b16 vs b18b on a crx?

[-B3aST-]

talking about the b20 tq diff between the b16 and ls

[2camvtec]

B20b 126 bhp/133 ftq --- B20z 146 bhp/133 ftq

[charliemopps24]

Originally Posted by 2camvtec

B20b 126 bhp/133 ftq --- B20z 146 bhp/133 ftq

Mostly runner lengths, tuning and combustion chamber shaping. I'd love to build a b20 vtec. But even more, i'd like to build a K series hybrid. Those are some bad ass engines.

[ksniperfox]

why the fuck does a LS need shorter gearing if the powerband is so torquey? wouldnt you want to spend more time in the powerband and less time rowing a short transmission? a B18C1 makes LESS torque than a B18B but is faster because of horsepower. period.

[Darkness]

Originally Posted by 2camvtec

That's what I was getting at. I ran 15.5 all day with just i/h/e. I brought the Type S in because you basically said the Cavi would run low 15's. And I was talking stock. And no for the price it would cost to build most other engines (non B series) you would def spend more. B series motors are the least expensive motors to build. There is so much stuff out there for them it's ridiculous. Especially the b16a/a2 and b18c1. I have built two b16's and can say I was completely satisfied with my real world results. I will admit if price wasn't an issue I would more than likely go with the b18c1, if I were choosing a b series. But people seem to forget like yourself the b16 is only a 1.6 liter motor. All other motors you talk about have more displacement so your arguement really dosen't hold up. The downside to the b16 today is that most 4 cyl are at least 2 liters or bigger and the technology that goes into them is far superior. So in todays world the b16 has too much to over come. But it is still a good motor. Just not loved by some.

type s? i said em1 si civic would run a high 15-low 16 stock. b-series motors are not the least expensive to build. you have to spend thousands to make 180whp. how much hp you make from a motor doesn't mean shit. it's powerband is what you really want and frankly the b-series falls rather short in that area, granted it is a 4cyl n/a motor and rather old. the k serieis is the cheapest to build. i dindt' forget it's a 1.6 hence why i said it's worthless. it makes hp alrigtht. sadly it makes alot more hp than alot of other motors in it's class but runs slower times. why is that. because it has no torque at all. you can't just have torque or hp you need both. my arguement holds up just fine. they have more displacement but also have much less hp further showing that the b16 isn't anything special. it's an overcomplicated motor that barely gets the job done. the b16 is has more technology than alot of other motors so your argument doesn't hold up. if i compared it to the K-series then yes you would be right. but no i compared it to an ecotec. it's a basic 140 hp motor with nothing special going for it at all. much like the b18b being a basic 4cylinder makign 140 hp and nothing going for it. yet both of them will spank the b16 in acceleration contests. i said it's application specific. if you're looking for a basic little street cruiser or 1/4 mile car then the b16 is highly overrated. b16 is more of a track motor to stay in the high rpms. it isn't there to be fast at all which is what alot of people try to make them into.

[Darkness]

Originally Posted by ksniperfox

why the fuck does a LS need shorter gearing if the powerband is so torquey? wouldnt you want to spend more time in the powerband and less time rowing a short transmission? a B18C1 makes LESS torque than a B18B but is faster because of horsepower. period.

nope you are wrong. the b18b is will more than keep up with a b18c1 in the 1/4. if you're talkign jsut top speed then the b18c1 will win on the highway. but if they ahve the same tranny the ls will more than keep up with a b18c1 in the 1/4. the b18b has the same gearing as the b18c1 untill you get to third gear, that's the difference in the two cars. the b18c1 isn't that fast. it runs mid 15's in a teg. the ls has longer gears starting at 3rd the gsr has shorter gears to take advantage of vtec and it's really peaky power band. that's why the money gear in gsr is 3rd gear. hp doesn't really mean shit when you take into consideration that the ls makes more torque sooner. the gsr can afford to run short gears in a daily driver because vtec saves economy. if you run a b18b on an si or gsr tranny you'll more than keep up with a b18c1, but your mpg will be significantly worse than stock. everyone fails to realize that vtec doesn't make you faster or generate more hp. it's there to retain low-end repsonse on peaky motors and to save economy. vtec isn't really that sophisticaed considering the germans started it back in the 70's

[2camvtec]

Originally Posted by WVU97GS-R

type s? i said em1 si civic would run a high 15-low 16 stock. b-series motors are not the least expensive to build. you have to spend thousands to make 180whp. how much hp you make from a motor doesn't mean shit. it's powerband is what you really want and frankly the b-series falls rather short in that area, granted it is a 4cyl n/a motor and rather old. the k serieis is the cheapest to build. i dindt' forget it's a 1.6 hence why i said it's worthless. it makes hp alrigtht. sadly it makes alot more hp than alot of other motors in it's class but runs slower times. why is that. because it has no torque at all. you can't just have torque or hp you need both. my arguement holds up just fine. they have more displacement but also have much less hp further showing that the b16 isn't anything special. it's an overcomplicated motor that barely gets the job done. the b16 is has more technology than alot of other motors so your argument doesn't hold up. if i compared it to the K-series then yes you would be right. but no i compared it to an ecotec. it's a basic 140 hp motor with nothing special going for it at all. much like the b18b being a basic 4cylinder makign 140 hp and nothing going for it. yet both of them will spank the b16 in acceleration contests. i said it's application specific. if you're looking for a basic little street cruiser or 1/4 mile car then the b16 is highly overrated. b16 is more of a track motor to stay in the high rpms. it isn't there to be fast at all which is what alot of people try to make them into.

I was refering to what you said about tha Cavi being able to run low 15's stock. An EM1 should be able to hit 15.7/15.8 stock which would put the cavi around 15.2 which is Type S Territory. Hope that clears that up.

Originally Posted by WVU97GS-R

if torque doesn't mean anything why does a 2004 eco cavy with 140 hp out accelerate the 160 em1 si in the 1/4 by over half a second

And no you don't need tq and hp. Gearing and power to weight is where it is at. A 94-95 Mustang GT runs mid to low 15's A Type S Run low 15's to high 14's. But wait the Mustang has more HP and double the torque.

Again if I had the money then I would have probably went with a c1, but my b16's did the job and I had a blast with them.

[solsykness]

Originally Posted by ksniperfox

why the fuck does a LS need shorter gearing if the powerband is so torquey? wouldnt you want to spend more time in the powerband and less time rowing a short transmission? a B18C1 makes LESS torque than a B18B but is faster because of horsepower. period.

yeah the hp difference would mean that higher in the rpms in later gears, the c1 would prevail. highway driving/top speed...like wvu97gs-r said...

And utilizing a shorter geared tranny would allow the ls to accelerate faster, much faster than it would having to use it's stock tranny. To me it makes sense, I just don't know what else there is to it. If you want hardcore facts, try it out yourself. Try and get whitels...whatever his name is to jump in this thread. He's driven his ls with a b16 tranny in it, I think he had some issues with it though, not 100% sure...

[MQTGSR]

Originally Posted by ksniperfox

why the fuck does a LS need shorter gearing if the powerband is so torquey? wouldnt you want to spend more time in the powerband and less time rowing a short transmission? a B18C1 makes LESS torque than a B18B but is faster because of horsepower. period.

Shorter gearing is for economy, in 1st and 2nd. And torquey powerband????

My freind, it's a honda, the words torquey powerband and Honda are oximorons, like a minivan and a sport package. (in refrence to stock hondas anyway.)

The torque diffrence between a B18c1 and b1 is so neglagable, its a few ft.lbs.

And yes, in a way the b18c1 is faster due to hp, but keep in mind that the LS will keep up till 3rd, cause b18b has less top end.

But keep in mind, a b16 will take much longer than any b18 to get to the top end. Torque is important, and b16's make none of it, therefore it takes much longer to reach the topend.

b16 is a better roadcourase motor or something, where high revs and the narrow powerband can be used. As a drag motor, it is not the best choice.

I have smoked a few B16 civics with IHE and some goodies, in a near stock GSR. Sure they are running like 20 more hp than me, but that dosen't really make a diffrence with no torque. It stumps many a ricer The key reason I win? Torque. It gets me to my top end much faster, so I can use it.

I know I am re-telling what others have said, but B16 isn't bad, but when there are far better honda motors avalible, like the b18b, why wate your moeny? You have so much more potental with that extra displacement.

[ksniperfox]

of course there is always more potential with displacement in THIS argument, but stock vs stock id always prefer the b16. more compression, more hp stock, easy to make power on with boltons. seen the engine tech threads where stock block/head b16s are making 195whp and shit.

in a drag race you're in the high rpms all the time too? something called launch/throttle control/good driving is used to launch at a good rpm point where the most torque is made with littlest wheelspin? does that not overcome the low end tq of the b18b to stau in the high end powerband? ill never believe that ls will meet or beat a gsr in the 1/4. thats all i have to say. peace.

[MQTGSR]

Originally Posted by ksniperfox

of course there is always more potential with displacement in THIS argument, but stock vs stock id always prefer the b16. more compression, more hp stock, easy to make power on with boltons. seen the engine tech threads where stock block/head b16s are making 195whp and shit.

in a drag race you're in the high rpms all the time too? something called launch/throttle control/good driving is used to launch at a good rpm point where the most torque is made with littlest wheelspin? does that not overcome the low end tq of the b18b to stau in the high end powerband? ill never believe that ls will meet or beat a gsr in the 1/4. thats all i have to say. peace.

As said earlier, an LS will not beat a GSR.

A b16 with 195whp and still no tourque. Realize a b18 with the same mods will walk all over a b16 with the same mods. There are b16's with higher hp than a b18, but the touque shortcommings of the b16 are the reason it is not quite is good. Not saying it sucks, once again, just not as good as a B16, there is not too much of an arguement to be made here.

I know in dragraceing you are high in the powerband, but once again, it's torque that makes or breaks a lot of races, not HP, HP is notihin without torque to back it up.

[ksniperfox]

Originally Posted by MQTGSR

As said earlier, an LS will not beat a GSR.

A b16 with 195whp and still no tourque. Realize a b18 with the same mods will walk all over a b16 with the same mods. There are b16's with higher hp than a b18, but the touque shortcommings of the b16 are the reason it is not quite is good. Not saying it sucks, once again, just not as good as a B16, there is not too much of an arguement to be made here.

I know in dragraceing you are high in the powerband, but once again, it's torque that makes or breaks a lot of races, not HP, HP is notihin without torque to back it up.

hp is only a mathematical derivant of torque. i forget the equation. but it states that torque is torque, but the faster you spin that torque with engine speed, the more power you will make and the faster the car will be.
hence the reason a boosted b16 revving to 9k with 450whp/250wtq will smoke a 5.7 revving to 4900 with 480whp/500wtq vette.

[MQTGSR]

For one, the reason a boosted b16 civic hatch lets say will pull on a stock vette also has a lot to do with weight. Put that same motor and driveline into a car that weighs the same as that hatch, and see what wins.

Yes, hp is basicly torque, but what makes more of the force (in ft.lbs) increases with longer strokes and larger displacement. Torque is the maximum pushing force being applied at one time. Rule of thumb is usually that torque can not be applied as strongly as revs increase. Look at any torque curve, peak hp and torque never come toegether.

High revving engines like the b16 can't produce as much torque due to their shorter stroke and smaller displacement, they sacrifice torque for higher hp. It is the way the motor is built.

And think about it in basic terms.

A stock B18 B16 both with *****, what wins?

B18, everytime. The motors have a diffrence of what 10hp? And an Ingtegra weighs more than a hatch, so really, what is causeing the b18 to be faster? It isn't all the high revving hp.

This is why regardless, I would take a b18 to build, unless I had a b16 on hand in a garage, then of course I would not hesitate. And in a way, if you put this motor in a CRX, either way, your car will be fast, but the faster way is a b18, or b20 vtec.

[charliemopps24]

This arguement is kinda academic anyway. B-series engines are gonna go the way of the dodo bird before long. K-series engines are where it's at. They're better engines in almost every aspect. Argue about that now.

[MQTGSR]

You can't really, K is better in every way it seems over b series.