited by VagaBond-X; February-27th-2003 at 04:44 PM.
February-27th-2003, 11:54 PM
#8
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Orlando, Florida
Posts: 341
Well I have a 99 es 1.8 and got to race a 2.0 and beat him by about to car lengths at about 80mph. Please nobody get mad at me or something. My parents also have a 2.0 and I feel the car a bit heavier than mine. The 1.8 is loud inside compared to the 2.0 and also the clutch in the 2.0 is easier to push in than the 1.8 like it makes any difference. But both are great engines and great cars, I love them both but now I want to get a mazdaspeed.
February-28th-2003, 12:50 AM
#9
Protege Anarchist
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 708
the anemic top end of the FS-DE stems from the fact that the cams are tuned for low end torque and emissions purposes.
as I said, the linear powerband on the FS is possible-- the FS-ZE does it very well.... and power output is very good too
some of you might say that the FS revs slower than the FP... well the reason for that is the FS has a heavier stock flywheel than the FP
as I said, the linear powerband on the FS is possible-- the FS-ZE does it very well.... and power output is very good too
some of you might say that the FS revs slower than the FP... well the reason for that is the FS has a heavier stock flywheel than the FP
Originally posted by carguycw
The main reasons Mazda switched to the FS-DE is (a) it has more low-end torque to improve performance in auto tranny cars, and (b) to partially offset increased vehicle weight. The 2001+ cars weigh ~100 lbs. more than a 99-00 in equivalent trim (~180 lbs. more for the P5). The weight gain is partially due to more suspension bracing but is mostly due to sound deadening material that Mazda added throughout the unibody to reduce road noise. (The weight gain is also the probable reason that Mazda dropped the 1.6L engine in 2002.)
The FS-DE does have more torque, but does NOT breathe as well as an FP-DE at high rpm, and the 2 engines actually show almost the same horsepower when tested on a dyno. Consequently, the 2.0L cars are somewhat slower than a 99-00 ES in equivalent trim.
I've driven TheMAN's 2.0L ES back to back with my 99 ES. My engine is bone stock except for a drop-in flat-panel K&N and NGK plug wires; his car has an FS-ZE intake cam and intake manifold, an HKS air intake, AND a Mazdaspeed exhaust cam. His car's powerband feels almost exactly the same as mine. This is admittedly a non-scientific test, but you can conclude that if an FS requires extensive intake mods to *equal* the high-end power of an FP, it must be pretty anemic in stock trim.
The main reasons Mazda switched to the FS-DE is (a) it has more low-end torque to improve performance in auto tranny cars, and (b) to partially offset increased vehicle weight. The 2001+ cars weigh ~100 lbs. more than a 99-00 in equivalent trim (~180 lbs. more for the P5). The weight gain is partially due to more suspension bracing but is mostly due to sound deadening material that Mazda added throughout the unibody to reduce road noise. (The weight gain is also the probable reason that Mazda dropped the 1.6L engine in 2002.)
The FS-DE does have more torque, but does NOT breathe as well as an FP-DE at high rpm, and the 2 engines actually show almost the same horsepower when tested on a dyno. Consequently, the 2.0L cars are somewhat slower than a 99-00 ES in equivalent trim.
I've driven TheMAN's 2.0L ES back to back with my 99 ES. My engine is bone stock except for a drop-in flat-panel K&N and NGK plug wires; his car has an FS-ZE intake cam and intake manifold, an HKS air intake, AND a Mazdaspeed exhaust cam. His car's powerband feels almost exactly the same as mine. This is admittedly a non-scientific test, but you can conclude that if an FS requires extensive intake mods to *equal* the high-end power of an FP, it must be pretty anemic in stock trim.
February-28th-2003, 01:30 AM
#10
WiCky=))
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 883
I know I should do a search and crap, but I just finished my accounting assignement and very tired.
I have a few questions:
How much are the FS-ZE intake and exhaust cams in Canadian currency preferably?
Is there anything I need to do, like swapping FS-ZE intake manifold or exhaust headers to make the powerband more linear?
Do the above mods affect fuel economy in any way?
I just fixed up my 1 year old alignment problem and hope fuel economy improves.
I have a few questions:
How much are the FS-ZE intake and exhaust cams in Canadian currency preferably?
Is there anything I need to do, like swapping FS-ZE intake manifold or exhaust headers to make the powerband more linear?
Do the above mods affect fuel economy in any way?
I just fixed up my 1 year old alignment problem and hope fuel economy improves.
February-28th-2003, 08:14 AM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 77
Edwin,
How do the intake and exhaust cams effect emissions? Pittsburgh requires emissions testing along with the annual state inspection. I am very interested in your modifications, but I certainly don't want to have to switch out the cams once every year.
Thanks.
How do the intake and exhaust cams effect emissions? Pittsburgh requires emissions testing along with the annual state inspection. I am very interested in your modifications, but I certainly don't want to have to switch out the cams once every year.
Thanks.
February-28th-2003, 01:23 PM
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by acidbbg1
Good Choice on the Protege 5 ....I think they look so much better than the older protege's!!!!
Also...Once you put in an intake...the engine will growl at your every command!!!
Good Choice on the Protege 5 ....I think they look so much better than the older protege's!!!!
Also...Once you put in an intake...the engine will growl at your every command!!!
I think the p5's are nice, but they are not all that ...
Bruce
February-28th-2003, 01:43 PM
#15
Protege Anarchist
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 708
it should not be a problem if you're not in cali.... the 2 jeremys in the DC area who have actual FS-ZEs had no inspection problems
Originally posted by KHH
Edwin,
How do the intake and exhaust cams effect emissions? Pittsburgh requires emissions testing along with the annual state inspection. I am very interested in your modifications, but I certainly don't want to have to switch out the cams once every year.
Thanks.
Edwin,
How do the intake and exhaust cams effect emissions? Pittsburgh requires emissions testing along with the annual state inspection. I am very interested in your modifications, but I certainly don't want to have to switch out the cams once every year.
Thanks.