anybody have a dyno of a b16a2 when vtec isnt engaged at all?
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RACEPAK »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">hello everybody...
anybody have a dyno of a b16a2 when vtec isnt engaged at all?
thx
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah, it put down 69whp and 45ftlbs of torque.
anybody have a dyno of a b16a2 when vtec isnt engaged at all?
thx
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah, it put down 69whp and 45ftlbs of torque.
damb mine put down 101whp & 56lbs/tq LOL I dont think anyone has done that. But for sh*ts and giggles it would be funny.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by GetawayInMoscow »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Wow really only 97.7 ft lbs?
Good thing I have a turbo sitting next to me waiting to go in mine
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Even with that turbo, the B16 suffers from a major setback... lack of stroke. If you want torque, its not the way to go. sorry guys.
Good thing I have a turbo sitting next to me waiting to go in mine
</TD></TR></TABLE>Even with that turbo, the B16 suffers from a major setback... lack of stroke. If you want torque, its not the way to go. sorry guys.
Trending Topics
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hybrid93Eg »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Even with that turbo, the B16 suffers from a major setback... lack of stroke. If you want torque, its not the way to go. sorry guys.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah but it will double 97.7 ft lbs no problem, which is a big help.
Even with that turbo, the B16 suffers from a major setback... lack of stroke. If you want torque, its not the way to go. sorry guys.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah but it will double 97.7 ft lbs no problem, which is a big help.
the air/fuel graph shold be reading around 18. not 15 down to 12especiaalyhigher in rpms. 15 is good at idle soon as start running it hard. like on dyno you car gets richer. not leaner.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by postman »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">the air/fuel graph shold be reading around 18. not 15 down to 12especiaalyhigher in rpms. 15 is good at idle soon as start running it hard. like on dyno you car gets richer. not leaner.</TD></TR></TABLE>
ban
His AFR is good. Higher numbers are leaner. AIR/FUEL
ban
His AFR is good. Higher numbers are leaner. AIR/FUEL
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by postman »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">the air/fuel graph shold be reading around 18. not 15 down to 12especiaalyhigher in rpms. 15 is good at idle soon as start running it hard. like on dyno you car gets richer. not leaner.</TD></TR></TABLE>
18:1 = pretty damn lean... also, stock Hondas typically run a little rich on the idle, not lean.. 15:1 might be "ok", but you can certainly run a good amount richer with no problems also..
18:1 = pretty damn lean... also, stock Hondas typically run a little rich on the idle, not lean.. 15:1 might be "ok", but you can certainly run a good amount richer with no problems also..
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hybrid93Eg »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Even with that turbo, the B16 suffers from a major setback... lack of stroke. If you want torque, its not the way to go. sorry guys.</TD></TR></TABLE>
if you have a b16 and you want more piston speed, then get a 4.785 final
if you have a b16 and you want more piston speed, then get a 4.785 final
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Bense »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
if you have a b16 and you want more piston speed, then get a 4.785 final</TD></TR></TABLE>
Umm.. How is this going to increase piston speed? News flash, IT WON'T.
if you have a b16 and you want more piston speed, then get a 4.785 final</TD></TR></TABLE>
Umm.. How is this going to increase piston speed? News flash, IT WON'T.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hybrid93Eg »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Umm.. How is this going to increase piston speed? News flash, IT WON'T.</TD></TR></TABLE>
more engine cycles = more piston movement.
also, what's better than inhaling air through the same size intake port?
inhaling air more times per minute.
more engine cycles = more piston movement.
also, what's better than inhaling air through the same size intake port?
inhaling air more times per minute.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Bense »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
more engine cycles = more piston movement.
also, what's better than inhaling air through the same size intake port?
inhaling air more times per minute.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Its not going to "raise piston speeds" like you said. Piston speeds will be dictated by rod/stroke ratio. While it might raise revolutions per minute... Its not going to change piston speeds as you have stated. I guess if you consider piston speeds the same as RPMS...
more engine cycles = more piston movement.
also, what's better than inhaling air through the same size intake port?
inhaling air more times per minute.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Its not going to "raise piston speeds" like you said. Piston speeds will be dictated by rod/stroke ratio. While it might raise revolutions per minute... Its not going to change piston speeds as you have stated. I guess if you consider piston speeds the same as RPMS...
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 98ekhx »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
</TD></TR></TABLE>
agree
</TD></TR></TABLE>agree
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post





