How would i figure out when i build my b16a, bore it to 84 mm with 12.5:1 compression pistons, stock crank blah blah blah how the hell do you figure out the liters would it be a 1.7??? I dont know howo to figure it out how do you??

 

1707cc.

Good luck getting a b16 to 12.5:1 w/o heavy duty head milling.

 

sorry i meant to put 12:1 but hey you watch out for crx power coming up on your gsr's *** in the future

 

LOL

I'll watch my step bro.

 

Displacement is the number of cylinders, times the stroke, times Pi, times half of the bore squared!

B16:
Bore - 81mm (/2=40.5mm)
Stroke - 77mm
Number of cyl - 4
[4*77*Pi*(40.5^2)]/1000 = 1587cc

86mm LSVTEC
Bore - 86 (/2=43mm)
Stroke - 89mm
Number of cyl - 4
[4*89*Pi*(43^2)] = 2068cc

Offset Sleeved 99mm stroke crank, 1.25" Deckplate
Bore - 87.5mm
stroke - 99
number of cyl - 4
[4*99*Pi*(43.75^2)] = 2381cc = 2.4L

 

See now that's why I use an online calculator. Pi is for eating...not brain aches.

 

Pi is just a number. It's not hard. There's nothing here but STRAIGHT simple mutiplication and division. A 3rd grader could do this.

 

Yeah...3.14blah blah blah...c-speed...here I come!

 

bore x bore x stroke x .7854 x the number of cylinders = displacement in cc's

Thats a little easier way to figure out displacement...

 

That's how I've always done it.

Now let's eat that Pi.

 

Banana cream PI.... Mmmmm PI

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RS_H22 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">bore x bore x stroke x .7854 x the number of cylinders = displacement in cc's

: </TD></TR></TABLE>

It does ?

in CC's ?
LMAO
You might wana * that by 16.387 to get the cc's


Modified by MAX_CFM at 11:22 AM 10/11/2003

 

We are such honda geeks......Pi is exactly 3.14 oooooooooo ill keep this equation in my mind

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MAX_CFM &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

It does ?

in CC's ?

Modified by MAX_CFM at 11:22 AM 10/11/2003</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yes, it does...

84 x 84 x 89 x .7854 x 4 = 1972
Which is the exact cc of a B20B/Z

81 x 81 x 89 x .7854 x 4 = 1834
Which is the exact cc of a B18A/B

81 x 81 x 87.2 x .7854 x 4 = 1797
Which is the exact cc of a B18C1/5

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MAX_CFM &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
LMAO
You might wana * that by 16.387 to get the cc's


Modified by MAX_CFM at 11:22 AM 10/11/2003</TD></TR></TABLE>

Nah, no need to... this is an easier way... If you were to do the equasion in inches and convert from cubic inches to cc's than you would be correct. but, thats a few too many steps... Since the import world doesnt even use inches (except US piston/rod/crank manufactureres) I have found this to be the easiest way to get the exact result... This way you dont need to convert mm to inches and so on and so forth.... Same exact results with alot less steps... From what Ive been told this is suppsedly the way displacement is calculated in japan...

Curious though... what was it that you found so funny?


Modified by RS_H22 at 6:15 PM 10/11/2003

 

Ha ha WOW I just learned sumthing while trying too be an ***

I was going on english numbers like 3.189 oops well I guess I used that from habbit

like this 3.189*3.189*3.504*.7854* 4 *16.387= 1834.524

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MAX_CFM &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Ha ha WOW I just learned sumthing while trying too be an ***

I was going on english numbers like 3.189 oops well I guess I used that from habbit

like this 3.189*3.189*3.504*.7854* 4 *16.387= 1834.524</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yeah... lol, way too many steps that way...

Well, now you know of an easier way...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RS_H22 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Curious though... what was it that you found so funny?


Modified by RS_H22 at 5:43 PM 10/11/2003


Modified by RS_H22 at 5:46 PM 10/11/2003</TD></TR></TABLE>

Im a happy guy

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RS_H22 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Yeah... lol, way too many steps that way...

Well, now you know of an easier way...</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yea im still getting used to this metric thing
all my Mics and dial bore gages and all my machines
read in .0001 So its just old habbit to use those types of measure
Thanks for the Great tip
I was like daymn he left a step out haha now i see its a short cut
Wich one is more accurite? lets look

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MAX_CFM &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Yea im still getting used to this metric thing
all my Mics and dial bore gages and all my machines
read in .0001 So its just old habbit to use those types of measure
Thanks for the Great tip
I was like daymn he left a step out haha now i see its a short cut
Wich one is more accurite? lets look </TD></TR></TABLE>

1834471.3464 is the way it reads...

Move the decimal over 3 spots from right to left for "exact" reading which I dont usually do because the first 4 numbers from the left is all I ever look at...

When needing precise calculations for builds (stroker kits, longer rods... etc, etc) I use the old school methods of inches because it is a proven 100% accurate measurement...

This is just a quick way of finding out displacement without all the hassle...

Bottom line is that you get the same end results... 1834cc

 

when it comes to figuring thing like this out. i just go here, http://www.c-speedracing.com/h...c.php don't get me wrong i think that the math equations are cool and all, but i like this.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TimoneX &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">1707cc.

Good luck getting a b16 to 12.5:1 w/o heavy duty head milling.</TD></TR></TABLE>

It's not so hard.