please Help! JDM engine differences..

[pdiggitydogg]

good god....look at the post-whorin up in here

tengoku...do me a favor -
if you have somthing to add to a post that you already did, edit it so youre not completely whoring it up (just edit the most recent post, I mean)

appreciated

[AzCivic]

Originally posted by Honda_Tengoku
Here are the major ways that stroking manufactures torque:

1. An increase in cubic inches creates more displacement, and more displacement means more torque.

2. A longer stroke is like a lever acting on the crankshaft; in practical terms it's like using a breaker bar instead of a ratchet handle.

3. More displacement facilitates a higher compression ratio without resorting to outlandish piston domes that disturb flame travel.

4. A longer stroke creates faster piston speed, so the piston can create more of a pressure drop to fill the cylinder more completely at low rpm. 5. It is thought by some that increasing stroke without increasing the length of the connecting rod builds torque because piston-speed dynamics and the rod ratio create more cylinder pressure at maximum rod angularity, at which point the rod has the greatest mechanical advantage over the crank. In a street engine, lengthening the stroke without changing anything else usually favors low-end torque, not high-rpm horsepower.




happy? This is about as simple as I can get it. The actual theories are very complex and I am not getting into it now

way to copy and paste off of other websites , so if you copy this and a whole lot of other people have copied this then it must be true...

not to mention this has all been mentioned already.

oh, also I know alot of "jet technicians"(mechanics) and most of them dont know crap about cars, so thats not really going to cut it as an explanation of why you just know(think you know) so much.

[Shaved &/or Laid]

hm
lets all ge tmustangs then

Originally posted by AzCivic
way to copy and paste off of other websites , so if you copy this and a whole lot of other people have copied this then it must be true...

not to mention this has all been mentioned already.

oh, also I know alot of "jet technicians"(mechanics) and most of them dont know crap about cars, so thats not really going to cut it as an explanation of why you just know(think you know) so much.

yes I did get this off of a website. Never said I didnt. It was a quick way to do end it. I am really tired of talking about this. Some of it was mentioned b4, not all of it. Also I guess since u know alot of "Jet engine technicians" then I guess u know everything then. Sorry but I have been into cars and have other experience than just on jet engines (like initially started to get my automechanics certification). I did mention that BTW. Obviously a jet engine is way different, but physics dont change. U just wont let this go will U? Nothing that is said u wont believe. How about if u do your own research? It is a common known fact, as well as there are theories on it. If u want me to admit your right then if that will get u to do your own research and discover it for yourself and make yourself feel good then I will do it. Look "your right". Does that make u happy? Look I am sick of talking about this. Go think what u want. lets just post on another topic for GOD SAKE!!!

[AzCivic]

"I never said I didnt copy it" I'll be sure to use that when I turn in a paper, and the professor tells me he just read half my paper in some book.

You want research!? hows this:

2 engines, one has an 81mm bore and 77mm stroke,
the other has a 75mm bore and a 90mm stroke. BOTH ARE 1.6ltr engines(first one is 1595cc's the second 1590cc's)

The first engine(smaller stroke) makes more torque than the one with the larger stroke. wait a minute the one with the larger stroke should just be making gobs more torque according to you.

The reason theres any difference is because the engine with the smaller stroke has a higher compression ratio, so make the ratios the same and you'll see very similiar torque #'s.

Wheres YOUR research?

oh, the engines were the b16 and d16, incase you couldnt figure it out.

[silver]

Originally posted by Honda_Tengoku
[b]No its not displacement that makes torque. Its stroke length and compression.

1. An increase in cubic inches creates more displacement, and more displacement means more torque
[/]

maybe i missed something there?

i will chime in on this once i finish my paperwork here at work, stay tuned...

[AzCivic]

ahahahhaha good catch, good catch.

[silver]

ok, having read through all of this 3 times(thanks to both of you, i now want my 25 minutes of wasted life back). you both have said the exact same things over and over. with the exception of the previous flaw that i posted on, both of you are correct.

tengoku-don't use f1 cars as a comparison, a 10 cylinder 3 liter motor compared to a 4 cyl 1.6 liter motor is a different ballgame with absolute opposite tuning ideas behind them. i understand your analogy but you need to compare apples to apples to make it viable. plus your knowledge of turbos and their affect affects on a honda motor do not seem to be that great, generalizing a 13 sec car by putting on a turbo is not how things work, you should know that.

az-business as usual for you your remark about the b and d16s and their cr was pretty much addressed by him though earlier when he stated the comparisons between equal motors with different b/s ratios. and you're correct about the longer stroke idea, since the cylinder is always further down the cylinder at the same given crank position less cylinder pressure at moderate speeds its volumetric efficiency is excellent, giving killer tq numbers.

i was waiting for someone to hit on the volumetric eff. but it didn't happen. short r/s ratios at high rpms cause the mentioned high piston speeds, causing poor airflow due to the lack of time to fill the cylinder, so that is why a high r/s ratio is wanted.

now i think the question is about tq right? first off i want to know where you're getting your h22's from cuz when we dynoed my friends h powered hatchback, it put down 160whp and 134lbs/tq, it was a 98 motor with 22,000 miles on it, us spec, bone stock. after i dynoed an rsx type-s with around 800miles on it, i got 168whp and 124lbs/tq. doesn't look as impressive with real world numbers does it? this reminds me of the arguments regarding putting a vg30dett into a silvia.

as for saying that tq is a direct proportion to the stroke, it's not, it's just the easier way of building the motor. you spoke of dimensions and yes it's a dimensions game. by adding to the stroke, you are adding merely height to the motor, while by adding bore you must multiply that by the number of cylinders causing the motor to get wide really fast.

it's 5:10am i'm tired. good night guys

Originally posted by silver
ok, having read through all of this 3 times(thanks to both of you, i now want my 25 minutes of wasted life back). you both have said the exact same things over and over. with the exception of the previous flaw that i posted on, both of you are correct.

tengoku-don't use f1 cars as a comparison, a 10 cylinder 3 liter motor compared to a 4 cyl 1.6 liter motor is a different ballgame with absolute opposite tuning ideas behind them. i understand your analogy but you need to compare apples to apples to make it viable. plus your knowledge of turbos and their affect affects on a honda motor do not seem to be that great, generalizing a 13 sec car by putting on a turbo is not how things work, you should know that.

az-business as usual for you your remark about the b and d16s and their cr was pretty much addressed by him though earlier when he stated the comparisons between equal motors with different b/s ratios. and you're correct about the longer stroke idea, since the cylinder is always further down the cylinder at the same given crank position less cylinder pressure at moderate speeds its volumetric efficiency is excellent, giving killer tq numbers.

i was waiting for someone to hit on the volumetric eff. but it didn't happen. short r/s ratios at high rpms cause the mentioned high piston speeds, causing poor airflow due to the lack of time to fill the cylinder, so that is why a high r/s ratio is wanted.

now i think the question is about tq right? first off i want to know where you're getting your h22's from cuz when we dynoed my friends h powered hatchback, it put down 160whp and 134lbs/tq, it was a 98 motor with 22,000 miles on it, us spec, bone stock. after i dynoed an rsx type-s with around 800miles on it, i got 168whp and 124lbs/tq. doesn't look as impressive with real world numbers does it? this reminds me of the arguments regarding putting a vg30dett into a silvia.

as for saying that tq is a direct proportion to the stroke, it's not, it's just the easier way of building the motor. you spoke of dimensions and yes it's a dimensions game. by adding to the stroke, you are adding merely height to the motor, while by adding bore you must multiply that by the number of cylinders causing the motor to get wide really fast.

it's 5:10am i'm tired. good night guys

Ok I did contradict myself. Oops. I dont care anymore to tell u the truth. He talkes about D16 and the B16 and comaring them. Problem is that they only make 5 ft pounds of torque difference and they are two totally different engines. I am not going to talk about the differences in the engines as well as the flaws in his research. If it makes him feel good thats fine. I admit I didnt say things as clearly as I meant too. OOps sorry. U admitted that u knew what I was getting at just wasnt explaining it correctly. As far as the H22 figures goes it sounds as if the H22 u put on the Dyno was an H22a1. The H22a1 makes 190 HP at the flywheel, and supposedly 161 Ft pounds of torque at the flywheel. Most of the H22's make 190 to 200 hp with the exception of the JDM H22A Type S, USDM H22A4 Type SH, and the USDM H22A? Type S engine. Those engines make 220 HP, and of course the same torque figures. The figures that u got would seem fairly accurate with the H22a1. I would love to go with the new Acura RSX engine. Too bad they cost way too much, and the engine spins the wrong way and so its not really compatable with 6th gen and lower Civic's (dont get me wrong it can be done, I just dont think it should be).

So maybe I am shooting too high but only time will tell. I guess that other guy is really against H series engines or something. Human nature is to fear what u really dont know. Anyways thats his problem and I really dont care. The shipping company that is sending me the H22, isnt open till the 5th and they will ship it sometime after that. It will take a bit of time to put this in the car, and eventually I will dyno it, and we will all see. IF I get the JDM H22A Type S engine (like I am supposed to) I was shooting for 200 WHP, and 140 Ft-pounds of torque at the wheels. All the mods I will be putting on this car is i/h/e, 7.5 pound flywheel, clutch, cam gears, A.T.B. LSD, coilovers, 16" OZ superleggras....
WIth drag radials this should be good for somewhere in the mid 12's, and somewhere in the mid 13's or possibly lower on normal street radials.

[AzCivic]

Originally posted by Honda_Tengoku
Ok I did contradict myself. Oops. I dont care anymore to tell u the truth. He talkes about D16 and the B16 and comaring them. Problem is that they only make 5 ft pounds of torque difference and they are two totally different engines. I am not going to talk about the differences in the engines as well as the flaws in his research. If it makes him feel good thats fine.

"Problem is that they only make 5 ft pounds of torque difference"

Yeah that is a problem isnt it! It proves your "theories" wrong.

I compare 2 engines with the same displacement, pretty close compression ratios, same # of valves and one has an extra cam, while you compare F1 engines to diesel engines, and somehow my research is flawed. YEAH RIGHT!

oh, and it does make me feel good to know that i've shot down yet another know it all who is trying to spread what they think, as what is fact.

There are ALOT of differences besides compression between the D16 and the B16 but whatever makes u happy. How many times do I have to say that "your right" to make u happy and stop this idioticy?