Type-S - Euro-R : Wheres the Difference?
02-07-2007, 09:33 AM
#26
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: handing you your ass
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (mgags7)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mgags7 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">one of the big deals honda made about the type s on their website was about the bigger exhaust manifold and exhaust they used on the type s
its also in the SAE article on it.
btw you drive a lude with a euro r swap in it? I'm in raleigh also....</TD></TR></TABLE>
it was a euro r swap in a 4th gen... all thats left now thats euro r is the head and tranny...its turbo now, 89X95 and i just bought a gt35r for it.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Revi »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Thats pretty much what i wanted to hear, i just wanted to make sure the Type-S intake manifold did have anything special that made it equal to the Euro-R. I didnt want to spend money on a Euro-R manifold only to not make any power.
So i will go either Euro-R or maybe even the Skunk2 Pro Manifold( ) Do i dare? LOL.</TD></TR></TABLE>
i would be apprehensive to believe that..both motors are rated at the same power and the euro r plenum is small..you could make much better use of those cams with a bigger plenum...i'm running a venom manifold now..flows alot more cfm.
its also in the SAE article on it.
btw you drive a lude with a euro r swap in it? I'm in raleigh also....</TD></TR></TABLE>
it was a euro r swap in a 4th gen... all thats left now thats euro r is the head and tranny...its turbo now, 89X95 and i just bought a gt35r for it.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Revi »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Thats pretty much what i wanted to hear, i just wanted to make sure the Type-S intake manifold did have anything special that made it equal to the Euro-R. I didnt want to spend money on a Euro-R manifold only to not make any power.
So i will go either Euro-R or maybe even the Skunk2 Pro Manifold( ) Do i dare? LOL.</TD></TR></TABLE>
i would be apprehensive to believe that..both motors are rated at the same power and the euro r plenum is small..you could make much better use of those cams with a bigger plenum...i'm running a venom manifold now..flows alot more cfm.
02-07-2007, 09:42 AM
#28
Re: (vinuneuro)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by vinuneuro »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The Skunk2 mani is not very good at all. Unless, the Type-S has a different mani than regualr H22, the EuroR would be the way to go.</TD></TR></TABLE>
whats wrong with a Skunk 2 manifold, besides the ONLY 2 dynos that ive seen on here, which are like 2 years old now, with the guys setups had very different motor setups
whats wrong with a Skunk 2 manifold, besides the ONLY 2 dynos that ive seen on here, which are like 2 years old now, with the guys setups had very different motor setups
02-07-2007, 09:51 AM
#29
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Mykizism)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mykizism »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
whats wrong with a Skunk 2 manifold, besides the ONLY 2 dynos that ive seen on here, which are like 2 years old now, with the guys setups had very different motor setups</TD></TR></TABLE>
you lose ALOT of your midrange power. its worthless unless you are trying to make very high rpm power only.
whats wrong with a Skunk 2 manifold, besides the ONLY 2 dynos that ive seen on here, which are like 2 years old now, with the guys setups had very different motor setups</TD></TR></TABLE>
you lose ALOT of your midrange power. its worthless unless you are trying to make very high rpm power only.
02-07-2007, 09:54 AM
#30
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 1,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Missing Gears)
I was refering to the New and Improved Skunk2 Pro series manifold. You know, they one they claim will out power the Euro-R by 8whp? 
Ive seen dynoes of the old S2 mani but i dont think anyone has tried the new pro series.
Ive seen dynoes of the old S2 mani but i dont think anyone has tried the new pro series.
02-07-2007, 09:54 AM
#31
Re: (Missing Gears)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Missing Gears »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
you lose ALOT of your midrange power. its worthless unless you are trying to make very high rpm power only.</TD></TR></TABLE>
do you have any dynos to show that?
im really curious, to see the real differences of that vs stock or vs euro then to hear the same thing over and over again, with no real proof of this.. besides ppl word of mouth or regurgitating the same info over and over again
you lose ALOT of your midrange power. its worthless unless you are trying to make very high rpm power only.</TD></TR></TABLE>
do you have any dynos to show that?
im really curious, to see the real differences of that vs stock or vs euro then to hear the same thing over and over again, with no real proof of this.. besides ppl word of mouth or regurgitating the same info over and over again
02-07-2007, 09:56 AM
#32
Re: (Revi)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Revi »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I was refering to the New and Improved Skunk2 Pro series manifold. You know, they one they claim will out power the Euro-R by 8whp?
Ive seen dynoes of the old S2 mani but i dont think anyone has tried the new pro series.</TD></TR></TABLE>
i wasnt aware there are two Skunk 2 manifolds?? the one i have is when they first came out.. so im assuming i have the old version?? anyone have a pic of the new version?
Ive seen dynoes of the old S2 mani but i dont think anyone has tried the new pro series.</TD></TR></TABLE>
i wasnt aware there are two Skunk 2 manifolds?? the one i have is when they first came out.. so im assuming i have the old version?? anyone have a pic of the new version?
02-07-2007, 10:02 AM
#33
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Mykizism)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mykizism »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
do you have any dynos to show that?
im really curious, to see the real differences of that vs stock or vs euro then to hear the same thing over and over again, with no real proof of this.. besides ppl word of mouth or regurgitating the same info over and over again</TD></TR></TABLE>
there is another thread called "advice on my n/a build, euror, type s" its on the 2nd page now i believe. go check it out.
do you have any dynos to show that?
im really curious, to see the real differences of that vs stock or vs euro then to hear the same thing over and over again, with no real proof of this.. besides ppl word of mouth or regurgitating the same info over and over again</TD></TR></TABLE>
there is another thread called "advice on my n/a build, euror, type s" its on the 2nd page now i believe. go check it out.
02-07-2007, 10:03 AM
#34
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 1,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Mykizism)
Last i looked they look very similar but i will try to fetch some pics. Also the power loss with the S2 mani was on n/a cars mykizism, since you are boosted i believe the s2 manifold works well.
02-07-2007, 10:04 AM
#35
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Missing Gears)
the only difference between the old skunk i/ms and the "pro series" is a smoother casting. i used to deal w/ skunk weekly as we sold their products where i used to work. theres not a big difference between the two.
02-07-2007, 11:51 AM
#38
Re: (cifer6425)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by cifer6425 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">so a euro r IM with type S cams would be an ideal set up?</TD></TR></TABLE>
using the word "ideal" loosely, yes.
using the word "ideal" loosely, yes.
02-07-2007, 07:52 PM
#39
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: FL, us
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (PreludeZ)
the ATR, Euro-R and Prelude Type-S/S-spec are all different. They all have higher lift cams, a ported head, more aggressive gearing, stock LSD, (or AttS) higher compression pistons (11.0:1),62mm throttle bodies, and a lighter crank. the slightly better cams (12.2 and 11.2), but he type-S has a the Dual stage manifold which engages earlier and has a larger top portion than regular H22s, it also had a more aggressive header and also exclusive active ABS. I summize that the plenums are larger as well
the Euro-R and ATR also benefitted in power output from the electronic assist as opposed to power steering pumps, as well as the single stage intake manifold. both engines feel different, the type-S having the brunt lower end like the H22 SiR, but the Euro-R relatively has a decidely stronger pull up top, & I've never driven a ATR, so one can only guess, but I am trying to get into one soon.
still 209hp vs 217hp may also have root in ecu tuning.
the Euro-R and ATR also benefitted in power output from the electronic assist as opposed to power steering pumps, as well as the single stage intake manifold. both engines feel different, the type-S having the brunt lower end like the H22 SiR, but the Euro-R relatively has a decidely stronger pull up top, & I've never driven a ATR, so one can only guess, but I am trying to get into one soon.
still 209hp vs 217hp may also have root in ecu tuning.
02-07-2007, 08:04 PM
#40
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 1,664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (gogunkergorilla)
Good question Revi, I too wondered what the difference were between these engines. I've heard from countless peeps that the engines themselves are the same, cams, headwork etc, with the exception of maybe different valve angles or something. As far as I know the physical parts themselves are the same. But there are people who will tell you they are different.
Now as far as the engines go.
H22A (Euro-R Spec)
217hp@7200/163tq/@6800
Accord Euro-R (CL1) (JDM)
notes: Type-S head and cams 11:1 CR, single stage manifold,
H22A (S-spec)
Prelude Type-S and Sir spec-S (BB6)
217@7200/163tq@6500
Notes: Type-S head and cams 11:1 CR, dual stage IM,
As you can see peak HP and TRQ numbers are the same, HOWEVER the R reaching it's torque peak 300 RPMS later which should be expected from the single runner IM design. What perplexes me in a sense is that I would expect a higher peak hp # outta the euro-r especially being that it reaches it's TRQ peak later, I would expect it to hold that torque better. So unless it just degrades at a rate that would allow it to have the same TRQ as the Type-S at 7200rpms, but I just can't see why that would happen especially being that the R IM is designed for high-end power. I'm not sure i'm expressing what i'm saying in a matter that is easily understood, but maybe Honda is lying? I don't know. Also I have heard from peeps that the normal USDM IM and the Type-S IM's have differences whether or not this is true I don't know. We need dynos.
Also what's the deal with this H23A VTEC engine.
Edit -- Here's an idea does anyone know how to look up European and Japanese part numbers?
Now as far as the engines go.
H22A (Euro-R Spec)
217hp@7200/163tq/@6800
Accord Euro-R (CL1) (JDM)
notes: Type-S head and cams 11:1 CR, single stage manifold,
H22A (S-spec)
Prelude Type-S and Sir spec-S (BB6)
217@7200/163tq@6500
Notes: Type-S head and cams 11:1 CR, dual stage IM,
As you can see peak HP and TRQ numbers are the same, HOWEVER the R reaching it's torque peak 300 RPMS later which should be expected from the single runner IM design. What perplexes me in a sense is that I would expect a higher peak hp # outta the euro-r especially being that it reaches it's TRQ peak later, I would expect it to hold that torque better. So unless it just degrades at a rate that would allow it to have the same TRQ as the Type-S at 7200rpms, but I just can't see why that would happen especially being that the R IM is designed for high-end power. I'm not sure i'm expressing what i'm saying in a matter that is easily understood, but maybe Honda is lying? I don't know. Also I have heard from peeps that the normal USDM IM and the Type-S IM's have differences whether or not this is true I don't know. We need dynos.
Also what's the deal with this H23A VTEC engine.
Edit -- Here's an idea does anyone know how to look up European and Japanese part numbers?
02-07-2007, 09:12 PM
#42
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 1,664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (mgags7)
Kinda OT again, but another engine I never knew anything about. I'd assume it uses a single stage IM making power that high. This is what i'm talking about the Euro-R I would think would hold it's trq longer and have a higher peak hp all things being equal, tune, exaust systems etc.
Transmission: LSD Hydraulic
Year: 97+
Compression Ratio: 11.0
HP/Torque: 215hp@8000/145lb-ft@7500
Redline: 8200
notes: (ported head and type-s cams(12.1, 11.2 lift), 2.0L block 11:1cr 85mm pistons
Transmission: LSD Hydraulic
Year: 97+
Compression Ratio: 11.0
HP/Torque: 215hp@8000/145lb-ft@7500
Redline: 8200
notes: (ported head and type-s cams(12.1, 11.2 lift), 2.0L block 11:1cr 85mm pistons
02-07-2007, 09:23 PM
#44
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 1,664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (mgags7)
ya never knew there was a lude swappable engine that could rev so high stock and make power. Not that, that actually matters either, just never knew.....
02-07-2007, 09:35 PM
#45
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (94Vtecluder)
Can anyone answer why the Type-S shares the same shitty gearing with the SH / regular H22 transmissions?
94vtecluder: Where are you getting your info?
94vtecluder: Where are you getting your info?
02-07-2007, 09:42 PM
#46
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 1,664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (vinuneuro)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by vinuneuro »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
94vtecluder: Where are you getting your info?</TD></TR></TABLE>
I just did a quick google of it.
http://www.jazzproparts.com/Pr...Specs
The rest of their engine specs seem to be on point.
94vtecluder: Where are you getting your info?</TD></TR></TABLE>
I just did a quick google of it.
http://www.jazzproparts.com/Pr...Specs
The rest of their engine specs seem to be on point.
02-08-2007, 02:20 AM
#47
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 1,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (vinuneuro)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by vinuneuro »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Can anyone answer why the Type-S shares the same shitty gearing with the SH / regular H22 transmissions?
94vtecluder: Where are you getting your info?</TD></TR></TABLE>
Well it has the same exact tranny from the SH, which really sucks. I wish they would of just made the bottom end of the Type-S just like the Euro-R with LSD.....but thats something i might do anyways in the future...
94vtecluder: Where are you getting your info?</TD></TR></TABLE>
Well it has the same exact tranny from the SH, which really sucks. I wish they would of just made the bottom end of the Type-S just like the Euro-R with LSD.....but thats something i might do anyways in the future...
02-08-2007, 07:00 AM
#48
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 6,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Revi)
Honda obv thought that ATTS was superior to LSDs if they used it in the Type-S, when the SiR had LSD.
Is there anyway you can examine your intake mani and compare it with your SH H22?
Is there anyway you can examine your intake mani and compare it with your SH H22?
02-08-2007, 07:31 AM
#49
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: FL, us
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Revi)
F20B specs you guys have are wrong.
The Sir-T in 97+ has the F20B had 200ps 198 and 20kgs 144lbs of torque. the automatic is detuned for 185/and 142. and it has a dual stage manifold. the torque peak is at 6600, and hp peak is a 7200rpm.
in addition the motor is undersquare and no where as rev happy as those numbers suggest.
the type-S/S-spec has MORE horsepower than the ATR and Euro-R. they are 210hp, and the Type-S/S-spec is 217hp.
the f20B transmission was the same as the lsd option in the 5th generation Prelude.
The Sir-T in 97+ has the F20B had 200ps 198 and 20kgs 144lbs of torque. the automatic is detuned for 185/and 142. and it has a dual stage manifold. the torque peak is at 6600, and hp peak is a 7200rpm.
in addition the motor is undersquare and no where as rev happy as those numbers suggest.
the type-S/S-spec has MORE horsepower than the ATR and Euro-R. they are 210hp, and the Type-S/S-spec is 217hp.
the f20B transmission was the same as the lsd option in the 5th generation Prelude.
02-08-2007, 08:34 AM
#50
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 1,664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (P13_mein)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by P13_mein »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">F20B specs you guys have are wrong.
The Sir-T in 97+ has the F20B had 200ps 198 and 20kgs 144lbs of torque. the automatic is detuned for 185/and 142. and it has a dual stage manifold. the torque peak is at 6600, and hp peak is a 7200rpm.
in addition the motor is undersquare and no where as rev happy as those numbers suggest.
the type-S/S-spec has MORE horsepower than the ATR and Euro-R. they are 210hp, and the Type-S/S-spec is 217hp.
the f20B transmission was the same as the lsd option in the 5th generation Prelude.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I was skeptical too, but I'll look around more, I'm finding other sheyot that is blowing my mind right now. Like this...
2. SiR S package Sedan FF AT Gasoline 1997 F20B GH-CF4 $19500
3. 2.0VTS 4WD leather package Sedan 4WD AT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CF5 $19500
4. SiR Sedan FF AT Gasoline 1997 F20B GH-CF4 $18300
5. 2.0VTS 4WD Sedan 4WD AT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CF5 $18300
6. 2.0VTS leather package Sedan FF AT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CL3 $17900
7. 2.0VTS leather package Sedan FF MT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CL3 $17100
8. 2.0VTS 4WD F type Sedan 4WD AT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CF5 $17000
9. 2.0VTS Sedan FF AT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CL3 $16600
10. 2.0VTS Sedan FF MT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CL3 $15800
4WD...WTF?
http://www.cars-directory.net/...000_6
http://asia.vtec.net/specs/acc....html
http://www.accord-specs.info/specs/2001_may/
Am I a idiot for not knowing this? lol
Edit -- Also in an old thread on here peeps seem to think it does have a 8200redline and 9K fuel cut. Again not that reving that high is 00ber cool or anything but just something I never knew out of a prelude/accord engine.
https://honda-tech.com/zerothre...44874
Edit X2 -- A nice thread where Satan drops mad knowledge about the engine. Open deck, no FRM liners, stronger rods/bolts to make it rev happy etc. What happened to this guy.
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=754295&page=1
Modified by 94Vtecluder at 12:54 PM 2/8/2007
The Sir-T in 97+ has the F20B had 200ps 198 and 20kgs 144lbs of torque. the automatic is detuned for 185/and 142. and it has a dual stage manifold. the torque peak is at 6600, and hp peak is a 7200rpm.
in addition the motor is undersquare and no where as rev happy as those numbers suggest.
the type-S/S-spec has MORE horsepower than the ATR and Euro-R. they are 210hp, and the Type-S/S-spec is 217hp.
the f20B transmission was the same as the lsd option in the 5th generation Prelude.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I was skeptical too, but I'll look around more, I'm finding other sheyot that is blowing my mind right now. Like this...
2. SiR S package Sedan FF AT Gasoline 1997 F20B GH-CF4 $19500
3. 2.0VTS 4WD leather package Sedan 4WD AT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CF5 $19500
4. SiR Sedan FF AT Gasoline 1997 F20B GH-CF4 $18300
5. 2.0VTS 4WD Sedan 4WD AT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CF5 $18300
6. 2.0VTS leather package Sedan FF AT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CL3 $17900
7. 2.0VTS leather package Sedan FF MT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CL3 $17100
8. 2.0VTS 4WD F type Sedan 4WD AT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CF5 $17000
9. 2.0VTS Sedan FF AT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CL3 $16600
10. 2.0VTS Sedan FF MT Gasoline 1997 F20B LA-CL3 $15800
4WD...WTF?
http://www.cars-directory.net/...000_6
http://asia.vtec.net/specs/acc....html
http://www.accord-specs.info/specs/2001_may/
Am I a idiot for not knowing this? lol
Edit -- Also in an old thread on here peeps seem to think it does have a 8200redline and 9K fuel cut. Again not that reving that high is 00ber cool or anything but just something I never knew out of a prelude/accord engine.
https://honda-tech.com/zerothre...44874
Edit X2 -- A nice thread where Satan drops mad knowledge about the engine. Open deck, no FRM liners, stronger rods/bolts to make it rev happy etc. What happened to this guy.
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=754295&page=1
Modified by 94Vtecluder at 12:54 PM 2/8/2007