GSR heads on an ls/vtec

I have just bought a 95 GSR P & P head for my 93 Integra Ls. Now when I go to buy my headers should I buy headers for a 95 GSR or for the 93 Ls. Will the headers for an LS match up to the ports on the GSR head also will the GSR header go to my down pipe right.

[2ndGenTeg]

You need the GS-R header. However, since the head is P&P, you're going to need to get the header port matched, as well as the intake manifold.

How much do you think this will cost me and where can i go to get it done?

[2ndGenTeg]

Any machine shop can do it, expect it to run $100-$150 for quality work.

I'm not a total car guru but don't the headers connect to the block, not the head??
As far as I know, you'd get LS headers because they are not connected to the head, but the combustion chamber.
I'm not claiming to be correct, but that's what I always thought and have been told.....

[2ndGenTeg]

Ummmm.... no. The header connects to the exhaust ports- located on the cylinder head, above the combustion chamber, which is actually also located in the head.

Errrr.......ok I'm admitting I'm wrong.....even though I didn't claim to be 100% correct, now that I think about it more, it makes sense what you said.
I've learned something new!

Originally posted by Incubus
I'm not a total car guru but don't the headers connect to the block, not the head??
As far as I know, you'd get LS headers because they are not connected to the head, but the combustion chamber.
I'm not claiming to be correct, but that's what I always thought and have been told.....

Yeah thats probelly one of the stupidest things ive seen so far on this fourm. Im not really 100% sure on this either but theres probelly a reason that they are called headers. Not like they would go into the head or anything.

The combustion chamber is also in the head not the block.

[2ndGenTeg]

No name calling, please. I'm sure there's been more than one instance where you attempted to provide some insight only to find that you had been misinformed.

FYI- it's not called a header because it attaches to the head. If that were true, the intake manifold would be called a header as well. Technically, it's an exhaust manifold.

We're all here to learn- let's keep it fun.

I'm not going to get asinine about this, but if you will read what I said, I said my words as more of a question than an answer, because I figured I wasn't correct in my information.

Oh yeah, don't forget to read the article on this web page about reasons why LS/VTEC head swaps aren't all that great.

I was'nt making fun of you. I used to be pretty stupid too. Im not really sure about the header thing i just thought it would make sense.

Does anyone know why they are called headers?

Also ive read many articles on why LS/VTEC is good and bad including that one. But if done right and not reved higher then about 8400 it will run fine. This is with a built up bottom end though. And I know most people would say why don't you just spend less money and go turbo. I really have no argument to that idea I just wanted to go all motor. Even though its alot more money.

[2ndGenTeg]

Alright kids, simma down. No need to beat a dead horse. Gear down, big shifter. In short, let it go.

Actually, I wrote that article- thanks for pointing it out. Makes me feel important. Anyways, with a fully built bottom end and a good valvetrain, I personally wouldn't rev it past 8K. You'll hear stories and people will tell you that they rev theirs to 8500 or 9K, but their engines won't last like that.

Think about it. Remember what horsepower is? Torque multiplied by RPM. Comparably built, a B18C block will rev 15-20% higher than a B18A/B block, just by virtue of the better rod ratio. Now do you truly think you'll get 15-20% more torque out of 37cc?

Now remember about aggressive camshafts. Jun Stage 2 and Toda Spec B cams usually crossover at around 7K-7500 RPM. On an LS/VTEC with an aggressive redline, that leaves all of 1000-1500 RPM of the powerband with which to make use of the VTEC lobe. Not much use, is it?

I'm not going to regurgitate everything you've already read, I'm just saying if it were me...

A friend of mine has an LS/VTEC in his 94 integra and he has been reving at 8200 on stock rods for over a year now. And he races a lot. He did trash his b18 crank in favor of a b17 to create a little higher r/s ratio. But i think it should be fine.

Josh,
Do you know anything about the importbuilders.com site that you have in your signiture. I am intressted in buying the b18 "Stroker" block from them. I was wondering if they do good work and are they easy to deal with. Any information would help.

Thanks,
Chris

[2ndGenTeg]

LOL- no he doesn't.

An LS/VTEC is little more than slightly stroked GS-R. By using a B17A crank, he's actually destroked the engine, decreasing displacement. This does, however, drastically improve the rod ratio- I have no doubt he can rev to 8200 all day long with no problems. His displacement is also identical to that of a B17A- 1677.8cc. A far cry from the 1834cc of an LS/VTEC. And he's not using stock rods with a B17A crank in a B18A block- the deck heights are different, so he would have to get custom rods made to run that setup.

Importbuilders is the shiznit. Owned and run by Jeff Schaeffer, ex co-owner of Atomic Motorsports. Think Atomic Motorsports quality with good customer service. You will not get a better built engine anywhere, period. On top of that, Jeff is a helluva guy. My friend had a JDM H22A dropped in his 94 Civic hatch, and the workmanship is flawless, and it has run beautifully with no problems for three years now.

For any type of serious build, I wouldn't go anywhere else.

Originally posted by 2ndGenTeg
LOL- no he doesn't.

An LS/VTEC is little more than slightly stroked GS-R. By using a B17A crank, he's actually destroked the engine, decreasing displacement. This does, however, drastically improve the rod ratio- I have no doubt he can rev to 8200 all day long with no problems. His displacement is also identical to that of a B17A- 1677.8cc. A far cry from the 1834cc of an LS/VTEC. And he's not using stock rods with a B17A crank in a B18A block- the deck heights are different, so he would have to get custom rods made to run that setup.

Hey is not running stock ls rods but he has b17 rods and pistons that were balanced along with the crank shaft. Also he had his cylinder walls resized and the head has been decked to support higher rpms. He has kinda just made a b17 gsr with a 98 gsr head.

[2ndGenTeg]

Like I said- the deck heights are different on the B17A and B18A. Therefore, in order to use a B17A crank in a B18A/B block, you would have to have rods custom built to the correct length. He cannot possibly have OEM rods on that setup. It simply isn't possible. What you could do, however, is run a B17A crank with B18A spec rods in a B18C block- the numbers match up perfectly- and have an incredible rod ratio.

By resizing the cylinder walls, do you mean they're bored out? If so, that would mean he's also running aftermarket pistons. In addition, this would create more displacement.

What do you mean the head has been decked? Do you mean it has been milled? If so, this is usually done to increase compression, not support RPMs.

Any way you cut it, it's still not even close to being an LS/VTEC, by definition. The point is to get more displacement by using the LS bottom end, but your friend has actually done the opposite. Actually, I think his setup is better- very close to what I want to do. I want a B16A with B17A crank and rods, bored to 85-86mm. So I'm not knocking your friend'd setup- on the contrary- I'm just saying it's not an LS/VTEC, and using it to argue in favor of their reliability is a far cry from reality.

Wow.......I'm still kicking myself for even asking if the headers connect to the block.........I totally know better than that. Oh well....I'm not as stupid as I sound though, although I'm not incredibly mechanically inclined.
I've thought about going LS/VTEC also but I'm not sure.
I was actually gonna go ahead and do it and then shortly before I bought the head and started work on it, I read your article and it gave me second thoughts.

I'd like to do it, but I don't know if it's worth it considering the limited revving I'd be able to do.....it's probably better to go forced induction on a B18B engine anyway

Josh
You would have to talk to him. I am probely wrong about a lot of things in this setup. But i do know that he has the cylinder sleves decked at the top. Where the piston his TDC around the piston sleve is sealed. I never knew that this was done for higher compression though i just though it keep the block more stable to handle higher rpms. I do know that he is using rods from some B series engine with ctr or itr pistons. im not really that sure im not great freinds with him but i see him ocasionally and i was'nt really listening when he told me.

next time i see him i will get him to join this fourm and you can ask him about.

Also do you know where i can learn more about displacement, bore, and r/s ratios of b series motors.

[2ndGenTeg]

On a B18A/B, I'd definitely go FI. It's simply not worth the effort for the mediocre engine you'll end up with attempting to go all motor. If I had a B18C, I'd play with that and build it, but with the B18A I have, I'm just going to swap it out.

Originally posted by Integra221
Josh
You would have to talk to him. I am probely wrong about a lot of things in this setup. But i do know that he has the cylinder sleves decked at the top. Where the piston his TDC around the piston sleve is sealed. I never knew that this was done for higher compression though i just though it keep the block more stable to handle higher rpms. I do know that he is using rods from some B series engine with ctr or itr pistons. im not really that sure im not great freinds with him but i see him ocasionally and i was'nt really listening when he told me.

next time i see him i will get him to join this fourm and you can ask him about.

Also do you know where i can learn more about displacement, bore, and r/s ratios of b series motors.

Is this a red integra??

No its white

Hey guys. All this talk about ls/vtec. I'm actually thinking of doing a B20 from the CRV with Type R heads. Of couse the bottom end would be prepared for boost and ceramic coated goodness for an extra measure of protection. Money this money that. I hear the CRV motors are cheap and the Type R heads are cheap as well. My first question is first of all if anyone knows if someone makes an oil sump system for the B series motors. The second is if anyone knows where I could purchase Top Fuel turbo cams for the Type R head? Or if anyone knows of a good quality company that makes Turbo cams for the Type R head or any of the B series motors for that matter?

Hey by the way no picking on Incubus. He's my homey and he already gets shit from me. Believe me he doesn't need anymore. Besides there was a time when all of us didn't know a camshaft from our bungholes! Speaking about bung holes where is the best placement on a turbo honda to have an oil cooler. Between the turbo and the oil return line or between the filter and the turbo?

Hmmm. well I don't know what you guys think of a 2.0 single overhead cam turbo honda motor. NO I'm not talking about the CRV motor. I know it has dual overhead cams. I'm talking about the motor in my 87 Accord. If you think I'm crazy then check out this site----> http://www.88turboaccord.net/ This guy is my Honda Idol. I think this much sums up a honda as a hot rod. FAST CHEAP And loads of FUN!

I believe JUN makes good cams for the Type R head, but if your looking for turbo cams, I'd look at what Crower has to offer. I've checked them out and they seem to have good cams for FI applications.
I wouldn't say Type R heads are cheap though.......they run anywhere from $1,200 to $2,000 from the info I've gathered. I'd personally go with a GSR head that's ported and polished, with some good Titanium valves/springs. Then go for the turbo application intake manifold.......that way it's totally set up for turbo. The Type R engine is a great all motor engine, but in my opinion it shouldn't be boosted.

Hey Incubus. Thanks for the info. Although I hear that the Japanese Top Fuel Cams are the best for Turbo Applications. A little known secret I guess. Anyway, Also I'm not so sure the Heads alone for a Type R cost that much. But I'm not sure. Just doesn't sound right though. And also I agree the entire motor for the Type R isn't set up for boost but the Head alone if properly modified to fit on an LS or CRV motor can actually be pretty good for it. Off course the bottom end has to be modified but that goes without saying.

Plus if anyone knows a company that makes a dry sump oil system for the B series motors I'd be interested to know who makes one. Thanks.

I know this might sound a little crazy but I know that Toda also carries a VTEC killer package that removes VTEC all at once. Now would it be better to get a ported and polished LS head with cams or would it be better to get a Type R head and use the VTEC Killer package for an LS/Type R head swap? Keep in mind the intake manifolds that will attach to these heads as well when you give your opinion.

Also, if the rod to stroke ratio is such a bad thing in the LS motor then why is it such a reliable motor in its stock form. Not withstanding the revving too 8500RPMs because I already know that it has a lower revlimit than the rest of the B series motors except the CRV motor.

Oh and where is that article you wrote? I'd be interested in reading it. 2ndGENTEG

I believe Skunk2 also carries some good turbo/supercharger cams, but I'd have to double check on that.
Let's cruise down to Inline Four, they have lots of cool stuff to check out, then we can have some of our questions answered, just be forewarned that they will push NA motors over forced induction.

A VTEC killer package? It removes VTEC from a VTEC engine? That's wierd, why would anyone want to do that, or am I just reading it wrong?

Type R heads are good for FI, but I'd still go with the GSR head instead......that way you'll spend less and the difference in money will go towards parts specifically set up for turbo such as intake manifold, rods, pistons, valves/valvesprings, etc.
Type R engines run around $5,000
I've checked around for heads and they all run around $1,200 give or take a few hundred, but I've never seen any less than $1,000.
The Type R engine isn't the best engine for turbo in my opinion because of the high compression it's running in stock form. Yeah with lower compression pistons that'll fix the problem, but I still think that it's blasphemy to force feed such an already perfect engine. GSR and LS engines are better suited for abuse, and if you blow the engine, you won't feel the remorse of blowing an engine that's a limited production piece.

Yes Incubus you read right. Toda makes a VTEC killer package because when racing (read road racing) The motor usually stays above the VTEC switchover point and so the extra weight and friction from all the uneeded switching mechanicals are just dead weight. Also, since the only real reason for Having VTEC is so that you can have a racing profiled cam for high rpms while maintaining that dubious honor that most hondas have as being fuel efficient at lower RPMs. It makes no sense to use a fuel efficient cam profile while road racing since the lower RPM cam profile will essentially end up being the same as the higher RPM profile.

I know it doesn't make sense in the fact that if you were to Turbo a honda motor VTEC actually can be a benefit if tuned properly. First off if you use turbo cams it can help the motor make more power while the turbo is still spooling up while also providing an optimized performance at higher RPMS after the switchover. However supposedly if you use the VTEC Killer package you can use a single cam Profile to optimize the Turbo and motor during spool up and the same profile can be beneficial at higher RPMs at the same time to keep the turbo moving. It's debatable I know but I guess it depends on the cams your using, the motor, and your application for the car.

By the way I already said I agree with you that Type R motor are not good for forced induction so I don't know why you restated what I already agreed with you on.

As for buying a GSR Head and there being a great enough difference from a Type R head that I could buy an intake manifold, rods, pistons, valves/valvesprings, I'm not sure that is true. Compare a Type R head and a GSR head that is ported and polished and then let me know if it is still cheaper to go with a GSR head.

Instead of the whole VTEC killer package, why not just have an LS engine with some aggressive cams? From my point of view it's the same thing.
Yeah I know, toxy, that we aggree on the Type R head being best for NA applications and it's close to blasphemy to force feed it, I was just kinda saying that for the benefit of other readers.

I think that a GSR head or a Type R head are both good for what you want to do, I just think that you could get some better performance/numbers with a head specifically set up for turbo.

You could easily spend the extra money on the Type R head to put turbo specific parts in it, but the you'd be spending more money to achieve the same results with a GSR head.
It's all preference, but if you want the prestige of having a Type R head, just get a GSR head and slap a red valve cover on it that looks like a Type R valve cover and nobody will be the wiser!

OK as for the LS head with some aggressive cams. It's not the same thing since the LS head isn't optimized for flow like a GSR or Type R head so it's not the same.

As for other readers. Well they need to READ it the first time!

As for a head specifically set up for turbo. I'm not sure if the already ported and polished head of the Type R would need to be necessarily re-ported for a Turbo setup. The only modifications would be to add the cams, valves, valve springs, and cam gears thats it. Also, remember I said to take the Intake manifold into consideration as well. The Type R intake manifold is better optimized for flow just like the head. Therefore the GSR head and it's intake manifold would need to be ported polished and port matched first before even adding the cams, valves, valve springs, and cam gears.

As for the prestige. I've never been about the pretige. I love to drive. I just have a passion for driving fast and capable cars. That of course doen't always mean driving in a straight line. What adds to that of course is knowing I made my car faster and a better handling car. I just happen to believe that Hondas are a very potent lot of automobiles.

I wouldn't re-port a Type R head, of course, but that's about the only extra thing you'd have to do to the GSR head if your comparing the two. While the Type R intake manifold is shorter than the GSR intake manifold, and already ported, you'd probably be better off with a turbo specific intake manifold, in which case the one that comes with the Type R head would end up sitting in your garage anyway, just as the GSR intake manifold would.
Both heads have their plusses, but for the same amount of money you could have a head that is specifically set up for a turbo, versus the Type R head that would require extra money to accomplish the same thing.
It's all in your taste, but I'd still go for the GSR head, if for no other reason than the fact that it might be just a bit easier to find turbo specific parts for the GSR head than the Type R head.

[2ndGenTeg]

First, about the Toda cams. They're Killer VTEC, not VTEC Killer.

I don't know what you thought you read, but there's no cam that eliminates VTEC. The cam would simply be one large lobe, and the other mechanics in the head would still be there and functioning, they just wouldn't make any difference.

The Killer VTEC cams from Toda are made for huge power. Intake lift is 12mm and the duration is a whopping 305 degrees. Made to tear up the dragstrip in an all motor setup. However, they SUCK for road racing and are far from streetable, both in smog and drivability. They would also never work for an FI application.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with using a Type R head for an FI application. The stock cams would be a little aggressive and would definitely need to be swapped. Other than that, enerything would be an improvement over the GSR- the larger ports, stiffer valvetrain, etc- all help in an FI setup.

The best head and manifold for an FI application is the B17A 2nd Gen GS-R. The cams were a little less aggressive than the B18C, making tuning to avoid blow-by a breeze. The valvetrain is nearly identical to that of the B18C. The best part, though, was the intake manifold. The runners are the shortest and fattest of any B series engine. Combine that with the (IMO) best crank in terms of displacement while preserving rod ratio, and you've got a killer engine.

Long live the B17A!!!

<-------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Design

The primary and secondary lobes are designed to be the same size. Overall construction of the cam has been heavily revised. With areas of stress, rigidity and weight all greatly benefiting. Normal cams are created from solid blanks, but TODA VTEC KILLER cams are produced from a special hollow core exclusively developed by TODA Racing, which not only reduces weight but also improves valve timing accuracy through a reduction in flexing. The cam is designed to bed in quickly and have a low wear rate.

Characteristics

The mid rocker cam is REMOVED & both pins are changed, reducing the valve train mass for better response. Disabling the VTEC system removes fluctuations in the oil pressure system, securing a reliable oil feed to all the main moving components.
<-------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

This is the description from the Toda Website. Any questions? If so then go to the web page and read for yourself: http://www.todaracing.com/B162.html
Good now that we have that cleared up lets move on. They have different Valve durations so 305 isn't the only cam they have that works with the VTEC KILLER PACKAGE. Also they used to describe how this package was better for ROAD RACING not DRAG RACING. Besides Toda doesn't specialize in Drag Racing products. Only N1 endurance racing type products. Besides they describe for themselves how using this package would work for ROAD RACING since they racers don't use the lower power band of the RPM range during high speed Gymkhana racing (otherwise known as high speed track racing) therefore negating the need for VTEC.

As for using the Toda Camshaft for Forced Induction I agree that it's not a viable option and that's why I would use TOP FUELS Turbo Cams instead.

Oh and do you even know what Blow by is???? Believe me it has nothing to do with Valves. Try rings on pistons and the amount of compression that is lost by pressure escaping between the gaps in the rings. There is a reason they make gapless rings these days.

Also the GSR intake manifold had dual stage intake runners so on that point you sorta win. Except that the best intake manifold is the one on the Type R because of its length. Otherwise if the GSR intake manifold was better then why would they have revised the Type R intake manifold when they could have saved production costs and used the pre-existing intake manifold that they already had in production with the GSR. The answer is because the Type R intake manifold by virtue of it's longer length actually enhances Torque in the bottom end of the RPM band. This is also the same reason why AEM has the best intake/filter. Because when they get dynoed they get better Torque. Yes they also get cooler air but the internal resonance of the longer intake adds to the lower RPM band in the Form of Torqe. Now if Honda motors were fantastic at making Torqe at the lower end of the RPM band then they wouldn't have needed to make a new intake manifold for the lower RPM band but rather the higher RPM band.

As for you Incubus, the intake manifold would end up being used not in my garage. What would you use for an intake manifold then? And what extra money would you need to spend on the Type R head to get it ready to be Turbo? I'm curious becuase I already explained that the Type R Head would be ready to go with less modifications than the GSR head? So what EXTRA modifications do you think would be necessary? It's already ported and polished so that wouldn't need to be redone. Also there are plenty of parts for the Type R head for Turbo applications. You just need to know where to look. Top Fuel in Japan is one of those companies that is in fact able to squeeze 300+ horsepower out of a relatively stock Type R motor in a reliable streetable kit. I'm not saying I'd do that with a Type R motor but there are professional people who know how to tune the motor and that includes the head.

[2ndGenTeg]

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.

First, about the Toda cams. They're Killer VTEC, not VTEC Killer. I don't know what you thought you read, but there's no cam that eliminates VTEC.

Oh, I'm sorry. Where was the "actually, I believe you are mistaken..." as apposed to the "look here, dumbass" you laid out. I will apologize, however, for returning fire with fire. I am above that usually. I let my emotions get the best of me and for that I apologize. Now onto the facts.

I am actually curious about this valve tuning you talk about as a cause for blow by. Do you mean the seating of the valves or the timing of the valves in relation to the combustion cycle?

Also I know that the whole idea behind the B series motors was for small displacement, and high revving features. However, and this is the important part, Honda knows that these motors are not going to be raced everyday all day long. These are after all motors that were made for pedestrian cars, not race cars. So to offset the extreme power gains in the higher RPMs they made some concessions to make for a decent power delivery in the lower to midrange RPMs. Also VTEC was also advantageous for yes having extra power in the higher RPMs but it was also looked at a way to get around smog issues in North America. Honda knows that the smogging of the cars in North America consists of a hard pull to 55mph followed by a short consistent run at that speed and I believe also 65 as well. If done conservatively this won't even engage the VTEC camshafts. Honda, knowing this, optimized the lower end for cruising, efficiency, and mid range power. All the while tuning the higher RPMs after VTEC engagement for all out power. In fact this was one of the reasons that the Type R took so long to get here. This was because the power delivery before VTEC was optimized for more power in its midrange and as a result would not pass smog. Now even in Japan the motors were still given a decent power delivery so that the car would not exhibit a Jekyl and Hyde characteristic during hard runs. After all, the switchover to VTEC is pretty drastic as is and that can lead to problems when driving at the limit and trying to handle a car in those conditions. After all I don't think Honda would have made the switchover so drastic so as to upset the delicate balance that they have in the handling characteristics of the car. And as a credit to the Honda engineers I believe knowing this they designed the engines to at least have some modest midrange power. Which would be lower than the VTEC switchover. One of the ways to offset this was to have a longer intake manifold for the Type R. Now the CRV that you refer to would have been overkill in this application and that's why it isn't used. The Type R is after all a high revving motor. And interestingly enough if the GSR intake manifold was the best then why do you admit that the Type R intake manifold is better and has been retrofitted to the GSR motor for years. You said it yourself that the GSR intake manifold was the shortest and fattest of ANY B series motor. Not that I agree with you but you’re the one who is contradicting yourself.

Although, I admit to a slight wording error, I didn't mean to say the bottom end of the RPM band but rather lower than VTEC. I was after all tired and upset.

Also, you say, as a parting shot, that the AEM intake makes power strictly because of the cold air. Despite the fact that Sport Compact Car dynoed the AEM intake verses several other intakes and noticing the biggest increase in torque over the other brands in the lower to midrange RPM band despite even including a ram air intake in the line up (which would in theory have the coldest most dense air (just for clarity it was the iceman intake with the headlight replacement ram air scoop for the 92-95 Civic)). Yes they also noticed power gains in the higher RPM bands but not any more than the rest despite the other shorter intakes drawing in hot air from the engine bays.

In hindsight I wasn't as contradictory as you claim. Although I was perhaps not as clear, as I should have been. In conclusion, my opinion is that although the B series motors are made to make their power in the higher RPM bands with some power to be found in the mid range and lower RPM bands because it was engineered to be there.

Now please don't take me off these boards just because you poked and I poked back. That would be a gross abuse of your power. But rather respect me and I'll respect you. As you can see I don't always "lay into people" and I can after all learn a thing or too also. Perhaps realize that most actions are not unprovoked but instead re-actions to attitudes around us.

[2ndGenTeg]

I'm going to use engine codes because I think "GSR" is where you got confused. If you reread my post, you can see I believe the B17A (2nd Gen GSR) manifold to be the best, not the B18C (3rd Gen GSR). I wasn't contradicting, I believe you misread what I said. I believe the B18C5 (Type R) manifold runners to be shorter than the B18C to produce high end power. Please feel free to prove me wrong. Keep in mind that the GSR manifold is "snail shell" design- it actually curves around the manifold a bit, making the runners longer than they appear.

Your statement on emissions was educational, but irrelevant. I believe the B18C5 is made for high end power, with little concern for the low end. The GS-R, on the other hand, with its longer runners, is made for performing a little better in daily driving conditions- less aggressive camshafts, lower VTEC point, and longer runners. I suppose our entire debate rests on which runners are longer. Until then, we could go on forever.

And on the intakes: You don't get a ram air effect until traveling at approximately mach .5, much less standing still on the dyno. And the problem with the Iceman intakes is their funnel design is restrictive to airflow unless it is being pushed (as in a ram air situation or FI) rather than pulled in through the throttle body. On the note of diameter, the smaller diameter AEM intake is better because it maintains proper pressure on the throttle body, and therefore higher charge air velocity. In addition, I can also explain the higher gains in the lower RPMs. The AEM has an advantage throughout the powerband due to its cold air induction. However, at higher RPMs a shorter intake is desirable because it permits a higher charge air velocity, crucial at high RPMs. So the AEM wins in the low end due to the cooler air, but ties in the high end with a gain due to a cooler charge air, but a loss in charge air velocity due to its longer length.

I don't know about you, but I'm sick of bickering, and it's not something I normally do. As for the quote above, I can see how you could take that- It's a shame you can't hear tone of voice on a message board. It would have saved us some trouble. It's clear we both know our shit, and there's no need to bicker. I don't even moderate this forum, so there can be no gross abuse of power. Even if there could be, I wouldn't ban you for debating with me. I would however, ban you for talking down to me or other members. This doesn't need to be said here- I'll talk to you in PM, and we can bury the hatchet there.

Hey, I'm cool with you if your cool with me. We're all going to be a couple of Fonzies. K? As for Incubus. I love Incubus man. He's my best friend. We've worked together and we hang out together. So actually my comments to him were in all earnest meant to be answered honestly. I really did want to know what else he though should have been done to prepare a Type R head for FI. Cause I certainly couldn't think of anything else.
I do agree though that we need more and more smilies. Cause they kick ass and they need to show our feelings and entonations when we write to each other. I know you know your stuff. We just differ in opinion on some topics and misunderstood each other in others. However I believe that we have failed each other on some level. Seeing as we both have a high degree of knowledge in this area we should rather compare notes and make a good thread for the other readers to enjoy. Because, although we desseminate information when we debate it isn't the most efficient means of communication or the most enjoyable. Regrettably we have both erred and seeing that we understand this we should move on and work together to make this thread what it was supposed to have been.

So. I'm really curious. I would really like to know more about your reference about the blow by relating to the valves. I also would like to know what you think of the Toda package to eliminate the VTEC system and if you think you could incorporate this into your B17A killer motor? Also if you were to go Turbo which intake manifold would you pick?

I'm also curious as to the flow dynamics within the Intake of the AEM filter system. Only because I'm not quite sure how the velocity would be higher at the tip of the intake nearer the filter and slower toward the throttle? 2 things bother me about this scenario. First of all there is actually a pulsating flow because of valves closing and valves opening while air is rushing in to fill the vacum behind the valves. And the fact that the motor is essentially an air pump which pulls air and therefore should increase the velocity of the volume of air as it gets closer to the throttle. I would think very much like the way water spins faster as it gets closer to the center of a vortex. Lets talk about this and make this thread interesting.

The Type R intake manifold does indeed have shorter runners for high RPM power. I've got the literature to prove it. I don't think that's the issue anymore though.
I wholeheartedly agree that the Type R is pretty much a high RPM vehicle. If you don't believe me, toxy, i'll show you the videos I have of me racing at the track against my buddies type R. I was actually in the lead until about 3rd gear when he got traction and hit the sweet spot of his power band.
Now, I'm loath to say the whole "when VTEC" kicked in, but I've got it on video and he wasn't pulling on me until he was in the higher RPM range and my B18B couldn't hang at that level.

Also, I could be wrong, but was 2ndGen talking about overlap when it comes the the aggressive cam profiles on a VTEC (Type R) engine? From what I've read, especially with the Type R cams, overlap can be a problem when under pressure.

Anyway, when I was talking about the pros and cons of the GSR and Type R head, I was speaking from the point of money not being an object and having the "perfect" setup. I know you can understand that, toxy, as that's usually the viewpoint we take when talking about cars. But don't get me wrong, I think both heads are great for FI applications and mainly comes to availability, affordability, and application. hehe the 3 A's. Anyway, as you know, toxy, if I were doing a engine and were pulling out all the stops, I'd definitely use the Type R head. As far as the GSR head, you know I play devil's advocate, and was just saying that the GSR head isn't a bad way to go also.

Hehe.....I remember the day that Trong proved you wrong with the whole Integras not having sway bars argument. We all make silly mistakes. I think this thread should be renamed to be called "It's ok if you screw up"

Hey I guess everyone's been busy lately. It seems like the Cali peeps have been quite for a while now.

I'm never quiet!

Originally posted by Toxygene
So. I'm really curious. I would really like to know more about your reference about the blow by relating to the valves.

Did you ever get your answer?

Here goes...
The blow-by comes from the intake and exhaust valves being open at the same time during the intake stroke(I'm referring to the intake stroke related to intake/compression/power/exhaust cycle: 4-stroke). There is a certain amount of this on all modern internal combustion engines. When you have high-duration cam(s) timing, the "overlap" of the intake and exhaust usually increases, depending on lobe centerline/separation angle for the most part. Reason for this- it helps to "scavenge" the combustion chamber, that is to "push out" the spent gases and "suck in" the intake charge, depending on which cycle the engine is in at that moment. The more overlap, the greater the scavenging effect, which at high rpms, makes power due to the high velocity of the valvetrain and the relatively low time for which the valves are opened. At lower RPM, the valves basically "hang" open for much too long(time-wise) allowing: unburned fuel(and compression with it) to go straight out the exhaust valve, power loss due to the valve opening on the "down" side of the power stroke(right prior to the exhaust stroke), and also allowing exhaust gases to cross contaminate the intake side of things when the exhaust/intake crossover happens. All of these lead to power loss *at low rpm*. Not surprisingly, this is why big cams won't pass smog. They let unburned gas out into the exhaust system, thus putting the HC count into the stratosphere. Turn the motor up a notch, wind it to where it's meant to breathe, and things start flowing like they're supposed to and you'll be in the power band.

Can I just say that VTEC "kicking in" is kind of a hoax? I know it turns on and everything, but it truly is gradual. It's just that once you get to the right point in the powerband/rpm range, these little B series motors really sing. That goes for the vtec and non-vtec as well. The vtec just extends the powerband. The gs-r has that funny dual length intake runner switchover at around 6000 rpm, which is what sounds like what people think vtec is... and by "people" I don't mean those in this thread, or at this site, just "people" in general. The average, uninformed idiot j/k

I can go on and on about this. I don't claim to be 100% correct, but I have a fair understanding of engine internals. I used to build v-8s, chevy and fords... the principles are still the same, it's just the implementation that's changed here. If anyone thinks I know what I'm talking about and they want clarification, I'd be more than happy to expound on what I've mentioned here. Happy Honda'ing.
J