Turbo B18B DC4 for street and road racing (HPDE's)
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,277
Likes: 0
Turbo B18B DC4 for street and road racing (HPDE's)
I don't know when i will be building up my engine and turbo charging it, but i'm starting to research and make a list of parts and things to do to the engine, in my free time.........
I'm just curious and have a few Q's
so here some stuff i've put together:
run about 15psi to 20psi of fully tuned boost
make peak boost @ at least 3500rpm
CP Pistons instead
Pauter rods
TiAL Wastegate
TiAL blow off valve instead
Aeromotive fuel pressure regulator
Golden Eagle Fuel Rail
Aeromotive fuel pump
10-AN fuel lines from the tank to the rail
Crower cams
Skunk2 Racing Valves
Skunk2 Racing Valve Springs
new bearings
new water pump
new timing belt
new head gasket
Urethane motor mounts
ADJUSTABLE CAM GEARS
Gator Racing Axles
GReddy oil catch can
HKS GT2835 Pro S turbo
inter cooler
76mm exhaust b-pipe
Carsound high flow catalytic converter w/ 76mm inlet and outlet
76mm down pipe
turbo manifold that retains ac
Lightweight flywheel
ITR tranny
jdm itr 4.7 final gear ratio
ACT HDSS clutch or extreme presureplate
Spoon fan switch
Spoon radiator cap
new radiator hoses
oil cooler
MOROSO oil pan
Fluidyne radiator
FAL fans
Motec engine management
500cc injectors
blitz turbo timer
Motec CD ignition
wideband 02 or Air/fuel ratio gauge
boost gauge
B&M fuel pressure gauge
edited: all the best parts added to the list
Modified by R-Spec at 6:15 PM 2/23/2004
I'm just curious and have a few Q's
so here some stuff i've put together:
run about 15psi to 20psi of fully tuned boost
make peak boost @ at least 3500rpm
CP Pistons instead
Pauter rods
TiAL Wastegate
TiAL blow off valve instead
Aeromotive fuel pressure regulator
Golden Eagle Fuel Rail
Aeromotive fuel pump
10-AN fuel lines from the tank to the rail
Crower cams
Skunk2 Racing Valves
Skunk2 Racing Valve Springs
new bearings
new water pump
new timing belt
new head gasket
Urethane motor mounts
ADJUSTABLE CAM GEARS
Gator Racing Axles
GReddy oil catch can
HKS GT2835 Pro S turbo
inter cooler
76mm exhaust b-pipe
Carsound high flow catalytic converter w/ 76mm inlet and outlet
76mm down pipe
turbo manifold that retains ac
Lightweight flywheel
ITR tranny
jdm itr 4.7 final gear ratio
ACT HDSS clutch or extreme presureplate
Spoon fan switch
Spoon radiator cap
new radiator hoses
oil cooler
MOROSO oil pan
Fluidyne radiator
FAL fans
Motec engine management
500cc injectors
blitz turbo timer
Motec CD ignition
wideband 02 or Air/fuel ratio gauge
boost gauge
B&M fuel pressure gauge
edited: all the best parts added to the list
Modified by R-Spec at 6:15 PM 2/23/2004
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
From: Tampa, FL
you could probably get what your lookin for using a t3 super 60. i you want be able to crank it up in the future, look into a lower trimed t3/t4. the t3 will have significantly faster spool time for those corners.
compression ratio depends on the application, the lower the compression ratio the safer. a lot of people run like 8.5:1. you can run high compression, theres just little bit more risk of detonating sooner.
compression ratio depends on the application, the lower the compression ratio the safer. a lot of people run like 8.5:1. you can run high compression, theres just little bit more risk of detonating sooner.
Member
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,347
Likes: 0
From: NL, CT, cuba
Re: (boostedsl2)
I share your driving style, and for that car (I have two), I would go all motor or JRSC, nice flat power-curve, if you ever have to up/down shift in a turn...
That's just me.
Your ultimate power goals will help us size a turbo for you. I don't think the GT28R or GT28RS would be innaporpriate for your setup.
-PHiZ
That's just me.
Your ultimate power goals will help us size a turbo for you. I don't think the GT28R or GT28RS would be innaporpriate for your setup.
-PHiZ
Re: (PHiZ)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by PHiZ »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Your ultimate power goals will help us size a turbo for you. I don't think the GT28R or GT28RS would be innaporpriate for your setup.
-PHiZ</TD></TR></TABLE>
i think if you want a fast spooling turbo like Phiz said the gt28 is the way to go
Your ultimate power goals will help us size a turbo for you. I don't think the GT28R or GT28RS would be innaporpriate for your setup.
-PHiZ</TD></TR></TABLE>
i think if you want a fast spooling turbo like Phiz said the gt28 is the way to go
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,369
Likes: 0
Re: (R-Spec)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by R-Spec »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> I don't want to go all motor or SC for my B18B, cuz they both suck fo that engine and i just like turbo cars, so fun...........[/i]</TD></TR></TABLE>
Really depends on your needs, my friend regularly cleans up in his class at AutoX events in his all motor LS, White98LS on Honda-Tech btw. We all know FI has more power potential, but you might wanna talk to Derek about his NA LS - he's got pics, vids, etc...
Really depends on your needs, my friend regularly cleans up in his class at AutoX events in his all motor LS, White98LS on Honda-Tech btw. We all know FI has more power potential, but you might wanna talk to Derek about his NA LS - he's got pics, vids, etc...
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,277
Likes: 0
Re: (mskibbz-T)
yea but there's just sumthin about turbo cars i love, i don't kno, NA just doesn't seem as fun.........
well i was searchin around i found this:
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">N/A cars: As most of you know, the design of turbo exhaust systems runs counter to exhaust design for n/a vehicles. N/A cars utilize exhaust velocity (not backpressure) in the collector to aid in scavenging other cylinders during the blowdown process. It just so happens that to get the appropriate velocity, you have to squeeze down the diameter of the discharge of the collector (aka the exhaust), which also induces backpressure. The backpressure is an undesirable byproduct of the desire to have a certain degree of exhaust velocity. Go too big, and you lose velocity and its associated beneficial scavenging effect. Too small and the backpressure skyrockets, more than offsetting any gain made by scavenging. There is a happy medium here.
For turbo cars, you throw all that out the window. You want the exhaust velocity to be high upstream of the turbine (i.e. in the header). You'll notice that primaries of turbo headers are smaller diameter than those of an n/a car of two-thirds the horsepower. The idea is to get the exhaust velocity up quickly, to get the turbo spooling as early as possible. Here, getting the boost up early is a much more effective way to torque than playing with tuned primary lengths and scavenging. The scavenging effects are small compared to what you'd get if you just got boost sooner instead. You have a turbo; you want boost. Just don't go so small on the header's primary diameter that you choke off the high end.
Downstream of the turbine (aka the turboback exhaust), you want the least backpressure possible. No ifs, ands, or buts. Stick a Hoover on the tailpipe if you can. The general rule of "larger is better" (to the point of diminishing returns) of turboback exhausts is valid. Here, the idea is to minimize the pressure downstream of the turbine in order to make the most effective use of the pressure that is being generated upstream of the turbine. Remember, a turbine operates via a pressure ratio. For a given turbine inlet pressure, you will get the highest pressure ratio across the turbine when you have the lowest possible discharge pressure. This means the turbine is able to do the most amount of work possible (i.e. drive the compressor and make boost) with the available inlet pressure.
Again, less pressure downstream of the turbine is goodness. This approach minimizes the time-to-boost (maximizes boost response) and will improve engine VE throughout the rev range.
As for 2.5" vs. 3.0", the "best" turboback exhaust depends on the amount of flow, or horsepower. At 250 hp, 2.5" is fine. Going to 3" at this power level won't get you much, if anything, other than a louder exhaust note. 300 hp and you're definitely suboptimal with 2.5". For 400-450 hp, even 3" is on the small side.”
As for the geometry of the exhaust at the turbine discharge, the most optimal configuration would be a gradual increase in diameter from the turbine's exducer to the desired exhaust diameter-- via a straight conical diffuser of 7-12° included angle (to minimize flow separation and skin friction losses) mounted right at the turbine discharge. Many turbochargers found in diesels have this diffuser section cast right into the turbine housing. A hyperbolic increase in diameter (like a trumpet snorkus) is theoretically ideal but I've never seen one in use (and doubt it would be measurably superior to a straight diffuser). The wastegate flow would be via a completely divorced (separated from the main turbine discharge flow) dumptube. Due the realities of packaging, cost, and emissions compliance this config is rarely possible on street cars. You will, however, see this type of layout on dedicated race vehicles.
A large "bellmouth" config which combines the turbine discharge and wastegate flow (without a divider between the two) is certainly better than the compromised stock routing, but not as effective as the above.
If an integrated exhaust (non-divorced wastegate flow) is required, keep the wastegate flow separate from the main turbine discharge flow for ~12-18" before reintroducing it. This will minimize the impact on turbine efficiency-- the introduction of the wastegate flow disrupts the flow field of the main turbine discharge flow.
Necking the exhaust down to a suboptimal diameter is never a good idea, but if it is necessary, doing it further downstream is better than doing it close to the turbine discharge since it will minimize the exhaust's contribution to backpressure. Better yet: don't neck down the exhaust at all.
Also, the temperature of the exhaust coming out of a cat is higher than the inlet temperature, due to the exothermic oxidation of unburned hydrocarbons in the cat. So the total heat loss (and density increase) of the gases as it travels down the exhaust is not as prominent as it seems.
Another thing to keep in mind is that cylinder scavenging takes place where the flows from separate cylinders merge (i.e. in the collector). There is no such thing as cylinder scavenging downstream of the turbine, and hence, no reason to desire high exhaust velocity here. You will only introduce unwanted backpressure.
Other things you can do (in addition to choosing an appropriate diameter) to minimize exhaust backpressure in a turboback exhaust are: avoid crush-bent tubes (use mandrel bends); avoid tight-radius turns (keep it as straight as possible); avoid step changes in diameter; avoid "cheated" radii (cuts that are non-perpendicular); use a high flow cat; use a straight-thru perforated core muffler... etc.”
Comparing the two bellmouth designs, I've never seen either one so I can only speculate. But based on your description, and assuming neither of them have a divider wall/tongue between the turbine discharge and wg dump, I'd venture that you'd be hard pressed to measure a difference between the two. The more gradual taper intuitively appears more desirable, but it's likely that it's beyond the point of diminishing returns. Either one sounds like it will improve the wastegate's discharge coefficient over the stock config, which will constitute the single biggest difference. This will allow more control over boost creep. Neither is as optimal as the divorced wastegate flow arrangement, however.
There's more to it, though-- if a larger bellmouth is excessively large right at the turbine discharge (a large step diameter increase), there will be an unrecoverable dump loss that will contribute to backpressure. This is why a gradual increase in diameter, like the conical diffuser mentioned earlier, is desirable at the turbine discharge.
As for primary lengths on turbo headers, it is advantageous to use equal-length primaries to time the arrival of the pulses at the turbine equally and to keep cylinder reversion balanced across all cylinders. This will improve boost response and the engine's VE. Equal-length is often difficult to achieve due to tight packaging, fabrication difficulty, and the desire to have runners of the shortest possible length.”
Here's a worked example (simplified) of how larger exhausts help turbo cars:
Say you have a turbo operating at a turbine pressure ratio (aka expansion ratio) of 1.8:1. You have a small turboback exhaust that contributes, say, 10 psig backpressure at the turbine discharge at redline. The total backpressure seen by the engine (upstream of the turbine) in this case is:
(14.5 +10)*1.8 = 44.1 psia = 29.6 psig total backpressure
So here, the turbine contributed 19.6 psig of backpressure to the total.
Now you slap on a proper low-backpressure, big turboback exhaust. Same turbo, same boost, etc. You measure 3 psig backpressure at the turbine discharge. In this case the engine sees just 17 psig total backpressure! And the turbine's contribution to the total backpressure is reduced to 14 psig (note: this is 5.6 psig lower than its contribution in the "small turboback" case).
So in the end, the engine saw a reduction in backpressure of 12.6 psig when you swapped turbobacks in this example. This reduction in backpressure is where all the engine's VE gains come from.
This is why larger exhausts make such big gains on nearly all stock turbo cars-- the turbine compounds the downstream backpressure via its expansion ratio. This is also why bigger turbos make more power at a given boost level-- they improve engine VE by operating at lower turbine expansion ratios for a given boost level.
As you can see, the backpressure penalty of running a too-small exhaust (like 2.5" for 350 hp) will vary depending on the match. At a given power level, a smaller turbo will generally be operating at a higher turbine pressure ratio and so will actually make the engine more sensitive to the backpressure downstream of the turbine than a larger turbine/turbo would. As for output temperatures, I'm not sure I understand the question. Are you referring to compressor outlet temperatures?
The advantage to the bellmouth setup from the wg's perspective is that it allows a less torturous path for the bypassed gases to escape. This makes it more effective in bypassing gases for a given pressure differential and wg valve position. Think of it as improving the VE of the wastegate. If you have a very compromised wg discharge routing, under some conditions the wg may not be able bypass enough flow to control boost, even when wide open. So the gases go through the turbine instead of the wg, and boost creeps up.
The downside to a bellmouth is that the wg flow still dumps right into the turbine discharge. A divider wall would be beneficial here. And, as mentioned earlier, if you go too big on the bellmouth and the turbine discharge flow sees a rapid area change (regardless of whether the wg flow is being introduced there or not), you will incur a backpressure penalty right at the site of the step. This is why you want gradual area changes in your exhaust." </TD></TR></TABLE>
so i gues i'm gona go w/ a 76mm (3") down pipe, cat, and B-pipe......
now any 1 got sugestions on an intercooler size?
Modified by R-Spec at 1:01 PM 2/15/2004
well i was searchin around i found this:
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">N/A cars: As most of you know, the design of turbo exhaust systems runs counter to exhaust design for n/a vehicles. N/A cars utilize exhaust velocity (not backpressure) in the collector to aid in scavenging other cylinders during the blowdown process. It just so happens that to get the appropriate velocity, you have to squeeze down the diameter of the discharge of the collector (aka the exhaust), which also induces backpressure. The backpressure is an undesirable byproduct of the desire to have a certain degree of exhaust velocity. Go too big, and you lose velocity and its associated beneficial scavenging effect. Too small and the backpressure skyrockets, more than offsetting any gain made by scavenging. There is a happy medium here.
For turbo cars, you throw all that out the window. You want the exhaust velocity to be high upstream of the turbine (i.e. in the header). You'll notice that primaries of turbo headers are smaller diameter than those of an n/a car of two-thirds the horsepower. The idea is to get the exhaust velocity up quickly, to get the turbo spooling as early as possible. Here, getting the boost up early is a much more effective way to torque than playing with tuned primary lengths and scavenging. The scavenging effects are small compared to what you'd get if you just got boost sooner instead. You have a turbo; you want boost. Just don't go so small on the header's primary diameter that you choke off the high end.
Downstream of the turbine (aka the turboback exhaust), you want the least backpressure possible. No ifs, ands, or buts. Stick a Hoover on the tailpipe if you can. The general rule of "larger is better" (to the point of diminishing returns) of turboback exhausts is valid. Here, the idea is to minimize the pressure downstream of the turbine in order to make the most effective use of the pressure that is being generated upstream of the turbine. Remember, a turbine operates via a pressure ratio. For a given turbine inlet pressure, you will get the highest pressure ratio across the turbine when you have the lowest possible discharge pressure. This means the turbine is able to do the most amount of work possible (i.e. drive the compressor and make boost) with the available inlet pressure.
Again, less pressure downstream of the turbine is goodness. This approach minimizes the time-to-boost (maximizes boost response) and will improve engine VE throughout the rev range.
As for 2.5" vs. 3.0", the "best" turboback exhaust depends on the amount of flow, or horsepower. At 250 hp, 2.5" is fine. Going to 3" at this power level won't get you much, if anything, other than a louder exhaust note. 300 hp and you're definitely suboptimal with 2.5". For 400-450 hp, even 3" is on the small side.”
As for the geometry of the exhaust at the turbine discharge, the most optimal configuration would be a gradual increase in diameter from the turbine's exducer to the desired exhaust diameter-- via a straight conical diffuser of 7-12° included angle (to minimize flow separation and skin friction losses) mounted right at the turbine discharge. Many turbochargers found in diesels have this diffuser section cast right into the turbine housing. A hyperbolic increase in diameter (like a trumpet snorkus) is theoretically ideal but I've never seen one in use (and doubt it would be measurably superior to a straight diffuser). The wastegate flow would be via a completely divorced (separated from the main turbine discharge flow) dumptube. Due the realities of packaging, cost, and emissions compliance this config is rarely possible on street cars. You will, however, see this type of layout on dedicated race vehicles.
A large "bellmouth" config which combines the turbine discharge and wastegate flow (without a divider between the two) is certainly better than the compromised stock routing, but not as effective as the above.
If an integrated exhaust (non-divorced wastegate flow) is required, keep the wastegate flow separate from the main turbine discharge flow for ~12-18" before reintroducing it. This will minimize the impact on turbine efficiency-- the introduction of the wastegate flow disrupts the flow field of the main turbine discharge flow.
Necking the exhaust down to a suboptimal diameter is never a good idea, but if it is necessary, doing it further downstream is better than doing it close to the turbine discharge since it will minimize the exhaust's contribution to backpressure. Better yet: don't neck down the exhaust at all.
Also, the temperature of the exhaust coming out of a cat is higher than the inlet temperature, due to the exothermic oxidation of unburned hydrocarbons in the cat. So the total heat loss (and density increase) of the gases as it travels down the exhaust is not as prominent as it seems.
Another thing to keep in mind is that cylinder scavenging takes place where the flows from separate cylinders merge (i.e. in the collector). There is no such thing as cylinder scavenging downstream of the turbine, and hence, no reason to desire high exhaust velocity here. You will only introduce unwanted backpressure.
Other things you can do (in addition to choosing an appropriate diameter) to minimize exhaust backpressure in a turboback exhaust are: avoid crush-bent tubes (use mandrel bends); avoid tight-radius turns (keep it as straight as possible); avoid step changes in diameter; avoid "cheated" radii (cuts that are non-perpendicular); use a high flow cat; use a straight-thru perforated core muffler... etc.”
Comparing the two bellmouth designs, I've never seen either one so I can only speculate. But based on your description, and assuming neither of them have a divider wall/tongue between the turbine discharge and wg dump, I'd venture that you'd be hard pressed to measure a difference between the two. The more gradual taper intuitively appears more desirable, but it's likely that it's beyond the point of diminishing returns. Either one sounds like it will improve the wastegate's discharge coefficient over the stock config, which will constitute the single biggest difference. This will allow more control over boost creep. Neither is as optimal as the divorced wastegate flow arrangement, however.
There's more to it, though-- if a larger bellmouth is excessively large right at the turbine discharge (a large step diameter increase), there will be an unrecoverable dump loss that will contribute to backpressure. This is why a gradual increase in diameter, like the conical diffuser mentioned earlier, is desirable at the turbine discharge.
As for primary lengths on turbo headers, it is advantageous to use equal-length primaries to time the arrival of the pulses at the turbine equally and to keep cylinder reversion balanced across all cylinders. This will improve boost response and the engine's VE. Equal-length is often difficult to achieve due to tight packaging, fabrication difficulty, and the desire to have runners of the shortest possible length.”
Here's a worked example (simplified) of how larger exhausts help turbo cars:
Say you have a turbo operating at a turbine pressure ratio (aka expansion ratio) of 1.8:1. You have a small turboback exhaust that contributes, say, 10 psig backpressure at the turbine discharge at redline. The total backpressure seen by the engine (upstream of the turbine) in this case is:
(14.5 +10)*1.8 = 44.1 psia = 29.6 psig total backpressure
So here, the turbine contributed 19.6 psig of backpressure to the total.
Now you slap on a proper low-backpressure, big turboback exhaust. Same turbo, same boost, etc. You measure 3 psig backpressure at the turbine discharge. In this case the engine sees just 17 psig total backpressure! And the turbine's contribution to the total backpressure is reduced to 14 psig (note: this is 5.6 psig lower than its contribution in the "small turboback" case).
So in the end, the engine saw a reduction in backpressure of 12.6 psig when you swapped turbobacks in this example. This reduction in backpressure is where all the engine's VE gains come from.
This is why larger exhausts make such big gains on nearly all stock turbo cars-- the turbine compounds the downstream backpressure via its expansion ratio. This is also why bigger turbos make more power at a given boost level-- they improve engine VE by operating at lower turbine expansion ratios for a given boost level.
As you can see, the backpressure penalty of running a too-small exhaust (like 2.5" for 350 hp) will vary depending on the match. At a given power level, a smaller turbo will generally be operating at a higher turbine pressure ratio and so will actually make the engine more sensitive to the backpressure downstream of the turbine than a larger turbine/turbo would. As for output temperatures, I'm not sure I understand the question. Are you referring to compressor outlet temperatures?
The advantage to the bellmouth setup from the wg's perspective is that it allows a less torturous path for the bypassed gases to escape. This makes it more effective in bypassing gases for a given pressure differential and wg valve position. Think of it as improving the VE of the wastegate. If you have a very compromised wg discharge routing, under some conditions the wg may not be able bypass enough flow to control boost, even when wide open. So the gases go through the turbine instead of the wg, and boost creeps up.
The downside to a bellmouth is that the wg flow still dumps right into the turbine discharge. A divider wall would be beneficial here. And, as mentioned earlier, if you go too big on the bellmouth and the turbine discharge flow sees a rapid area change (regardless of whether the wg flow is being introduced there or not), you will incur a backpressure penalty right at the site of the step. This is why you want gradual area changes in your exhaust." </TD></TR></TABLE>
so i gues i'm gona go w/ a 76mm (3") down pipe, cat, and B-pipe......
now any 1 got sugestions on an intercooler size?
Modified by R-Spec at 1:01 PM 2/15/2004
Trending Topics
If you're going to be using Hondata, do not use a lower temperature thermostat. If you do you will have major tuning issues.
I also hope you have a **** load of money for the parts you just listed.
I also hope you have a **** load of money for the parts you just listed.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,516
Likes: 1
From: Okie in training, usa
Re: (R-Spec)
GT28RS 
If you're making > 300 whp and gobs of torque (which you will with that turbo), then your LS tranny with a Quaife LSD might be a better choice. Might save some $$, and the Quaife has a lifetime guarantee no matter what type of event you do.
What do you plan on for suspension on this mythical beast?
If you're making > 300 whp and gobs of torque (which you will with that turbo), then your LS tranny with a Quaife LSD might be a better choice. Might save some $$, and the Quaife has a lifetime guarantee no matter what type of event you do.
What do you plan on for suspension on this mythical beast?
Re: (fsp31)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by fsp31 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">this mythical beast? </TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah, I built one on paper when I bought my first Honda, haha. I didn't even know what half the stuff did or what it was for [needless to say what it cost], I just knew that I wanted it.
Now I'm building a realistic beast, and realizing how much money it's costing!
</TD></TR></TABLE>Yeah, I built one on paper when I bought my first Honda, haha. I didn't even know what half the stuff did or what it was for [needless to say what it cost], I just knew that I wanted it.
Now I'm building a realistic beast, and realizing how much money it's costing!
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
From: U of A, AZ, US
Re: (R-Spec)
Add a high-limit credit card to your list..
And if you don't know what you're getting or what it does, buy a second motor as a replacement when yours blows.
Unless you're just making an excuse to make a bunch of power, it seems if you like twisty backroads and such then you might take these guys' advice. All-motor or JRSC would be a smoother, better choice for what you're looking for. And with road racing, your 20 psi of turbo boost'll make driving really difficult - accelerating out of a corner looking for 20 psi of boost is probably a lot trickier than you think.
And if you don't know what you're getting or what it does, buy a second motor as a replacement when yours blows.
Unless you're just making an excuse to make a bunch of power, it seems if you like twisty backroads and such then you might take these guys' advice. All-motor or JRSC would be a smoother, better choice for what you're looking for. And with road racing, your 20 psi of turbo boost'll make driving really difficult - accelerating out of a corner looking for 20 psi of boost is probably a lot trickier than you think.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,942
Likes: 0
From: Destroying turbo ITR motors in Minneapolis, MN, U.S.A.
Re: (R-Spec)
I just have this feeling that you don't know what the hell you're doing. Why would you want to run 20 psi on a turbo honda...for a road course? 
It's not about the power, it's about tires, suspension, brakes, driver, weight, etc.
Yes power is important, but if you can't control it it's useless.
Re-think your setup and post in the Road Racing forum. And be prepped to get flamed. Sounds like a dream setup to me.
It's not about the power, it's about tires, suspension, brakes, driver, weight, etc.
Yes power is important, but if you can't control it it's useless.
Re-think your setup and post in the Road Racing forum. And be prepped to get flamed. Sounds like a dream setup to me.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,277
Likes: 0
Re: (boostincoupe)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by boostincoupe »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I just have this feeling that you don't know what the hell you're doing. Why would you want to run 20 psi on a turbo honda...for a road course?
It's not about the power, it's about tires, suspension, brakes, driver, weight, etc.
Yes power is important, but if you can't control it it's useless.
Re-think your setup and post in the Road Racing forum. And be prepped to get flamed. Sounds like a dream setup to me. </TD></TR></TABLE>
uh ok.........
1st, i made this thread so i could learn more. I don't know what psi i'm gona be running, plus i said 15psi to 20 psi in my 1st post.........so i could run 15psi. i don't kno that's another reason why i made this thread, to learn
2nd, i defiantly know that it's not all about power, i wont be doing this for a while, and my suspension will be complete. So i will have a great suspension set up, i have removed lots of useless **** and i'm doing some more weight reduction soon. I might even decide to go all-motor, i've been thinkin about a ls/vtec setup b/c of these guys suggestions to go all-motor, in this thread.
So before i even touch my engine I will have like a 2200lb to 2300lb (some where around there) car and it will handle great (it already handles great, i just need some better springs). And for the brakes, i have the brembo discs and Axxis ultimate pads, but depending on how much hp i will make i might need a big brake set up, such as Brembo GranTurismo.....
3rd, i will have done many HPDE's and other things like that and have gotten a lot of driving experience by the time i actually start building the motor.......
so yes i know what i'm talking about but only to a certain extent, but i want to learn more.
and it is a dream set up for now, depending on how much money i have when i want to do this and what i want to do it could be different, but what ever i want to put a list together of some great parts for a turbo setup.........I want a very reliable set up
I might even start making a list for a reliable all-motor ls/vtec set up.
i like to do my research before i get into any thing
Modified by R-Spec at 11:18 AM 2/20/2004
It's not about the power, it's about tires, suspension, brakes, driver, weight, etc.
Yes power is important, but if you can't control it it's useless.
Re-think your setup and post in the Road Racing forum. And be prepped to get flamed. Sounds like a dream setup to me.
</TD></TR></TABLE>uh ok.........
1st, i made this thread so i could learn more. I don't know what psi i'm gona be running, plus i said 15psi to 20 psi in my 1st post.........so i could run 15psi. i don't kno that's another reason why i made this thread, to learn
2nd, i defiantly know that it's not all about power, i wont be doing this for a while, and my suspension will be complete. So i will have a great suspension set up, i have removed lots of useless **** and i'm doing some more weight reduction soon. I might even decide to go all-motor, i've been thinkin about a ls/vtec setup b/c of these guys suggestions to go all-motor, in this thread.
So before i even touch my engine I will have like a 2200lb to 2300lb (some where around there) car and it will handle great (it already handles great, i just need some better springs). And for the brakes, i have the brembo discs and Axxis ultimate pads, but depending on how much hp i will make i might need a big brake set up, such as Brembo GranTurismo.....
3rd, i will have done many HPDE's and other things like that and have gotten a lot of driving experience by the time i actually start building the motor.......
so yes i know what i'm talking about but only to a certain extent, but i want to learn more.
and it is a dream set up for now, depending on how much money i have when i want to do this and what i want to do it could be different, but what ever i want to put a list together of some great parts for a turbo setup.........I want a very reliable set up
I might even start making a list for a reliable all-motor ls/vtec set up.
i like to do my research before i get into any thing
Modified by R-Spec at 11:18 AM 2/20/2004
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
From: U of A, AZ, US
Re: (R-Spec)
You're 16 years old?
I second boostincoupe. Use the search function and read up to get the most out of your research.
I honestly think while a turbo road race Honda is certainly do-able, even 15 psi of boost is stretching practibility. Read up on turbo's and you'll find out why.
Even with all the suspension in the world, you'll still have a crazy time driving it.
All-motor might be better for you and your driving style. More could possibly go wrong with a turbo motor, especially if you do HPDE's, and that could cause disaster. All-motor has less things to go wrong from a reliability stand-point. And instead of just jumping on the LS/VTEC bandwagon, you might look into building a B18C1 or saving all that money you (will) have and buying a B18C5. A B18C5 in a 2100 pound car will give you a crazy ride still, and you'll end up paying less for that swap than a fully built turbo. Not to mention you can daily drive it without a problem.
In fact, my new vote for ya is a B18C5 swap. Seriously, try to forget about the turbo. It's fun, but if I could drive the **** out of my turbo LS on a track and not worry about it, I'd be doing it everyday. I'm worried about something going out and blowing, and I'm only running 7 psi semi-tuned on a fresh block. Good luck..
I second boostincoupe. Use the search function and read up to get the most out of your research.
I honestly think while a turbo road race Honda is certainly do-able, even 15 psi of boost is stretching practibility. Read up on turbo's and you'll find out why.
Even with all the suspension in the world, you'll still have a crazy time driving it.
All-motor might be better for you and your driving style. More could possibly go wrong with a turbo motor, especially if you do HPDE's, and that could cause disaster. All-motor has less things to go wrong from a reliability stand-point. And instead of just jumping on the LS/VTEC bandwagon, you might look into building a B18C1 or saving all that money you (will) have and buying a B18C5. A B18C5 in a 2100 pound car will give you a crazy ride still, and you'll end up paying less for that swap than a fully built turbo. Not to mention you can daily drive it without a problem.
In fact, my new vote for ya is a B18C5 swap. Seriously, try to forget about the turbo. It's fun, but if I could drive the **** out of my turbo LS on a track and not worry about it, I'd be doing it everyday. I'm worried about something going out and blowing, and I'm only running 7 psi semi-tuned on a fresh block. Good luck..
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,277
Likes: 0
Re: (psychotic_z)
i turn 17 on march 6, but i work alot and save all my money and don't really spend it on any thing but my car, so i'll have enough to build a pretty good engine
I'll start to look into doin an allmotor set up....
Modified by R-Spec at 2:29 PM 4/3/2004
I'll start to look into doin an allmotor set up....
Modified by R-Spec at 2:29 PM 4/3/2004
If you're building a dream setup here, let me point out a few things you should change:
CP Pistons instead of Crower or JE
Pauter rods instead of Eagle
TiAL Wastegate
TiAL blow off valve instead of Blitz
Aeromotive fuel pressure regulator instead of B&M
Golden Eagle Fuel Rail instead of STR
Aeromotive fuel pump
Might as well upgrade to 10-AN fuel lines from the tank to the rail
etc...
CP Pistons instead of Crower or JE
Pauter rods instead of Eagle
TiAL Wastegate
TiAL blow off valve instead of Blitz
Aeromotive fuel pressure regulator instead of B&M
Golden Eagle Fuel Rail instead of STR
Aeromotive fuel pump
Might as well upgrade to 10-AN fuel lines from the tank to the rail
etc...
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,205
Likes: 0
From: MASSHOLE
Re: (DaX)
Motec? as well as a brembo gran turismo kit? you are talking almost 8 grand right there. If you want a track car, safe yourself the trouble and buy yourself a e36 M3. Will be alot easier and a hell of a lot more reliable.
Mike
Mike
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
From: U of A, AZ, US
Re: (R-Spec)
If you're keeping your B18A block, you can do a few things to make some all-motor madness... Now this'll still cost, but it'll last a lot longer and (personally) will drive a lot smoother and run well on a track.
If you want a serious N/A setup, btw, look into what they run on Honda's for the N1-spec races. They build serious setups that get abused..and they have all the tricks. But you probably shouldn't aim for that.
Keep your B18A block and get it sleeved and bored to 85mm. Add rods, high compression pistons, and a B16 head. Get the head ported and polished, add a Skunk2 intake manifold or AEBS manifold, add cams and valvetrain, good header, Hondata or other management, and you'll have a decent start. Keep that as your base and go from there and you'll be at well over 200whp and you can drive it everyday. If you road race, you'll enjoy the torque and power that setup'll give you, and you'll still have money saved over the turbo setup.
If you want a serious N/A setup, btw, look into what they run on Honda's for the N1-spec races. They build serious setups that get abused..and they have all the tricks. But you probably shouldn't aim for that.
Keep your B18A block and get it sleeved and bored to 85mm. Add rods, high compression pistons, and a B16 head. Get the head ported and polished, add a Skunk2 intake manifold or AEBS manifold, add cams and valvetrain, good header, Hondata or other management, and you'll have a decent start. Keep that as your base and go from there and you'll be at well over 200whp and you can drive it everyday. If you road race, you'll enjoy the torque and power that setup'll give you, and you'll still have money saved over the turbo setup.