K-series: 2240cc vs. 1998cc dyno
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
K-series: 2240cc vs. 1998cc dyno
Just got back from the dyno. Brand new motor, broken in on the dyno.
The charts show a comparison between different setups that have two things in common: stock K20A2 cylinder head and IPS-K2 cams. The lower of the two runs is produced by a K20A2 with the basic performance bolt-ons, stock bottom end. The higher run is the result of increased displacement, more compression, better induction and exhaust systems. This test seeks to demonstrate the potential of the stock K20A2 cylinder head when paired with engineered peripheral mods. Hondata custom tuned both setups via their flagship product: K-Pro and Kmanager user programmable software.
Relevant details for the 1998cc K20A2 (11:1cr):
- IPS-K2 cams
- Stock cylinder head, stock block
- PRC intake manifold w/bored TB
- Hondata IMG
- CAI with Prototype Racing Intake-Bell
- DC Race Header
- 5 Zigen catback
- Hondata K-Pro
Relevant details for the 2240cc setup:
- IPS-K2 cams
- Stock K20A2 cylinder head
- Hondata IMG
- TWM 52mm ITB's
- 90mm bore
- 88mm stroke
- 12.8:1 fully built short block
- Burns Stainless 4-1 header (spec'd for stock K20A2 utilizing their X-Design software)
- Hondata K-Pro
In-depth information for this build can be found in these threads:
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1236383
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1195734
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1211485
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1211570
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1188287
-Ron
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Re: K-series: 2240cc vs. 1998cc dyno (cxcivic)
Completely stock head and valves. The piston was made specifically for the stock combustion chamber. If you have a chance to attend SEMA in Atlantic City this weekend, these pistons will be on display at the JE booth.
-Ron
-Ron
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Re: K-series: 2240cc vs. 1998cc dyno (b19coupe)
Thanks for the support guys. Remember, these are our "Entry level" cams targeted at the street. The profiles were designed for CFM seen with PRC manifold on a stock cylinder head, out through a shelf aftermarket header and 2.0L of displacement. Target peak hp was 7900-8200rpm. So, by making peak hp close to 8900rpm is significantly beyond their design parameters and have exceeded our goals for the IPS-K2's. Not many companies can boast their "street" cam as 300hp capable. We're just happy to be one of them.
When we cracked 300, we didn't feel the need for greed. We found new VTC cam timing technique specific to high rpm powerband 9k+. There's some fine tuning left in it, but not a whole lot can be expected on the stock head. We haven't even touched velocity stack runner lengths/diameters, nor exhaust tuning with our slip fit extension tubes and modular collectors. We can pretty much tailor where we want peak hp to come in at - either earlier or later by reconfiguring induction and exhaust. That's another test for another time.
Next step is to obtain a Dynojet baseline prior to any further mods. It then lays good foundation for IPS-Kme testing to commence. We can now rest confident having completed the arduous task of seeing IPS-K2's through what we feel is a comprehensive R&D cycle, highlighting the performance potential at both ends of the spectrum. Mild to wild.
-Ron
Modified by edo at 12:05 AM 5/19/2005
When we cracked 300, we didn't feel the need for greed. We found new VTC cam timing technique specific to high rpm powerband 9k+. There's some fine tuning left in it, but not a whole lot can be expected on the stock head. We haven't even touched velocity stack runner lengths/diameters, nor exhaust tuning with our slip fit extension tubes and modular collectors. We can pretty much tailor where we want peak hp to come in at - either earlier or later by reconfiguring induction and exhaust. That's another test for another time.
Next step is to obtain a Dynojet baseline prior to any further mods. It then lays good foundation for IPS-Kme testing to commence. We can now rest confident having completed the arduous task of seeing IPS-K2's through what we feel is a comprehensive R&D cycle, highlighting the performance potential at both ends of the spectrum. Mild to wild.
-Ron
Modified by edo at 12:05 AM 5/19/2005
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,962
Likes: 0
From: at the track
Re: K-series: 2240cc vs. 1998cc dyno (edo)
astonishing
amazing work man. Everything you have posted on these boards has been top notch. Good luck with future projects, and please, keep us posted.
amazing work man. Everything you have posted on these boards has been top notch. Good luck with future projects, and please, keep us posted.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,303
Likes: 2
From: Sacramento, CA, USA
Re: K-series: 2240cc vs. 1998cc dyno (edo)
What's really impressive to think about here is that 300WHP is about the stock output of an LS1. And the LS1 is almost three times the size of this motor. Furthermore, 214ft-lb torque with an average of about 200ft-lb torque from somewhat less than 3000RPM to around 8000RPM is not too shabby for a mere 2240cc motor. The only problem with taking this further (in terms of displacement) is that stroke will inevitably increase. And this will tend to slow the increase of power output as displacement increases.
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Re: K-series: 2240cc vs. 1998cc dyno (StorminMatt)
That's what we'll find out for ourselves. The 2415cc motor will be using the K24 block. That gives us an extra 0.775" deck. It will be 90mm x 94.9198mm with a 6.250" rod, netting a 1.67:1 r/s ratio which is better than our 1.60:1 right now. The same piston will put compression around 14:1 without any design change. Can't wait til the next set of Ti rods are finished Late August.
-Ron
-Ron
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,638
Likes: 0
From: Altamonte Springs/Orlando, Florida, USA
Re: K-series: 2240cc vs. 1998cc dyno (edo)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by edo »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">That's what we'll find out for ourselves. The 2415cc motor will be using the K24 block. That gives us an extra 0.775" deck. It will be 90mm x 94.9198mm with a 6.250" rod, netting a 1.67:1 r/s ratio which is better than our 1.60:1 right now. The same piston will put compression around 14:1 without any design change. Can't wait til the next set of Ti rods are finished Late August.
-Ron</TD></TR></TABLE>
*wink *wink I'm still waiting for those FI cams
.
-Ron</TD></TR></TABLE>
*wink *wink I'm still waiting for those FI cams
.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,625
Likes: 2
From: T dot, O, Hemp Nation
Re: K-series: 2240cc vs. 1998cc dyno (edo)
One word..Dam!!
Question: In the future, are you considering doing some head work? I know in b-series setups, a lot of power can be yielded out of a proper head port and I presume a K-series would be the same(or any other motor for that matter).
Keep up the good work.
Question: In the future, are you considering doing some head work? I know in b-series setups, a lot of power can be yielded out of a proper head port and I presume a K-series would be the same(or any other motor for that matter).
Keep up the good work.
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Re: K-series: 2240cc vs. 1998cc dyno (Chillinit)
Yes, incremental cylinder head prep will be tested. We'll first start with just a valve job to isolate its benefit. Then we'll do the little things the K-series head needs, but not a full port. After that's tested, full-port and perhaps a bigger valve or two.
Last time we went with a bigvalve CNC ported head, it was too early in K-series development to take advantage of the flow. At the time, the best cam on the market was a Toda Spec A. It was a marginal improvement over K20A ITR cams.
-Ron
Last time we went with a bigvalve CNC ported head, it was too early in K-series development to take advantage of the flow. At the time, the best cam on the market was a Toda Spec A. It was a marginal improvement over K20A ITR cams.
-Ron
