Simple B20vtec build - 257hp 162tq
#28
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Durham, North Carolina, USA
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Simple B20vtec build - 257hp 162tq
How long do builds like this usually last being daily driven? Im really considering giving the turbo a break and building a N/A. I know ill miss the torque of boost but these sound awesome lol.
#32
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Re: Simple B20vtec build - 257hp 162tq
I helped plan the build and I did all the tuning. It was originally on crome, but we were having issues with the 2step and revlimiter, they were inconsistent at best, and we needed more ability to log things at the track so we switched to aem. The stock distributor wasnt playing nice w/the aem so I threw a cop/t1 trigger we had laying around on it.
Its in a full interior eg hatch, I think the fasted on 244hp was 12.2.
The only difference between the 2 runs is the head, the 244hp run had only a good valve job, 257 was after the rlz head. We'll be shifting around 10k w/the new head.. the car should go alot faster down the track.
The only thing to worry about with this build as far as longevity goes, is the fact that its still on stock sleeves.. 10k rpms on stock b20 sleeves is probably pushing it. Getting it to drive with out detonation on the low cam is also a concern w/the compression.
Last time on the dyno we tried a number of things, but I think the header is holding this motor back from making any more power. ( it is a small tube tri-y knock off) When we took the exhaust off it actually lost power. The only changes we'll be making this season will be in the header dept. The power is good, the main thing now is getting the car down the track.
Its in a full interior eg hatch, I think the fasted on 244hp was 12.2.
The only difference between the 2 runs is the head, the 244hp run had only a good valve job, 257 was after the rlz head. We'll be shifting around 10k w/the new head.. the car should go alot faster down the track.
The only thing to worry about with this build as far as longevity goes, is the fact that its still on stock sleeves.. 10k rpms on stock b20 sleeves is probably pushing it. Getting it to drive with out detonation on the low cam is also a concern w/the compression.
Last time on the dyno we tried a number of things, but I think the header is holding this motor back from making any more power. ( it is a small tube tri-y knock off) When we took the exhaust off it actually lost power. The only changes we'll be making this season will be in the header dept. The power is good, the main thing now is getting the car down the track.
#34
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
#35
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Paper Street
Posts: 3,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Simple B20vtec build - 257hp 162tq
Looks like you got some nice gains with the PNP. What is the A/F? The only thing I saw was that you have a big dip on the higher run compared to the first one. Is that where VTEC is or is that just the crossover? Maybe it's possible to richen it up down low to lose the dip and stop detonation?
P.S. What trans are you using B16 or GSR?
P.S. What trans are you using B16 or GSR?
#36
Re: Simple B20vtec build - 257hp 162tq
that head job is doing some serious work here
I've been kicking around the idea of doing basically the same build in my DD, different IM/header, but basically the same damn block and head/cam combo. This just makes me want to do it more.
I've been kicking around the idea of doing basically the same build in my DD, different IM/header, but basically the same damn block and head/cam combo. This just makes me want to do it more.
#37
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Nutley New Jersey
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Simple B20vtec build - 257hp 162tq
Just wanted to share what a good combination can do
this is a stock sleeve b20 block
8.25cc 84mm wiseco pistons
eagle rods
stock 89mm crank
skunk pro 2 cams
supertech springs and retainers
ferrea cheap valves (not the good ones but the cheaper ones)
CNC port work by BradZ at RLZ
Victor X intake manifold
Omnipower 70mm tb
small tube hytech knock off with 3 inch exhaust
93 pump gas
this is a stock sleeve b20 block
8.25cc 84mm wiseco pistons
eagle rods
stock 89mm crank
skunk pro 2 cams
supertech springs and retainers
ferrea cheap valves (not the good ones but the cheaper ones)
CNC port work by BradZ at RLZ
Victor X intake manifold
Omnipower 70mm tb
small tube hytech knock off with 3 inch exhaust
93 pump gas
#38
Re: Simple B20vtec build - 257hp 162tq
I helped plan the build and I did all the tuning. It was originally on crome, but we were having issues with the 2step and revlimiter, they were inconsistent at best, and we needed more ability to log things at the track so we switched to aem. The stock distributor wasnt playing nice w/the aem so I threw a cop/t1 trigger we had laying around on it.
Its in a full interior eg hatch, I think the fasted on 244hp was 12.2.
The only difference between the 2 runs is the head, the 244hp run had only a good valve job, 257 was after the rlz head. We'll be shifting around 10k w/the new head.. the car should go alot faster down the track.
The only thing to worry about with this build as far as longevity goes, is the fact that its still on stock sleeves.. 10k rpms on stock b20 sleeves is probably pushing it. Getting it to drive with out detonation on the low cam is also a concern w/the compression.
Last time on the dyno we tried a number of things, but I think the header is holding this motor back from making any more power. ( it is a small tube tri-y knock off) When we took the exhaust off it actually lost power. The only changes we'll be making this season will be in the header dept. The power is good, the main thing now is getting the car down the track.
Its in a full interior eg hatch, I think the fasted on 244hp was 12.2.
The only difference between the 2 runs is the head, the 244hp run had only a good valve job, 257 was after the rlz head. We'll be shifting around 10k w/the new head.. the car should go alot faster down the track.
The only thing to worry about with this build as far as longevity goes, is the fact that its still on stock sleeves.. 10k rpms on stock b20 sleeves is probably pushing it. Getting it to drive with out detonation on the low cam is also a concern w/the compression.
Last time on the dyno we tried a number of things, but I think the header is holding this motor back from making any more power. ( it is a small tube tri-y knock off) When we took the exhaust off it actually lost power. The only changes we'll be making this season will be in the header dept. The power is good, the main thing now is getting the car down the track.
which RLZ head is it? .. the street/strip, race, or outlaw? the dyno chart comparison showed great power increase from about 7k on , but it looks like it made less power before 7k. Is this due to the head or something else?
#39
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Re: Simple B20vtec build - 257hp 162tq
Not sure what he put on there, he just said.. "it's some good stuff"
the loss of power in the middle there is due to cam gear adjustments. With the stock head the power hit a wall at 9500 no matter what. Because of that I adjusted the gears accordingly which resulted in a bit more in the middle.
With the RLZ head the power stays flat through 10k rpms, so we dont need the power in the lower rpms since the motor is never there. shifting at 10k puts us in the fat part of the torque.
With the old head shifting at 9400 put it back in the fat part of the old torque curve... we dont need that part now that it makes power higher up in the rpms.
the loss of power in the middle there is due to cam gear adjustments. With the stock head the power hit a wall at 9500 no matter what. Because of that I adjusted the gears accordingly which resulted in a bit more in the middle.
With the RLZ head the power stays flat through 10k rpms, so we dont need the power in the lower rpms since the motor is never there. shifting at 10k puts us in the fat part of the torque.
With the old head shifting at 9400 put it back in the fat part of the old torque curve... we dont need that part now that it makes power higher up in the rpms.
#43
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Re: Simple B20vtec build - 257hp 162tq
Hit the dyno again today.. Tested a skunk2 alpha header (only thing we have been able to borrow with bigger tubes than what was on the car.)
Picked up about 5-8hp from 7000 on. It was interesting that the new header actually lost power with the same cam gear settings, I had to retard the intake cam 3 degrees to get any improvement in power. Any changes in the exhaust cam lost power. The cams were dialed in very well on the old header.
I forgot to send myself the dyno graphs, but we're happy w/the gains.
Hitting the track this weekend, hoping for 11's
Picked up about 5-8hp from 7000 on. It was interesting that the new header actually lost power with the same cam gear settings, I had to retard the intake cam 3 degrees to get any improvement in power. Any changes in the exhaust cam lost power. The cams were dialed in very well on the old header.
I forgot to send myself the dyno graphs, but we're happy w/the gains.
Hitting the track this weekend, hoping for 11's
#49
Re: Simple B20vtec build - 257hp 162tq
wow very nice, I was always under the impression that a header swap would require fuel tuning. I had no idea it needed as far as cam timing to be dialed in all over again
#50
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Re: Simple B20vtec build - 257hp 162tq
For timing.. its pretty simple.. flat around 30 degrees give or take one or 2 from 4500 up.
I did have to add a touch of fuel w/the new header but not much.
Exhaust pressure is key.. I really wish we had an exhaust pressure sensor in this car. Thats why the cam gear adjustments were needed. Small tubes = alot of pressure and require different amounts of overlap... at least thats what my logic is telling me.
I did have to add a touch of fuel w/the new header but not much.
Exhaust pressure is key.. I really wish we had an exhaust pressure sensor in this car. Thats why the cam gear adjustments were needed. Small tubes = alot of pressure and require different amounts of overlap... at least thats what my logic is telling me.