Hello,

I currently own a semi-modified Starlet GT Turbo pushing 12PSI along with clutch work and an LSD. I am looking for something a bit bigger and more mature I am considering an EK9 Civic Type R you know the B16B.

I'd like to know more about these cars and in real life what are they weakness and strengths? How would my current car match up to one of these?

 

the motor is really good and strong! fun driving car.. i have the motor not the car! but if i could own one i would!!

 

I don't know if you'll like it or not but I'm fairly certain that your turbo Starlet is putting down some good torque whereas a B16 has zero torque. If you can get used to having little to no torque than all will be well. Other than that, I'm sure you'll love the handling as do most people.

 

^^^ exactly...

 

what is everyone's obsession with torque, torque is required for pulling power right? well i mean you need pulling power when you have a lot of weight to pull, and civics don't weigh a whole lot so why would you need some ridiculous amount of torque? it just seems that people rag on b16's too much for not having enough torque (which is sort of the case) but do you honestly need an excess of torque for a civic? and for my two cents i think the civic type R is a great choice, and for the other posters, the starlet (stock) makes the same amount of torque as the b16b.

 

The same thin gyou have told me with reagards to Torque I have been advised of this by all my friends'sit sems you have to rev the **** out of the Civic to go forward but this is how the engine is designed and most performance engines are kind of like this these days with some form of variable valve timing.

How would the 2 motors match up tho? I imagine the Civic will have superior top end and handling.

 

the b16b is a stronger motor, if i'm not mistaken, the starlet turbo stock produces 133 HP and 116 TQ where the b16b is 185 and 117

 

Frankly, I'd keep the Starlet GT Turbo.

What country are you in?

 

Very true... but look at where the Starlet develops it's more torque at 4500RPM.. and it starts really pulling from 2000RPM the B16 doesn't pull it's torque till 7500RPM.

I am still undecided guys however.. I really should put my car up against a B16B with some mods to get a better idea..

But I really do like the Honda sus and I love how parts are easy aviable.

 

When you get your EK9 .... can I have your starlet?

 

LOL you like Starlets?
I thought you honda boys don't like us Ha lol jk

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by quadlight &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">LOL you like Starlets?
I thought you honda boys don't like us Ha lol jk </TD></TR></TABLE>
My favorite was the KP61.

 

regarding the b16 ... i drove an si and that felt slow as **** vs the gs-r or ls. why settle for less? oh right the b16 is helluvalot cheaper

 

lmao, the is BARELY any difference between a gsr and a b16a, above 5k anyway.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by strictly.business &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">lmao, the is BARELY any difference between a gsr and a b16a, above 5k anyway.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Stock, true story.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by strictly.business &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">lmao, the is BARELY any difference between a gsr and a b16a, above 5k anyway.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yeah, but most people are driving below 5K on a daily basis. Coming from an owner like myself, even I can concede that EM1's are pretty damn slow with the B16. Even my friend's Integra LS pulled away smoother and with less (audible) strain and revs than I am used to in my EM1 from a stop.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by dso &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">what is everyone's obsession with torque, torque is required for pulling power right? it just seems that people rag on b16's too much for not having enough torque (which is sort of the case) but do you honestly need an excess of torque for a civic?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Torque makes city driving easier. It's true that a Civic doesn't weigh as much as some other compact cars but it's painfully obvious to most b16 owners that it's clearly lacking torque, even in a somewhat light car like a Civic. It's not about excessive torque, the amount of torque the b16 has is just barely adequate compared to many other cars in the same segment. And FYI, the OP's Starlet is not stock so I'm fairly certain he's putting down more torque than stock.

 

thats because the a2 is a ******* dog.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by strictly.business &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">thats because the a2 is a ******* dog.</TD></TR></TABLE>

LOL And what makes a b16b not? It's the same ******* engine with even MORE top end, yeah, just what it needs more of. You stick a b16b in an EM1 and guess what? It feels the same, slow as expletive. Try it sometime.

 

without all due respect, youre a ******* retard.


the b16a2 is 160 hp. the b16b is 185 hp.


and none is gunna "try it." youre a dumbfuck if you buy a b16b swap, sounds like youve already experienced that though.

 

point well taken. i guess it's not torque isn't much of an issue considering mt hatch is completely gutted and i don't drive it every day.

 

"HP = (torque) * (RPM) / (5252)??
With that said, lets think about a domestic v8. Yeah, they have lots of torque, but most of them can't rev over 6000. For demonstration purposes lets see how much
200ft/lbs at 4000rpm really is.??
HP = (200) * (4000) / (5252)??HP = 152.32??
Now 100 ft lbs at 8000 rpm.??
HP = (100) * (8000) / (5252)??HP = 152.32??
Notice that these HP numbers are the exact same. Naturally, the motor that only makes 100tq is going to significantly smaller in displacement. (probably about 1/2 the size) But All one would have to do is double the gear ratio and you would never know the difference! Honda makes it's power by using smaller high-revving motors. Because the redline is so high, the gearing is also numerically high and the gears are short. The b16 gears may end at the same mph as a 6000rpm redline VW for example, but if you were to give the 8000rpm honda those same ratios and wheel dimater those gears would be "tall" So many people look at the specs of hondas b16 and they see 113ft/lbs and 1.6 liters, and they complain it doesn't have any torque! This isn't really a valid argument, mainly because these people have no concept of how gearing and torque multiplication works. Yes the b16 may have a low number of torque, but where it doesn't have torque, it has gears that are designed to keep the RPMs higher. This gives the impression of "this motor sucks so much that I have to rev the **** out of it to move" But in reality it has completely different characteristics of your typical domestic v8. I guarantee you that if you put a b16 in your civic along with a b16 transmission, and that if you were to change the 8 on your tach to a 6 and the 4 to a 3, as to trick you of how fast the motor was revolving, every oblivious person would ride in your car and think that you had an h23 "torque monster" in your car. "?
-takin from bense, thanks

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by strictly.business &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">without all due respect, youre a ******* retard.

the b16a2 is 160 hp. the b16b is 185 hp.

and none is gunna "try it." youre a dumbfuck if you buy a b16b swap, sounds like youve already experienced that though.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

You really don't know how stupid you look here do ya? That's OK noob, I understand how ricers like you think. Oh lookie here, it's got 185 HP, it's so much faster now!! You are seriously stupid if you really think that 25 extra HP at the very top end makes a serious difference in every day city driving. Seriously, instead of spewing #s, why don't you back it up? I've driven a B16B swapped EM1 before and it feels pretty much like my stock EM1 - slow. But not slower than your **** for brains.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by dso &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I guarantee you that if you put a b16 in your civic along with a b16 transmission, and that if you were to change the 8 on your tach to a 6 and the 4 to a 3, as to trick you of how fast the motor was revolving, every oblivious person would ride in your car and think that you had an h23 "torque monster" in your car. "?
-takin from bense, thanks</TD></TR></TABLE>

True but in reality, you can't fool a passenger that easily considering all that racket the engine will be making at 7 or 8 grand. Torque is not just torque. There's also the larger matter of WHERE that torque is being made and how soon it is available. There's no denying that the instant torque of a larger displacement engine is rarely ever duplicated by a much smaller displacement engine (excluding FI of course).

 

noob? ricer? lmfao. youre ******* ignorant. how can you be so ******* stupid to say that a b16b isnt any faster than a b16a2? granted in an em1 the a2 is gunna make it a 15 second car and the b16b will net you mid 14s. just because youve put one in an em1 doesnt ******* make you a honda tuning god. it makes you a ******* retard for wasting time and money. YOURE A ******* NOBODY.

but on another note, you dont know me, what ive built, what ive boosted, what i own or anything about me. so before you go running your **** slobberer, close it, ****** and think before you speak.