HSTuners - View Single Post

2ndGenTeg · 05-01-2002, 11:55 AM

Alright Billy Bad Ass, let's try this again.

You contradict yourself in so many ways that it's beyond amusing.

Believe it or not, there are two types of blow by. I'm well aware of loss on compression due to worn rings, however the same term is used to describe improper valve tuning resulting in the loss of power in an FI application.

The Type R motor is designed to produce power in the high end of the rev range, not the low end. Aggressive camshafts with a higher VTEC crossover, stronger engine internals for higher RPMs- it all points to making high end power.

You talk about power gains in response to intake manifold runner lengths. Very simple: longer= low end response, shorter= high end. Now you tell me that the Type R manifold is better in this application (power from 5K RPM +) by virtue of its longer runners? I think not.

The dual stage manifold is also a piece of crap. The theory behind the dual stage manifold is that until the secondary is opened, less air is flowing, so you want to increase velocity to produce low end power. However in the high end, it really puts a damper on air flow.

Until Skunk2 introduced their (single runner) GSR intake manifolds, Type R manifolds have been retrofitted onto GSR heads for years for their significant gains in the high end of the rev range, due to their shorter, fatter runners. So they revised the manifold from the GSR to the Type R to make high end power, not low end torque. If your theory were correct, the best manifold out there would be the CR-V. Exceptionally long runners to create more low end power in their low revving sport utility, not their high revving pocket rocket.

If you think Honda has ever been out to make low end power in the B series engine, you're delusional. Hondas have always made power through revving, not torque. Small displacement, high redline. The VTEC engines are an extension of this school of thought, made to make all their power in the high end and rev even higher.

Lay into anybody (myself, Incubus, or any other member) like that again, and I'll make sure you never post on these boards again. There's a big difference between "actually, I believe you are mistaken..." and the "look here, dumbass" you just laid out. We welcome the knowledge and experience of all of our members, but demand that it be kept courteous at all times. I'd love for you to stick around (I can tell you're always down for a good spirited debate- which I usually learn a thing or two from), but not if you're going to continue being an asshole.

And the AEM intake makes power from the cooler charge air, not the length, which reduces air velocity.

05-01-2002, 11:55 AM	#33
2ndGenTeg 4th Gear Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Boulder, CO Age: 45 Posts: 830	Alright Billy Bad Ass, let's try this again. You contradict yourself in so many ways that it's beyond amusing. Believe it or not, there are two types of blow by. I'm well aware of loss on compression due to worn rings, however the same term is used to describe improper valve tuning resulting in the loss of power in an FI application. The Type R motor is designed to produce power in the high end of the rev range, not the low end. Aggressive camshafts with a higher VTEC crossover, stronger engine internals for higher RPMs- it all points to making high end power. You talk about power gains in response to intake manifold runner lengths. Very simple: longer= low end response, shorter= high end. Now you tell me that the Type R manifold is better in this application (power from 5K RPM +) by virtue of its longer runners? I think not. The dual stage manifold is also a piece of crap. The theory behind the dual stage manifold is that until the secondary is opened, less air is flowing, so you want to increase velocity to produce low end power. However in the high end, it really puts a damper on air flow. Until Skunk2 introduced their (single runner) GSR intake manifolds, Type R manifolds have been retrofitted onto GSR heads for years for their significant gains in the high end of the rev range, due to their shorter, fatter runners. So they revised the manifold from the GSR to the Type R to make high end power, not low end torque. If your theory were correct, the best manifold out there would be the CR-V. Exceptionally long runners to create more low end power in their low revving sport utility, not their high revving pocket rocket. If you think Honda has ever been out to make low end power in the B series engine, you're delusional. Hondas have always made power through revving, not torque. Small displacement, high redline. The VTEC engines are an extension of this school of thought, made to make all their power in the high end and rev even higher. Lay into anybody (myself, Incubus, or any other member) like that again, and I'll make sure you never post on these boards again. There's a big difference between "actually, I believe you are mistaken..." and the "look here, dumbass" you just laid out. We welcome the knowledge and experience of all of our members, but demand that it be kept courteous at all times. I'd love for you to stick around (I can tell you're always down for a good spirited debate- which I usually learn a thing or two from), but not if you're going to continue being an asshole. And the AEM intake makes power from the cooler charge air, not the length, which reduces air velocity.