hey everyone im new this forum i just got a 92 prelude si. my question is what would the best setup be coming from your guys opinion. h23 turbo or h22 turbo. ive only seen kits for h22's and the h23 has lower compression if im not correct. sorry for the dumb question but if anyone can help me out

 

If you want to go turbo, then stay H23.

If you want to go all motor, go H22.

 

wurd, I think you should stick with the h23 if you want to turbo as well.

but you also have to take into consideration that your stock h23 probably

wont last long boosting on stock internals.

You're gonna want to build up a strong block to be able to handle

any considerable amount of boost.

Which means sleeving your block, balancing it, forged rods, pistons, etc.

That alone is gonna run you close to 3 grand.

BTW: Welcome to Honda-Tech

 

Here's the deal. As was suggested if you want to turbo then keep the H23. It's better for the turbo and the compression is perfect for it. Around 9:0 or something like that. You could boost it on stock internals however this isn't "good" for obvious reasons, but it still should be reliable as long as you keep boost low and maintain it. You can run around 6~8 pounds but I even have heard of stories of people running 10 on stock internals with some damn good tuning. Your best bet would then be to rebuild the motor, sleeves, rods pistons etc. and could then boost the **** out of it. If you turbo the H22 already your going to run into more problems because of it's higher compression. 10:0 or something of that nature. If I were you what I would do is first get a compression/leakdown test just to see how strong your engine is running. If that's good then I would turbo it as is on stock internals keep the boost low 6~8lbs or so and get it tuned good and such. Then save and rebuild the engine to handle more.

 

so from what you guys are saying h23 turbo would be best. and of course a fully built engine . its just like saying im going ls/turbo. does anyone from here have turbo setup on their lude? thanks again guys

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 94Vtecluder &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Here's the deal. As was suggested if you want to turbo then keep the H23. It's better for the turbo and the compression is perfect for it. Around 9:0 or something like that. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Actually, the h23 has 9.8:1 compression, only .2 less than the h22a1-a4

The problem is weak ringlands.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by SKDRCR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Actually, the h23 has 9.8:1 compression, only .2 less than the h22a1-a4

The problem is weak ringlands.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Owned!

Really tho? I thought the H23 had a decent amount less compression than the h22?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 94Vtecluder &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Owned!

Really tho? I thought the H23 had a decent amount less compression than the h22?</TD></TR></TABLE>

You're probably thinking of the f22. I believe it has 8.8:1 compression

 

man the f22 has some low compression. maybe i should just get that. jk. so since h23 and h22 is just .2 difference would h23 still be better?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by jaydemlude &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">man the f22 has some low compression. maybe i should just get that. jk. so since h23 and h22 is just .2 difference would h23 still be better?</TD></TR></TABLE>

yes, the h23 has a different tranny (m2s4)

which has better gearing for boosting

longer 3rd and 4th gears i believe.