This chart illustrates the difference between new cams and previous cams as tested on the same 2240cc motor and peripheral components. As you can see, the powerband continues upward to a higher peak hp that holds substantially longer than the previous set which start to roll over. Take notice of the improved area under the curve from 6k+. VTC cam timing is very granular in the 9000+ range. We could easily spend a few more hours fine tuning a few areas here and there, but we did the best we could within the time allotted. Shawn Church graciously accomodated us for this tuning session, as the car is slated for roll-cage installation tomorrow precluding us from a typical Hondata Wednesday. Many thanks to Church Automotive Testing!

We hoped the configuration would be sufficient to support the potential of the new cams. After a good afternoon's worth of tuning, we are inclined to believe that we've only scratched the surface and that our 2240cc motor with stock cylinder head barely meets the minimum requirements. From our direct observation and experience today, the new cams stand to benefit from the following:

- Ported head
- Reconfigured induction and exhaust
- more displacement and compression

This could be accomplished by several methods:

- Velocity stack length/diameter tuning
- ITB increased bore size (54mm+)
- Header: Primary/Secondary length/diameter tuning
- time for more stroke: allows for more compression with the same piston


Relevant details for the 2240cc setup:

- Stock K20A2 cylinder head
- Hondata IMG
- TWM 52mm ITB's
- 90mm bore
- 88mm stroke
- 12.8:1 fully built short block
- Burns Stainless Inconel 4-1 header (spec'd for stock K20A2 utilizing their X-Design software: peak hp 7900-8200rpm)
- Hondata K-Pro


Specifications:

Low Speed:

Intake
280º advertised duration
.404" gross valve lift

Exhaust
273º advertised duration
.359" gross valve lift


High Speed:

Intake
308º advertised duration
.523" gross valve lift

Exhaust
300º duration
.455" gross valve lift


The new cams were designed to allow full 50 degrees of VTC implementation with stock piston valve relief. They are at the very limit (lift/duration) with 0.030" piston-valve clearance at 50 degrees. We highly recommend aftermarket pistons that have deeper valve relief for high rpm applications seeking to preserve acceptable safety margin.

For 2.0-2.2L motors, the previous camshaft application is extremely well-rounded as demonstrated previously in street/bolt-on and semi-built race configurations. We need to free up a few restrictions prior to seeing what the new cams can really do. We are very hopeful that our next configuration will get us closer to realizing their full potential.

-Ron


Modified by edo at 11:59 PM 5/31/2005


Modified by edo at 12:54 AM 6/1/2005

 

 

 

looks like its struggling to breath up top.. get a bigger header and throttles on that thing.

are you guys gona see how far you can push teh stock head?

 

Getting closer and closer to 300 dynojet hp, before even getting any headwork done. What was the compression on that motor again?

 

Yeah, considering the header was optimized for an 11:1 K20A2 peaking 7900-8200rpm - that's our first thought. Header needs to be reconfigured to breathe more at the top end. 54mm+ ITB's are also calling... Look at the quasi-plateau between 7.5k-9.4k - it's relatively flat (sans those VTC rolls) and doesn't fall below 300hp for nearly 2000rpm! We've got to uncork this somehow....

This motor only has 12.8cr on an 88mm stroke. It will jump to 14.7cr with a 95mm crank and same piston. At 105mm, it will be 15.1:1

I think the stock head is finally showing signs of restriction. Time for some tweaks to let those cams work at the top end! Imagine what a 350cfm @ .500" head would do! The stock head is good, but it doesn't crack 300cfm in its unadulterated form.

-Ron


Modified by edo at 1:03 AM 6/1/2005

 

Wow, this is awesome! Edo (is this a person or a team?) is really exploring the potential of the K-series for us all; thank you, sir(s).

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JDogg &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">looks like its struggling to breath up top.. get a bigger header and throttles on that thing.

are you guys gona see how far you can push teh stock head?</TD></TR></TABLE>


Bigger header?

No not bigger just shorter is all that is needed, maybe a slightly different collector outlet but even then unlikely. Have to go through and crunch the numbers but there shouldnt be any major chnages.

what ron i dont get a thanks for my on the spot cellular consulting

Casey - who is loving all the progress that is being made!!!

 

Casey has been on stand-by, ready-alert status since we started working with him. He is totally committed to customer service way beyond the sale. He even answered our call on his Birthday getaway trip!

Many thanks goes to Casey and everyone at Burns Stainless!

-Ron

 

damn thats hot ...

 

That is pure evil.
I say stick with that stroke and compression, to keep it a real street motor.

 

we're not touching this motor, the other two combos are separate short blocks completely!

-Ron

 

about how much does that come out to translated into whp????

 

285-290 dynojet.

-Ron

 

Nice
Edo:boldly going where many will follow .

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by edo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">285-290 dynojet.

-Ron</TD></TR></TABLE>Damn thats awsome power without an unported head. When will you be releasing those sets of cams?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by edo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">285-290 dynojet.

-Ron</TD></TR></TABLE>

more like 278.76whp on dynojet. (303whp on dynapack)

 

on the 303hp motor i believe he made 282 on a dynojet

 

yea i was close... but its not 290whp dynojet. the motor still needs another 10whp on the dynapack to get that much.

 

whoa 20 percent difference from a dynapack to dynojet??

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by HondaIntegraR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
whoa 20 percent difference from a dynapack to dynojet?? </TD></TR></TABLE>

Not always it depends on how the dynapack is set up, Church's reads high may be closer to bhp than whp, even the graph says flywheel HP.

Peak torque at 6150

 

so with 310.3 hp now, that k20 should be pushing 288-290 on a dynojet?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by HondaIntegraR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
whoa 20 percent difference from a dynapack to dynojet?? </TD></TR></TABLE>

no its 8%

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MHRacing-310 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

no its 8%</TD></TR></TABLE>

no.. not all the time, our dynapack reads a good bit lower than the average dynojet

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MHRacing-310 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

more like 278.76whp on dynojet. (303whp on dynapack)</TD></TR></TABLE>

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MHRacing-310 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">yea i was close... but its not 290whp dynojet. the motor still needs another 10whp on the dynapack to get that much. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Previously we were at 303. Now we're at 310.

303 dynapack netted us 282 dynojet.

310 dynapack should put us 285-290 dynojet.

But this is all semantics now because it's still on the stock head with tiny 88mm stroke. Next combo and competition headwork is on deck... time for the big slugger...

-Ron