Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec?
Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec?
I've been looking into getting a stroker kit for my motor. I know that it's not the most cost effective route but I really would like to examine all my possiblities first befor giving up on going ALL-MOTOR.
I would like to know the what it rod/stroke ratio is. This will be for my c5. BTW how much do you think i could sell my crank,rods and pistons for? ($600 total?)
TIA
I would like to know the what it rod/stroke ratio is. This will be for my c5. BTW how much do you think i could sell my crank,rods and pistons for? ($600 total?)
TIA
Paragraph Alert
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 5,557
Likes: 2
From: Oil rig, middle of the ocean
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (Charlie Moua)
What displacement are you looking for? If just 2.0liters have your block resleeved and bored. Keeps the stock rod stroke ratio and basically has no ill side effects.
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (ActiveAero)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ActiveAero »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">What displacement are you looking for? If just 2.0liters have your block resleeved and bored. Keeps the stock rod stroke ratio and basically has no ill side effects.</TD></TR></TABLE>
well i already have sleeves 84mm just not installed yet.
and I hope my plates will read B22c5
well i already have sleeves 84mm just not installed yet.
and I hope my plates will read B22c5
Paragraph Alert
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 5,557
Likes: 2
From: Oil rig, middle of the ocean
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (acydphryck)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by acydphryck »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i don't think 84mm = 2.2L displacement... 
</TD></TR></TABLE>
If he used a larger stroke crank he could achieve 2.2L. You can achieve a good R/S ratio with a larger stroke by using custom rods (longer) and having the deck height raised. However a good R/S ratio doesn't mean everything. You will still have a larger crank thus increasing piston speeds, which at high rpm can out run the flame. I could be wrong on my info but I looked into a similar setup a while back and this is what I found. You could make it work, but if you plan on it being a high mileage street car and turning high rpm I don't think it is the best setup from what have read.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
</TD></TR></TABLE>If he used a larger stroke crank he could achieve 2.2L. You can achieve a good R/S ratio with a larger stroke by using custom rods (longer) and having the deck height raised. However a good R/S ratio doesn't mean everything. You will still have a larger crank thus increasing piston speeds, which at high rpm can out run the flame. I could be wrong on my info but I looked into a similar setup a while back and this is what I found. You could make it work, but if you plan on it being a high mileage street car and turning high rpm I don't think it is the best setup from what have read.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 8,757
Likes: 0
From: WI
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (ActiveAero)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ActiveAero »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">However a good R/S ratio doesn't mean everything. You will still have a larger crank thus increasing piston speeds, which at high rpm can out run the flame. I could be wrong on my info but I looked into a similar setup a while back and this is what I found. You could make it work, but if you plan on it being a high mileage street car and turning high rpm I don't think it is the best setup from what have read.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I dont think any of you really know what a GOOD rod stroke ratio is.
And about outrunning the flame, rod stroke ratio can make piston acceleration(not speed)
about the same as a shorter stroke engine.
But you are right, its probably not the best street setup for reliability.
I dont think any of you really know what a GOOD rod stroke ratio is.
And about outrunning the flame, rod stroke ratio can make piston acceleration(not speed)
about the same as a shorter stroke engine.
But you are right, its probably not the best street setup for reliability.
Trending Topics
Paragraph Alert
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 5,557
Likes: 2
From: Oil rig, middle of the ocean
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (sgT)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sgT »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I dont think any of you really know what a GOOD rod stroke ratio is.
And about outrunning the flame, rod stroke ratio can make piston acceleration(not speed)
about the same as a shorter stroke engine.
But you are right, its probably not the best street setup for reliability. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Well I know our engines don't have the best R/S ratio even in stock form. Could you elborate on acceleration vs speed in terms of the effects?
I dont think any of you really know what a GOOD rod stroke ratio is.
And about outrunning the flame, rod stroke ratio can make piston acceleration(not speed)
about the same as a shorter stroke engine.
But you are right, its probably not the best street setup for reliability. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Well I know our engines don't have the best R/S ratio even in stock form. Could you elborate on acceleration vs speed in terms of the effects?
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 8,757
Likes: 0
From: WI
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (JUN EK9)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JUN EK9 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">haha, silly boy. i know a good r/s ratio...
1.75:1 is OKAY, i SUPPOSE
</TD></TR></TABLE>
No, not really. See,this is exactly what i am talking about.
1.75:1 is OKAY, i SUPPOSE
</TD></TR></TABLE>No, not really. See,this is exactly what i am talking about.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 8,757
Likes: 0
From: WI
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (ActiveAero)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ActiveAero »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Well I know our engines don't have the best R/S ratio even in stock form. Could you elborate on acceleration vs speed in terms of the effects? </TD></TR></TABLE>
But do you know why?
But regarding speed vs acceleration, you were referring to acceleration rather
than speed in your previous comment. I'm not going to go into it anymore than that.
Well I know our engines don't have the best R/S ratio even in stock form. Could you elborate on acceleration vs speed in terms of the effects? </TD></TR></TABLE>
But do you know why?
But regarding speed vs acceleration, you were referring to acceleration rather
than speed in your previous comment. I'm not going to go into it anymore than that.
Junior Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (sgT)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sgT »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">But do you know why?</TD></TR></TABLE>]
Sacraficing a perfect ratio will increase the power. Domestics make torque and blow stuff up
Sacraficing a perfect ratio will increase the power. Domestics make torque and blow stuff up
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 8,757
Likes: 0
From: WI
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (BenB)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by BenB »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">]
Sacraficing a perfect ratio will increase the power. Domestics make torque and blow stuff up </TD></TR></TABLE>
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Sacraficing a perfect ratio will increase the power. Domestics make torque and blow stuff up
</TD></TR></TABLE>You have no idea what you are talking about.
Junior Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (sgT)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sgT »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
You have no idea what you are talking about. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Sure I do!
You have no idea what you are talking about.
</TD></TR></TABLE>Sure I do!
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 7,810
Likes: 0
From: Yokohama, Japan, Japan
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (sgT)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sgT »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
You have no idea what you are talking about. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Steve...any plans to come back to Tokyo any time soon...need some of you magic touch
You have no idea what you are talking about.
</TD></TR></TABLE>Steve...any plans to come back to Tokyo any time soon...need some of you magic touch
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 8,757
Likes: 0
From: WI
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (MiraiZ)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MiraiZ »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Steve...any plans to come back to Tokyo any time soon...need some of you magic touch </TD></TR></TABLE>
Actuallly.... yeah.
Steve...any plans to come back to Tokyo any time soon...need some of you magic touch
</TD></TR></TABLE>Actuallly.... yeah.
Paragraph Alert
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 5,557
Likes: 2
From: Oil rig, middle of the ocean
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (sgT)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sgT »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
But do you know why?
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah actually I do a little bit. B series have a lower R/S ratio which means they don't have the ability to rev as high do the force the put forth on the cylinder wall (the rod is at a greater angle). More pressure of cylinder walls = bad.
The pistons also don't stay at TDC long. They change direction from the up stroke to the down stroke very quickly. Which means that the ability to complete burn all the fuel isn't achieved, which makes sense. This is also were I talked about outrunning the flame, but I was thinking of it in terms of stroke as well. I figured with a longer stroke it will take more SPEED to make the same revolution (it would have to, d=rxt, increase the distance and you'll have to increase the speed for the same amount of time). Even with the same ratio I would think for something to reach a greater speed in the same amount of time (rpm) it would require more acceleration. The piston acceleration increase would not be the exact same due to some more complex math (angle reduction or some crap I haven't learned yet), but I think it would be greater.
But do you know why?
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah actually I do a little bit. B series have a lower R/S ratio which means they don't have the ability to rev as high do the force the put forth on the cylinder wall (the rod is at a greater angle). More pressure of cylinder walls = bad.
The pistons also don't stay at TDC long. They change direction from the up stroke to the down stroke very quickly. Which means that the ability to complete burn all the fuel isn't achieved, which makes sense. This is also were I talked about outrunning the flame, but I was thinking of it in terms of stroke as well. I figured with a longer stroke it will take more SPEED to make the same revolution (it would have to, d=rxt, increase the distance and you'll have to increase the speed for the same amount of time). Even with the same ratio I would think for something to reach a greater speed in the same amount of time (rpm) it would require more acceleration. The piston acceleration increase would not be the exact same due to some more complex math (angle reduction or some crap I haven't learned yet), but I think it would be greater.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,288
Likes: 0
From: Fort Worth, TX
Stroke is more important than Rod/Stroke ratio. Don't jump on the bandwagon...
FWIW, I think the stock C5 stroke is long enough for the RPMs it sees. Don't worry too much on Rod/Stroke ratio. Go with 84mm sleeves and a stock C5 stroke then concentrate on the head's ability to flow and making good power as far as you feasibly can. This doesn't mean going for that "magic" 10k limit or something just to impress the local ricers. If the setup dies at 8k RPM, but makes beast power from idle to redline - then so be it.
The stroke will directly affect the average piston velocity, which definitely has more bearing on how a motor breathes than its r/s ratio. The r/s ratio just gives you a general idea about how "easy" the motor will be on its available port capacity near TDC and BDC compared to another motor with very similar average piston velocities.
Worry more about your compression ratio than r/s. Higher compression ratio = higher thermal efficiency(within reason). So shooting for 13:1 on 93 octane is more worthy of your time than trying to get a 1.75:1 r/s ratio.
As for what a "good" r/s ratio is - there ISN'T one single value that is "the best." It is merely another value you can manipulate to change the characteristics of the engine if you know what you're doing. Don't hype up this stuff more than it needs to be...
FWIW, I think the stock C5 stroke is long enough for the RPMs it sees. Don't worry too much on Rod/Stroke ratio. Go with 84mm sleeves and a stock C5 stroke then concentrate on the head's ability to flow and making good power as far as you feasibly can. This doesn't mean going for that "magic" 10k limit or something just to impress the local ricers. If the setup dies at 8k RPM, but makes beast power from idle to redline - then so be it.
The stroke will directly affect the average piston velocity, which definitely has more bearing on how a motor breathes than its r/s ratio. The r/s ratio just gives you a general idea about how "easy" the motor will be on its available port capacity near TDC and BDC compared to another motor with very similar average piston velocities.
Worry more about your compression ratio than r/s. Higher compression ratio = higher thermal efficiency(within reason). So shooting for 13:1 on 93 octane is more worthy of your time than trying to get a 1.75:1 r/s ratio.
As for what a "good" r/s ratio is - there ISN'T one single value that is "the best." It is merely another value you can manipulate to change the characteristics of the engine if you know what you're doing. Don't hype up this stuff more than it needs to be...
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,288
Likes: 0
From: Fort Worth, TX
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (sgT)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">And about outrunning the flame, rod stroke ratio can make piston acceleration(not speed)
about the same as a shorter stroke engine. </TD></TR></TABLE>
I think you'd be hard pressed to prove this. Considering that the r/s ratio does have some small bearing on how fast the piston would accelerate from TDC to say, half the stroke. Yet the respective pistons would still cover half the stroke in the same amount of time. I find it VERY difficult to believe that *within reason* you could find two different automotive engines that had conventional r/s ratio, yet the one with the shorter stroke had faster piston acceleration from TDC.
Keep in mind that very few cars even have r/s ratios of above 2:1, and only a few have values below 1.3-1.4:1. That is not as much difference as you are 'hinting' is there. I doubt you're going to be able to make a piston with a 15% longer stroke accelerate less quickly than its shorter stroke counterpart just through r/s ratio changes. This is a subtle part of engine geometry folks, SUBTLE!
This just proves my point that stroke length is more important than the r/s ratio of an engine.
about the same as a shorter stroke engine. </TD></TR></TABLE>
I think you'd be hard pressed to prove this. Considering that the r/s ratio does have some small bearing on how fast the piston would accelerate from TDC to say, half the stroke. Yet the respective pistons would still cover half the stroke in the same amount of time. I find it VERY difficult to believe that *within reason* you could find two different automotive engines that had conventional r/s ratio, yet the one with the shorter stroke had faster piston acceleration from TDC.
Keep in mind that very few cars even have r/s ratios of above 2:1, and only a few have values below 1.3-1.4:1. That is not as much difference as you are 'hinting' is there. I doubt you're going to be able to make a piston with a 15% longer stroke accelerate less quickly than its shorter stroke counterpart just through r/s ratio changes. This is a subtle part of engine geometry folks, SUBTLE!
This just proves my point that stroke length is more important than the r/s ratio of an engine.
Paragraph Alert
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 5,557
Likes: 2
From: Oil rig, middle of the ocean
Re: (Def)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Def »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Stroke is more important than Rod/Stroke ratio. Don't jump on the bandwagon...
FWIW, I think the stock C5 stroke is long enough for the RPMs it sees. Don't worry too much on Rod/Stroke ratio. Go with 84mm sleeves and a stock C5 stroke then concentrate on the head's ability to flow and making good power as far as you feasibly can. This doesn't mean going for that "magic" 10k limit or something just to impress the local ricers. If the setup dies at 8k RPM, but makes beast power from idle to redline - then so be it.
The stroke will directly affect the average piston velocity, which definitely has more bearing on how a motor breathes than its r/s ratio. The r/s ratio just gives you a general idea about how "easy" the motor will be on its available port capacity near TDC and BDC compared to another motor with very similar average piston velocities.
Worry more about your compression ratio than r/s. Higher compression ratio = higher thermal efficiency(within reason). So shooting for 13:1 on 93 octane is more worthy of your time than trying to get a 1.75:1 r/s ratio.
As for what a "good" r/s ratio is - there ISN'T one single value that is "the best." It is merely another value you can manipulate to change the characteristics of the engine if you know what you're doing. Don't hype up this stuff more than it needs to be...</TD></TR></TABLE>
Good info.
FWIW, I think the stock C5 stroke is long enough for the RPMs it sees. Don't worry too much on Rod/Stroke ratio. Go with 84mm sleeves and a stock C5 stroke then concentrate on the head's ability to flow and making good power as far as you feasibly can. This doesn't mean going for that "magic" 10k limit or something just to impress the local ricers. If the setup dies at 8k RPM, but makes beast power from idle to redline - then so be it.
The stroke will directly affect the average piston velocity, which definitely has more bearing on how a motor breathes than its r/s ratio. The r/s ratio just gives you a general idea about how "easy" the motor will be on its available port capacity near TDC and BDC compared to another motor with very similar average piston velocities.
Worry more about your compression ratio than r/s. Higher compression ratio = higher thermal efficiency(within reason). So shooting for 13:1 on 93 octane is more worthy of your time than trying to get a 1.75:1 r/s ratio.
As for what a "good" r/s ratio is - there ISN'T one single value that is "the best." It is merely another value you can manipulate to change the characteristics of the engine if you know what you're doing. Don't hype up this stuff more than it needs to be...</TD></TR></TABLE>
Good info.
shit post warrior
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 9,141
Likes: 5
From: Socal, CA
Re: (ActiveAero)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ActiveAero »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Good info.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Absolutely!
Good info.</TD></TR></TABLE>Absolutely!
Re: (ITRbroham)
so the ITR/GSR has a r/s ratio of 1.58 and the B20/LS have r/s ratio of 1.54.............................................. ....
how much is that going to make a difference as in pressure and wear on the RINGS/Sleeves?
People say that LS shouldn't be reved higer than 7,500rpms daily becasue of poor r/s ratio but when i look at GSR/ITR they seem to have about just the same mount of pressure on the sleeves as LS would.
please help me understand this. TIA
how much is that going to make a difference as in pressure and wear on the RINGS/Sleeves?
People say that LS shouldn't be reved higer than 7,500rpms daily becasue of poor r/s ratio but when i look at GSR/ITR they seem to have about just the same mount of pressure on the sleeves as LS would.
please help me understand this. TIA
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 2,550
Likes: 0
From: too close to Oklahoma
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (BenB)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by BenB »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">]
Sacraficing a perfect ratio will increase the power. Domestics make torque and blow stuff up </TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah, right.
That's why a 302 stroked to a 331 still has a "better" rod ratio (1.69) than a B-series...
Sacraficing a perfect ratio will increase the power. Domestics make torque and blow stuff up
</TD></TR></TABLE>Yeah, right.
That's why a 302 stroked to a 331 still has a "better" rod ratio (1.69) than a B-series...
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 8,757
Likes: 0
From: WI
Re: Jun 2.0 stroker kit.... what is the R/S raito spec? (ActiveAero)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ActiveAero »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Yeah actually I do a little bit. B series have a lower R/S ratio which means they don't have the ability to rev as high do the force the put forth on the cylinder wall (the rod is at a greater angle). More pressure of cylinder walls = bad.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
low = bad
lower != bad
You now need to learn what defines a bad rod:stroke ratio.
Yeah actually I do a little bit. B series have a lower R/S ratio which means they don't have the ability to rev as high do the force the put forth on the cylinder wall (the rod is at a greater angle). More pressure of cylinder walls = bad.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
low = bad
lower != bad
You now need to learn what defines a bad rod:stroke ratio.
