i have a b16b which everybody by now knows uses a gsr/itr block with short stroke crank to make it a 1.6, in essence a destroked ITR motor. my motors blown now and i was going to build it with the typical gsr crank/eagle rods/probe pistons and make it a 1.8 which is good becuase obviosly its a bigger motor and its cheaper cause i wont have to buy custom rods... but then i had another ideae:

finance aside what if i sleeved the b16b to 84mm used some 84mm pistons and custom forged stock height rods, i would then have a 1.8 but maintain my 77.4mm stroke and 1.84 rs ratio. so id have a short stroke 1.8 that i could rev the **** out of that should in theory take more abuse since there is less side loading BUT here is my question:

each of these engines have the same displacements:
engine A: 84mm X 77.4mm 1.84 rs ratio 1.8 L
engine B: 81mm X 87.2mm 1.54 rs ratio 1.8 L

what would be the main difference between the two? aside from what most of us already know that the short stroke engine should be able to rev higher safely. will one engine create more low end tq than the other, etc...

i will probably most likely build engine B but im just curious, the only other downside i can think to engine A is that a gsr crank would make it a 2.0 and by not doing that you'd be sacraficing that displacement for rs ratio... where does it become worth it?

Edit: forgot to mention this is a TURBO motor.


Modified by blinx9900 at 11:47 AM 9/15/2007

 

I think R/S ratio is a bit overrated now.

If you went with engine A, Do you think you could find a cam that would take advantage of a ridiculous rpm range but still make half-decent bottom end?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by gibsanez &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I think R/S ratio is a bit overrated now.

If you went with engine A, Do you think you could find a cam that would take advantage of a ridiculous rpm range but still make half-decent bottom end?</TD></TR></TABLE>

oh its a turbo motor i know what your saying my engine builder always says a properly built blueprinted/balanced engine can rev high easily. my main question is if there was a difference in the way each motor would create tq?

 

engine b would probably make peak torque sooner because of the longer stroke. but that's just a general statement as other things will come into play.

 

rs ratio isnt too much of a deal if you have good rods/bolts/bearings etc.

im revving my 89mm stroke to 8700 and i know there are people who are going much higher.

the comment about tq could make a nice diff though