(Seemingly?) Unanswerable questions, RE:Engine/Drivetrain

[eventhorizon66]

Example, most don't know that GM's ECO-TECH 4Cyl is actually made by Honda, and is their Premium Acura 4Cyl's....

Are you sure?  Where did you hear this?  It shares no architecture with the Honda engines, and I read that it was developed as a clean slate by a team of engineers from Opel, GM powertrain, and SAAB (in other words GM, GM, and GM).  Not trying to be argumentative.  I'd really like to know if Honda had a hand in it.

[VileZambonie]

Yeah the ecotec engines were developed by GM as far as I know. They use compression sensing ignition technology. No camshaft position sensor is used. I had one of my students looking for a few hours for his cam sensor as a joke one day 

[Dragon]

Example, most don't know that GM's ECO-TECH 4Cyl is actually made by Honda, and is their Premium Acura 4Cyl's....

Are you sure?  Where did you hear this?  It shares no architecture with the Honda engines, and I read that it was developed as a clean slate by a team of engineers from Opel, GM powertrain, and SAAB (in other words GM, GM, and GM).  Not trying to be argumentative.  I'd really like to know if Honda had a hand in it.

It's my Understanding, from Old Automotive Instructors(These Guys were trained by GM/Honda/Acura/Ford/Toyota/Nissan/Infiniti/BMW/VW/Porsche/Mercedes) of mine, that the Euro/Korean 1.8L Eco-Tecs were a Joint Venture between Honda and  UK for use in Vauxhall's/Opels/Daewoo's..  GM Again revisited Honda when they needed a 2.2L(Originally for The Euro/Korean/Au/South American Markets, but trickled into ours eventually)... They went on to say that the 1.8's came directly from Honda, and the 2.2's were from Acura....
They said that the first Eco-Tec 4cyl basis(Euro/World Market 2.0L) was Originally Created by Opel, was later refined by Vauhall,Cosworth, then Saab, and the final Head Design coming from Lotus Engineer(a Similar DOHC Design that they came up with for MerCruiser LT5's, that GM used in the ZR1 Vettes in the Early 90's)....

Used to also have Auto Service Techs Customers, and Parts Vendors that had stated along the same lines as what my Old Instructors had... stated

[Lt.Del]

I had one of my students looking for a few hours for his cam sensor as a joke one day 

that's bad, and, reminds me of when a friend in college many moons ago had a VW bug.  I told him the antifreeze leaks out on these things and they should be checked often.  You should see him trying to find the radiator. 

[choptop]

I had one of my students looking for a few hours for his cam sensor as a joke one day 

that's bad, and, reminds me of when a friend in college many moons ago had a VW bug.  I told him the antifreeze leaks out on these things and they should be checked often.  You should see him trying to find the radiator. 

The last time I had my 51 3100 inspected I spent 1/2 hour explaining to the kid why it did not have turn signals, only one taillight, and no brake lights. I even had to argue about it not having a catalytic convertor. Finally he was trying to get me to let them change the oil, and I told him if he could find the oil filter, he could change it.... 15 minutes later he came over begging me to tell him where the filter was. I told him that it was the same reason it didnt have 2 taillights.... it was optional in 51. I have since then converted to antique tags, no more hassles

[Lt.Del]

a catalytic converter on a 1951 vehicle?  that guy wasn't serious. He couldn't be.  If so, that is scary.
My 65 Mustang GT Convertible doesnt' have any back up lights   

[choptop]

He was about 18 or 19 years old, and was very serious. While discussing the other items, I found out his book went back to 65 so evey inspection on older vehicles was referenced to the 65. I found that out when I asked him to show me where I needed a cat. Of course, it wasnt in there. He had the attitude thad said " Im the inspector, I have training, and I can fail your truck"  He lost though. They dont teach these kids about the older vehicles, and cant teach common sense.

[Lt.Del]

I think I would have let him fail it for no cat then report it to the state board.  Boy, they would get a laugh about a 1951 vehicle being failed for no cat.  Then they would probably be embarrased.  Either way, the dude would have got quite a talking to.