ismkv8s

Has anyone tried to do this???

www.megameet.org

.........

www.megameet.org

you cant. Only with one engine, it was a dohc d series engine. Non vtec. But forget that.

"Yes. It is out of the 1989 Integra and is close to the JDM ZC motor. The heads are basically the same. The ZC had 134hp and as I understand it the 89 Integra was around the same. D series SOHC trans are a bolt-on affair.

No, you can't put a VTEC head on it.

No, you shouldn't swap one into your car." Per phunhaus

ismkv8s

what are you talking about?? I was wondering if anyone had tried this like the h2b or the h/f to d from besi???

StorminMatt

So we are talking about a B2D adaptor here? If so, I don't think anyone has tried it because there is no point in it unless you are a complete cheapskate. But even then, by the time you actually bought the adaptor plate, you are probably WAYYY ahead of the cost of a B-series transmission anyway. So just go with a B-series transmission. Not only would it be cheaper than an adaptor plate. It would also be stronger. So even if it then costs less to replace your D-series transmission with another D-series transmission, you will likely be doing it ALOT more often (thus negating any cost savings). Oh, and let's not forget that D-series axles are non equal length and weaker.

www.megameet.org

that would have helped metioniong that in the first post.

ismkv8s

you can use an intermediate. And the d series have stronger stubby gears insted of longer thinner gears.
And it was in the title!

v4lu3s

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by StorminMatt &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">So we are talking about a B2D adaptor here? If so, I don't think anyone has tried it because there is no point in it unless you are a complete cheapskate. But even then, by the time you actually bought the adaptor plate, you are probably WAYYY ahead of the cost of a B-series transmission anyway. So just go with a B-series transmission. Not only would it be cheaper than an adaptor plate. It would also be stronger. So even if it then costs less to replace your D-series transmission with another D-series transmission, you will likely be doing it ALOT more often (thus negating any cost savings). Oh, and let's not forget that D-series axles are non equal length and weaker.</TD></TR></TABLE>

why would you repalce the D series tranny more often? that goes against what Bisi has said about the D series trannies.

StorminMatt

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by v4lu3s &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

why would you repalce the D series tranny more often? that goes against what Bisi has said about the D series trannies.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Because Bisi doesn't drive his car 20000+ miles a year. And remember, Bisi doesn't use D-series stuff because it is better.

thursday

I think it is important to note that the d16a1 transmission bolt pattern is different from all 88-00 SOHC d series transmissions and the JDM ones as well, including the JDM DOHC ZC.

this is one of the many differences between the a1 and the dohc zc.

http://bisimoto.com/wst_page10.html

v4lu3s

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by StorminMatt &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Because Bisi doesn't drive his car 20000+ miles a year. And remember, Bisi doesn't use D-series stuff because it is better.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Many may ask, "Why the D-series transmission?" These transmissions are plentiful and very cost effective. Since many popular Honda chassis come with these transmissions from factory, factory style axles, mounts, shift linkages, and gearbox sensors can economically remain intact.



[B]Strength of the individual gears is also a big plus. Unlike their B-series bretheren, D-based gears are "stubby", and take well to abuse.[b] Favorite transboxes include, but not limited to, the '86 to '89 Acura Integra D16A1, and the '97+ Civic ex (due to the ferrous based shiftforks).

StorminMatt

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by v4lu3s &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Many may ask, "Why the D-series transmission?" These transmissions are plentiful and very cost effective. Since many popular Honda chassis come with these transmissions from factory, factory style axles, mounts, shift linkages, and gearbox sensors can economically remain intact.



[B]Strength of the individual gears is also a big plus. Unlike their B-series bretheren, D-based gears are "stubby", and take well to abuse.[b] Favorite transboxes include, but not limited to, the '86 to '89 Acura Integra D16A1, and the '97+ Civic ex (due to the ferrous based shiftforks).</TD></TR></TABLE>

I cannot comment specifically on the strength of B-series vs D-series gears since I have not compared them side by side. But if they are so strong, why are more people not using them? Why has someone not already made an adaptor plate? Why are all the guys with 600+HP turbocharged drag B-series motors using B-series transmissions? And finally, why would Honda (a VERY cost-conscious company that is VERY much into engineering their stuff to be strong, but no stronger than needed) make transmissions for weaker motors stronger than transmissions for more powerful motors? I will believe D-series transmisions are better the day that Hasport starts making kits to use them with B-series motors.

bluemax189

because guys with 600+hp cars can afford to beef up their trannies, and they are running most likely b series engines, which dont take d series trannies.

v4lu3s

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by StorminMatt &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I cannot comment specifically on the strength of B-series vs D-series gears since I have not compared them side by side. But if they are so strong, why are more people not using them? Why has someone not already made an adaptor plate? Why are all the guys with 600+HP turbocharged drag B-series motors using B-series transmissions? And finally, why would Honda (a VERY cost-conscious company that is VERY much into engineering their stuff to be strong, but no stronger than needed) make transmissions for weaker motors stronger than transmissions for more powerful motors? I will believe D-series transmisions are better the day that Hasport starts making kits to use them with B-series motors.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Maybe you need to tell Bisi that he is doing it wrong then and that you know more than he does....obviously he isnt making 600+ whp since he only runs high 9s all motor. But for real, you should go tell him he is a fool for his beliefs and that his experience as a degreed engineer means nothing since there isnt a D2B adapter available for sale on Honda-Tech.

SwissChEz82

I'm sure its possible, they're putting B trannys on H blocks but not without some sort of adapter plate. My question is why?

StorminMatt

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by v4lu3s &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Maybe you need to tell Bisi that he is doing it wrong then and that you know more than he does....obviously he isnt making 600+ whp since he only runs high 9s all motor. But for real, you should go tell him he is a fool for his beliefs and that his experience as a degreed engineer means nothing since there isnt a D2B adapter available for sale on Honda-Tech.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Bisi is running a D-series transmission because that's what he knows and that's what he is comfortable with. The same goes for his use of carbs vs EFI. But keep in mind that for racing applications, longevity is not a major concern. If a D-series transmission is what you like, then it is OKAY in this sort of situation. But I would not run one with my ITR swap. The LAST thing I want is to have a transmission blow up on me while climbing Tioga Pass on the east side of Yosemite. It's a long ways home from there. And there is no cell phone service there. It is precisely this sort of thing that you need not concern yourself with if the car is to be trailered to a track and driven a quarter mile at a time.

0Bisimoto

Not true, Matt. I run certain combo because of my testing. Have you payed attention to all the b transmission that go south at events...even in the all motor class? Take some time to take apart a d-tranny, and a b-unit. Compare the two. Then find the ubiquitous blown B transmission. Pay attention to the damaged parts.

I do not know why Honda designed the d-gearboxes to take well to abuse, especially the D16A1 units; but instead of judging based on factory output of the engines thay are attached to, I take an unbiased approach to what works well, and has excellent longevity.

Do some reseach on the carb vs. injection atomization facts. Better yet, convert an injected car to sidedraft carburation. You will then see what I have seen and documented.

Those who know me well are aware that I embrace science, and what works well...not what I am comfortable with. I find change new, and exciting.

StorminMatt

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Bisimoto &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Do some reseach on the carb vs. injection atomization facts. Better yet, convert an injected car to sidedraft carburation. You will then see what I have seen and documented. </TD></TR></TABLE>

So what you're saying is that, despite the expenditure of millions of man-hours by the best and brightest and billions of dollars, the automotive industry would have been better off just sticking with carbs (admittedly, there was the complexity issue of feedback carbs, but that probably could have been overcome)? And that despite the myriad of different injectors with all sorts of different spray patterns out there, there is nothing better than a simple main jet operating over a small pressure difference when it comes to atomizing fuel? This is why I have such a hard time believing (not to mention the fact that I considered the day I got my first EFI vehicle to be cause for celebration). I don't doubt that any of this doesn't work for you. I just have a hard time believing that it is actually the best way possible, especially since basically the whole world seems to think otherwise on the issue. Now I certainly give you props for rising to the challenge of doing what you do with what you have. But I also believe that there is a better way.


Modified by StorminMatt at 8:20 PM 2/14/2006

v4lu3s

carbs make more power than fuel injection.
EFIis there for economy and part throttle drivability.

if fuel injection was the be all and end all why does nascar still use carbs? and make ungodly power? if carbs are such a terrible thing how come pro stock cars run 6's with them?

jsut because all you know is fuel injection doesnt mean that there isnt a whole different world out there.

StorminMatt

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by v4lu3s &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">if fuel injection was the be all and end all why does nascar still use carbs? and make ungodly power? if carbs are such a terrible thing how come pro stock cars run 6's with them?</TD></TR></TABLE>

NASCAR uses carbs because the rules of NASCAR require them. NASCAR looks at EFI as giving an 'unfair advantage' to those who can 'afford' to use it. Of course, this decision was made back when EFI was actually a more expensive way to go than carbs. As for pro stock cars running 6s with them, I never said such things can't be done. But it's not like EFI couldn't support such times. Just that carbs are not the best way to go. Look at it this way. If carbs are so great, then why are more not people using them? And as for EFI being just for fuel economy, emissions, and part-throttle operation, I have to disagree. EFI certainly is advantageous in terms on these sorts of things. But it's not like that's all it's good for. With the flexibility of user programmable engine management and a wide variety of different flowrates and spray patterns (not to mention ITBs), anything is possible.

SIXTY

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

carbs are not the best way to go. Look at it this way. If carbs are so great, then why are more not people using them? </TD></TR></TABLE>
So you just go along with the pack?

v4lu3s

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by StorminMatt &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">NASCAR uses carbs because the rules of NASCAR require them. NASCAR looks at EFI as giving an 'unfair advantage' to those who can 'afford' to use it. Of course, this decision was made back when EFI was actually a more expensive way to go than carbs. As for pro stock cars running 6s with them, I never said such things can't be done. But it's not like EFI couldn't support such times. Just that carbs are not the best way to go. Look at it this way. If carbs are so great, then why are more not people using them? And as for EFI being just for fuel economy, emissions, and part-throttle operation, I have to disagree. EFI certainly is advantageous in terms on these sorts of things. But it's not like that's all it's good for. With the flexibility of user programmable engine management and a wide variety of different flowrates and spray patterns (not to mention ITBs), anything is possible. </TD></TR></TABLE>


there are a LOT more carbed cars running sub 8 second all motor 1/4 miles than there are fuel injected.
people who know a lot more than you or me cite the emissions, economy and part throttle perofrmance of EFI versus the more peak power of a carb all the time. get out of the import world sometime and see what other speed industries are doing.

ismkv8s

Very true carbs are easyer to tune and the atomize fuel better( look at the kit they sell for ITB to place the injectors in front of the air horns) most of all the fast busas are running fast by gast carbs insted of efi.

d16dcoe45

High-end individual runner carbs give not only more power on the top (when sized and setup properly) but also good low-end and mid-range (although probably not as good as an ITB injection setup) Once you put a set of Webers or other side-draft carbs set up properly on a car--you will be AMAZED--throttle response, power, carbs are awesome!! It surprised me, but I have a non-vtec d16 with a huge cam--when it was fuel injected it didn't pull enough vacuum at idle to operated the brake booster--with the Webers it idles even lower and the power brakes work at any rpm. The advantage injection has over carbs say in Nascar would be if the race started with the sun out at 90 degrees--100 miles later say it was overcast and 75 degrees--the carbs have no way of adjusting for that--but injection of course could compensate. Carbs lose nothing in the way of ultimate power to injection.