Has anyone ever put a B18B or A head on a B16 block?
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,499
Likes: 0
From: resident ht bully, USA
Re: Has anyone ever put a B18B or A head on a B16 block? (TissueBox)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TissueBox »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> I know it will be a torqueless wonder </TD></TR></TABLE>
It will be a everything-less wonder.
You loose the top-end you'd normally get from the b16 head. and you loose the low-end grunt you'd normally get from an LS. You're basically back asswards. Keep the tranny though... don't listen to that guy ^^^^
It will be a everything-less wonder.
You loose the top-end you'd normally get from the b16 head. and you loose the low-end grunt you'd normally get from an LS. You're basically back asswards. Keep the tranny though... don't listen to that guy ^^^^
Re: Has anyone ever put a B18B or A head on a B16 block? (mwieczorek43)
its a waste see if any1 wants to buy the block and the head or trade for a gsr block and start working from there it has more potential
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
From: WW 05 evolutionIII, MN, USA
Re: Has anyone ever put a B18B or A head on a B16 block? (clint g)
hes can put together the bastard engine why not if your low on funds yes it can be done- but youll be as slow as a stock cx lol
Trending Topics
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
From: brookings, sd, USA
with the tranny, i was refuring to if he went turbo, just strait engine hell ya with the 16, also, my friend was in the same deal and traded a guy in town strait up for complete blocks, your better off if you could do somthing like that, makes it easier too, not to mention faster
Former Moderator
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 16,612
Likes: 55
From: Southside ATL, GA
Re: (TurboEM1)
For any stockish or even mildly boosted or N/A built B-Series engines the shorter B16A/Type R gearing will be the best for acceleration.
A friend of mine had a 500+whp beast Civic and he actually ran slower with an LS tranny as opposed to the shorter-than-LS-geared GS-R that he temporarily replaced it with.
...so there goes the "longer is better for boost" arument IMO.
A friend of mine had a 500+whp beast Civic and he actually ran slower with an LS tranny as opposed to the shorter-than-LS-geared GS-R that he temporarily replaced it with.
...so there goes the "longer is better for boost" arument IMO.
footwork mastery
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 8
From: Bigger, Faster, Smarter, Stronger
Re: (SkoundrelUSA)
in my old crx i got ripped off like that. pictures showed it to be a ls (b18a) so i bought it. got to my house and i was like wtf. b16a block(kinda scratch up to look like a b18) with a ls head. so yes someone out there has done it. don't do it
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,718
Likes: 2
From: home of 12 national championships, AL
Re: Has anyone ever put a B18B or A head on a B16 block? (TissueBox)
if you were gonna sell the block might as well sell the head and jus go b18c1 block and b16a head, or why not jus keep the b16 block and get a b16 head to since you have the tranny...
Re: (B18C5-EH2)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by B18C5-EH2 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">For any stockish or even mildly boosted or N/A built B-Series engines the shorter B16A/Type R gearing will be the best for acceleration.
A friend of mine had a 500+whp beast Civic and he actually ran slower with an LS tranny as opposed to the shorter-than-LS-geared GS-R that he temporarily replaced it with.
...so there goes the "longer is better for boost" arument IMO.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Im not saying longer is better for boost, shorter is better for N/A or any combination of them. There is no generilization as to which is better for which application. There are to many variables. One boosted car might be better with a shorter tranny then another and a N/A car might be better with a longer tranny then another. It all depends on how the car is making power, its weight, tire size, ect..
A friend of mine had a 500+whp beast Civic and he actually ran slower with an LS tranny as opposed to the shorter-than-LS-geared GS-R that he temporarily replaced it with.
...so there goes the "longer is better for boost" arument IMO.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Im not saying longer is better for boost, shorter is better for N/A or any combination of them. There is no generilization as to which is better for which application. There are to many variables. One boosted car might be better with a shorter tranny then another and a N/A car might be better with a longer tranny then another. It all depends on how the car is making power, its weight, tire size, ect..
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
From: LA
Re: (TurboEM1)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TurboEM1 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Im not saying longer is better for boost, shorter is better for N/A or any combination of them. There is no generilization as to which is better for which application. There are to many variables. One boosted car might be better with a shorter tranny then another and a N/A car might be better with a longer tranny then another. It all depends on how the car is making power, its weight, tire size, ect..
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I emailed you because I cant use instant message.
Im not saying longer is better for boost, shorter is better for N/A or any combination of them. There is no generilization as to which is better for which application. There are to many variables. One boosted car might be better with a shorter tranny then another and a N/A car might be better with a longer tranny then another. It all depends on how the car is making power, its weight, tire size, ect..
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I emailed you because I cant use instant message.
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,718
Likes: 2
From: home of 12 national championships, AL
Re: (litterbox)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by litterbox »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Why is your name tissuebox. 
</TD></TR></TABLE>
prolly cause its better to be a tissue box instead of a litter box
whatever that means...
</TD></TR></TABLE>prolly cause its better to be a tissue box instead of a litter box
whatever that means...
B*a*n*n*e*d
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 9,783
Likes: 47
From: Greenville, South Carolina
Re: (Exempt)
who cares what everyone says, I made a post about this a while back, it should work.
think of it as a d16 that's destroked with big pistons
to all the guys on here that think hp is everything.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Exempt »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If u think about it, theoretically, this combo would just be a DOHC ZC... 1.6 liters, non VTEC DOHC... And in the end, probably not worth the trouble...</TD></TR></TABLE>
it would be better than a ZC, the zc has a 75mm piston and a 89mm stroke
where as this setup would have a 81mm piston and a 77mm stroke
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TurboEM1 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Im not saying longer is better for boost, shorter is better for N/A or any combination of them. There is no generilization as to which is better for which application. There are to many variables. One boosted car might be better with a shorter tranny then another and a N/A car might be better with a longer tranny then another. It all depends on how the car is making power, its weight, tire size, ect..</TD></TR></TABLE>
bullshit. Shorter gears will always be better until you can break the coefficient of traction at any speed and just about any rpm. think about it, you have a 350hp motor and you have gears that put more tq to the tires. If you're spinning tires you can do two things. Increase your traction, or decrease the torque applied to the tires. When you get longer gears, all you're doing is decreasing wheel torque.
ever been completely stopped and tried to dump the clutch in 5th gear? Probably not, cause it would be stupid. It's virtually impossible to do anyways cause the gearing won't allow you to break traction.
think of it as a d16 that's destroked with big pistons
to all the guys on here that think hp is everything.<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Exempt »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If u think about it, theoretically, this combo would just be a DOHC ZC... 1.6 liters, non VTEC DOHC... And in the end, probably not worth the trouble...</TD></TR></TABLE>
it would be better than a ZC, the zc has a 75mm piston and a 89mm stroke
where as this setup would have a 81mm piston and a 77mm stroke
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TurboEM1 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Im not saying longer is better for boost, shorter is better for N/A or any combination of them. There is no generilization as to which is better for which application. There are to many variables. One boosted car might be better with a shorter tranny then another and a N/A car might be better with a longer tranny then another. It all depends on how the car is making power, its weight, tire size, ect..</TD></TR></TABLE>
bullshit. Shorter gears will always be better until you can break the coefficient of traction at any speed and just about any rpm. think about it, you have a 350hp motor and you have gears that put more tq to the tires. If you're spinning tires you can do two things. Increase your traction, or decrease the torque applied to the tires. When you get longer gears, all you're doing is decreasing wheel torque.
ever been completely stopped and tried to dump the clutch in 5th gear? Probably not, cause it would be stupid. It's virtually impossible to do anyways cause the gearing won't allow you to break traction.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,334
Likes: 1
From: Raleigh, NC
Re: (TurboEM1)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TurboEM1 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Im not saying longer is better for boost, shorter is better for N/A or any combination of them. There is no generilization as to which is better for which application. There are to many variables. One boosted car might be better with a shorter tranny then another and a N/A car might be better with a longer tranny then another. It all depends on how the car is making power, its weight, tire size, ect..
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Wrong. Shorter gearing is going to yield better acceleration. Period.
The only time when this wouldn't hold true would be when you make so much power that's impossible to use first or second gear.
Show me a single example of longer gearing yeilding better ET's and I'll step down, but you're not going to, because it's not going to happen. The only time shorter gearing is even considered helpful at all is when comparing 0-60 times. A slightly longer gearbox can cut a short amount of time off of a 0-60 run becuase you don't have to shift into third.
Im not saying longer is better for boost, shorter is better for N/A or any combination of them. There is no generilization as to which is better for which application. There are to many variables. One boosted car might be better with a shorter tranny then another and a N/A car might be better with a longer tranny then another. It all depends on how the car is making power, its weight, tire size, ect..
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Wrong. Shorter gearing is going to yield better acceleration. Period.
The only time when this wouldn't hold true would be when you make so much power that's impossible to use first or second gear.
Show me a single example of longer gearing yeilding better ET's and I'll step down, but you're not going to, because it's not going to happen. The only time shorter gearing is even considered helpful at all is when comparing 0-60 times. A slightly longer gearbox can cut a short amount of time off of a 0-60 run becuase you don't have to shift into third.
Former Moderator
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 16,612
Likes: 55
From: Southside ATL, GA
Re: (TurboEM1)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TurboEM1 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Im not saying longer is better for boost, shorter is better for N/A or any combination of them. There is no generilization as to which is better for which application. There are to many variables. One boosted car might be better with a shorter tranny then another and a N/A car might be better with a longer tranny then another. It all depends on how the car is making power, its weight, tire size, ect..</TD></TR></TABLE>
I think the other guys have already posted great rebuttals here, so I don't need to go in-depth again, but a few other points:
The only way shorter gearing hurt me personally (I have a bolt-ons B18C5 swap) was when I had my ATS 4.929 final drive in my transmission and I had really short 20'' slicks at the strip. I was finishing the 1/4 mile at like 9000rpm in 4th gear - well past the peak whp range of 8000-8200rpm. I had to shift at 9000 in each gear to not have to shift into 5th with those short-*** slicks.
Simple solution?
Run taller slicks.
Why suffer with longer gears every day just to run short slicks a few times a year at the strip? I'll take the shortest possible gearing all day and simply run taller slicks if I'm running out of 4th gear at the dragstrip.
On the street that 4.929 FD (stock is 4.400) was bad-*** with 205/50/15 tires. It was also awesome for auto-X because second gear pulled so crazy out of 90 degree turns, etc.
Too bad I shattered that FD because of a transmission-destroying puck clutch I used to run.
Im not saying longer is better for boost, shorter is better for N/A or any combination of them. There is no generilization as to which is better for which application. There are to many variables. One boosted car might be better with a shorter tranny then another and a N/A car might be better with a longer tranny then another. It all depends on how the car is making power, its weight, tire size, ect..</TD></TR></TABLE>
I think the other guys have already posted great rebuttals here, so I don't need to go in-depth again, but a few other points:
The only way shorter gearing hurt me personally (I have a bolt-ons B18C5 swap) was when I had my ATS 4.929 final drive in my transmission and I had really short 20'' slicks at the strip. I was finishing the 1/4 mile at like 9000rpm in 4th gear - well past the peak whp range of 8000-8200rpm. I had to shift at 9000 in each gear to not have to shift into 5th with those short-*** slicks.
Simple solution?
Run taller slicks.
Why suffer with longer gears every day just to run short slicks a few times a year at the strip? I'll take the shortest possible gearing all day and simply run taller slicks if I'm running out of 4th gear at the dragstrip.
On the street that 4.929 FD (stock is 4.400) was bad-*** with 205/50/15 tires. It was also awesome for auto-X because second gear pulled so crazy out of 90 degree turns, etc.
Too bad I shattered that FD because of a transmission-destroying puck clutch I used to run.
