Most swap to better engines with more horsepower, I am going for economy. I have a 94 accord with a F22B1 2.2 and want to go backwards in displacement. I mainly "sit" in trafffic, so I dont need speed or a lot of internal weight eating up gas, dont need a go fast engine. My engine is knocking a little, so, I was thinking, spend money on bearings seals etc or just buy a running used engine that s smaller and just replace. Is there a plug and play 1.8l engine that will drop right in? I would assume the computer can handle it since the car is MAF, as long as the stroke is the same (for timing purposes) but I dont know hondas very well.

Any ideas besides buying a prius, lol?

 

There really isn't. The 5th Gen Accord was only offered in the US with an F22B1 (EX) or F22B2 (DX, LX, SE). Only difference being the B1 has VTEC and the B2 does not. the B1 makes about 15hp more, but they still both get around the same MPG (auto vs manual transmission will make more of a difference than the motor in regards to MPG). The Accord is already about as tuned for Economy as it can get, without drastically cutting power, and driveability. Also, the Accord is a much larger car than a Civic or Integra (600lbs or so), so you need that extra displacement and torque to move the car. If you slapped a smaller 1.6 or 1.8 the car would be horribly underpowered, and may even get worse MPG because of how hard it would be working. But those smaller engines don't even mount the same, and the transmissions are completely different. You're pretty much limited to any F or H series motors.

In Japan, they did actually make smaller displacement motors, but you never see them, because they were only for their base commuter models. No one imports them, because there is no market here for them.

Your best bet may be to just find an importer and get a JDM F22B1. You'll basically need the block and head, and then swap over your stock IM and all your USDM sensors. The motor shouldn't be more than $500, and may be cheaper than replacing a ton of parts on your current motor. And you'll have a low mileage motor that should last as long as you have the car.

 

Wow, thats a lot of good info, thanks. I just may do that if I keep the car. Its a cute car, but, like you said, a beast just for a commuter. Its kinda growing on me, so, we will see after I use it as a practice paint car.

 

I'm not aware of any available options (though I've never searched specifically...) but taller gearing (numerically smaller ratios) would be the traditional method for getting better mileage. you could try a larger overall tire diameter (this will affect speedo accuracy) which is much easier than modifying or replacing the transmission.

some regular maintenance items that tend to help fuel economy: proper tire pressure, regular oil changes, correct oil spec, ignition components (spark plugs, wires, cap, rotor) primary O2 sensor (denso or NTK preferably), clean injectors, correct ignition timing... there are more, but this is a good start.

 

Heh, funny you mention speedo issues, as mine is not working. Another thing I have ot figure out and fix amongst this rats nest of a car. Sure dont get much for $200 now a days .

 

Actually there are engines that you could "backwards" swap but it would be hard to source one since they are not very popular swaps. Honda made F18 and F20 SOHC engines overseas that are extremely similar to what you have. Same block casting, etc just different bottom end internals to get the desired displacement. Would it be worth it? Depends on how bad you want more MPG. The F22s they originally came with aren't the best for city mileage. Luckily I have a direct comparison because I own two of them. My daily driver is all original with the F22B2 engine and it gets anywhere from 18-22 for city mileage and around 25 on the highway. My modified car that has a DOHC F20B gets 23-25 city and 31-32 on the highway. There are a lot more variables between the two than just displacement though so take that as you will.

Also these cars are not MAF. They are MAP. Any engine swap you do that was not original would require either the appropriate ECU or an aftermarket ECU with a tune.

With all that said; if I were you I would probably just try to throw a set of bearings in it since you said it was knocking. Doesn't seem like you have much in the car so it's worth a shot. If it's a noisy rod bearing that can easily be done without removing the engine. For better mileage just remove as much weight from the car as possible, add a few extra psi to your tires and maybe do a few simple "eco" mods(there's a whole huge community out there who mod their cars for gas mileage).

 

Wait, they are MAP engines? I thought I erad there was a MAF in the air cleaner box? Man, am I getting diff info from all over, lol???? Would explain why my intake is ripped to hell and back but the car still runs pretty good and no CEL light.

I think I am hosed on the remove weight part. In fact, I think I added about 60lbs with my tools, jack jumper cables.....yada yada yada.....

32 highway with a DOHC? Mmmmm, yea, I dont think a single cam would get there. Though, what was the biggest mileage boost you did on the DOHC, or, was it a lot of things done at once that added up to the 32 highway?

 

Yes, they are MAP. If you look on top of your throttle body you will see the MAP sensor. It's black with a 3 pin round plug. Most of the OBD1 and earlier OBD2 era are MAP. Honda only started doing MAF much later and sometimes it was a mixture of the two.

It's numerous things that added up to the 32mpg. It may even get more than that but I haven't taken it on a long trip in a good while. It's a manual transmission versus the auto in my stock one. Tire/wheel combo comes out to about 1" larger in diameter than stock overall. It's less displacement, higher compression, turbo, and tuned leaner at highway cruising. The OEM ECU will target 14.7 air/fuel ratio when cruising but I run 15.5-15.8 air/fuel ratio. I would say the single biggest contributing factor would be the leaner AFR at cruising speeds. Doing that requires a fair bit of knowledge and hardware though. I did run a few single cams years ago that were tuned as such and their mileage was better but still not great. They saw a bump to 27-28 highway but city stayed about the same.

For a cheap fix on that intake tube you can just use duct tape. I've worked on a million of these things and high mileage cars always have them cracked and split. If customer doesn't want to replace I just patch it up with some duct tape to keep dirt/sand out.

 

Ohh, you have a LOT of variables in there, lol. Yea, I thought about the lean burn AFR cars of past. Was thinking of picking up one of those but they seem to be hatchbacks and I dont like them, much. Well, I appreciate you getting back to me and letting me know, thanks.

 

Not sure if this is still being looked at, but couple of things to note, if your commute is in city, taller tires and transmission gearing will not help you, in fact it will decrease the mpg, in city driving short gears help because the engine doesn't need to spin up so much to pull the cars weight around. And in town the higher HP can help in small ways to save gas because the more low rpm torque the easier it is to go.

As to lean burn and really saving gas the 96 Civic HX 5 speed is absolutely awesome, the auto probably sucks but I got 45 mpg at 80 mph all day long, I got upper 30's in the city.

 

If anyone is reading this...
Displacement on the Accord is not the economy problem.
Gearing is in the real world.
Ideally the engine would operate with the best torque output for a given rpm range.
Problem with this is this is not readily seen on a typical WOT dyno run, we just get maximum peaks with WOT angle.
BSFC graph would show you where the best torque for a given throttle angle/rpm is. But locating the BSFC graph from Honda is probably not going to be easy to find, if at all.
Now if someone has done some serious dyno time with a stock F22B1 in car with stock everything then you may be able to locate that somewhere online, but most likely you will only find a blurb on it as everyone is more concerned with dyno power graphs.

Antedotal evidence I have is with a '95 EX coupe and '97 EX Sedan. Both now have MPJA ATs.
Prior the '95 might get 27MPG on a good day with its BOYA trans, after it **** the bed it was replaced with a MPJA(ody) trans. Goofing around and driving around initially net 26MPG, after a few weeks the MPG readily jumped to 29MPG. Futzing about the car net 34MPG. Less rpm changes were needed and less throttle input was needed to get the car to get up to speed or pass. Where before if I needed to pass someone rolling into the throttle wasn't always an option and more often required a downshift.
The '97 seems to get better highway mileage, but I am not sure if this is due to the difference in the sedan roof line, the '97 bumper cover, or the OBDII system.

texan made a good post on BSFC, https://honda-tech.com/forums/tech-m...ession-349065/

 

I have had similar experiences in other cars. It seems that if an engine/drive train is too small for the vehicle, then mileage goes down. Most of the newer cars I have rented get very good mileage. They do this by using a 6 speed trans and keeping the motor in a relatively small rpm range, so the small motors never really have to work hard. Not the case in older cars.