d16 vtec head matched wtih a d17 block?
 

Re: d16 vtec head matched wtih a d17 block? (90 Si Hatch)
 

???? https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif https://honda-tech.com/forums/images...s/emthdown.gif https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif https://honda-tech.com/forums/images...s/emthdown.gif ????

Re: d16 vtec head matched wtih a d17 block? (90 Si Hatch)
 

https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif https://honda-tech.com/forums/images...s/emthdown.gif https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif https://honda-tech.com/forums/images...s/emthdown.gif ???? https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif https://honda-tech.com/forums/images...s/emthdown.gif https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif https://honda-tech.com/forums/images...s/emthdown.gif

yup it will in fact it will also raise your compression and should proform quite well.p.s.
get a very thin after market head gasket and torque head down properly...

Re: (ek4 sir civic)
 

Well its not something i'm going to jump right on just thought for the future....

Anyone else have anything to say about this???

Re: (90 Si Hatch)
 

Anyone else?

anyone? what about d17 crank into d16y?

Re: (DecentCivicZ6)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DecentCivicZ6 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">anyone? what about d17 crank into d16y?</TD></TR></TABLE>

The d17 is a piece of shit. Instead of making a 16/17 hybrid (pointless), just swap in a full d16.

Re: (DecentCivicZ6)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DecentCivicZ6 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">anyone? what about d17 crank into d16y?</TD></TR></TABLE>

yes it will fit however dont you have to use the d17 oil pump with this crank? so there for you would have problems with the oil stick seen as the location is different on the d17 a better choice of blocks for this mod would be the d16z with the d17 crank

Re: (richard7968)
 

The d17 was a miserable failure.

Anyone who wants to stroke out a d16 needs to brush up on basic engine theory.

Re: (Semtec)
 

I was just talking about the D17 block and and a D16Y8 or Z6 head....

Re: (Semtec)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Semtec &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The d17 was a miserable failure.

Anyone who wants to stroke out a d16 needs to brush up on basic engine theory.</TD></TR></TABLE>

lol

And what basic engine theory would that be?

There are two classes of people those who like to stroke and those who don't personally i am not a fan of stroker motors but then again there are many who swear by it I understand both ideas for and against just depends on your preference i guess??? https://honda-tech.com/forums/images...es/emdgust.gif

Re: (richard7968)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by richard7968 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

lol

And what basic engine theory would that be?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

I'll interpret the "lol" as a sign of ignorance and point you in the right direction as far as doing your own research.

The factory D16 r/s ratio is a disgusting 1.52, resulting in a choked off, torquier (sic) engine than could be achieved with a more ideal r/s. This results in excess loading on the thrust side of the cylinders which causes premature sleeve/ring wear and a penchant for cylinder walk (i.e. blown head gaskets). In an attempt to wow consumers with a seemingly better motor (+7 ft-lbs) Honda decided to follow the standard protocol by cheaping out and stroking the existing 1.6L to 1.7L. This of course resulted in an all-time low for d-series r/s ratios: 1.45.

The D17 is trash and should be treated as such. The highest output D16 motors have always been de-stroked to 1.5L to achieve a better r/s ratio. This allows higher revving (9k+) which is the only possible way to get decent power from a sub-2L engine.

Re: (Semtec)
 

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

I'll interpret the "lol" as a sign of ignorance

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

I did not disagree or agree with what you were saying so how can that be interpreted as anything?

Once again to clarify

I said the following:-

"There are two classes of people those who like to stroke and those who don't personally i am not a fan of stroker motors but then again there are many who swear by it I understand both ideas for and against just depends on your preference i guess???"

For the record and perhaps the only inconclusive mistake I made was not to make it clear that I was not talking about any particular honda engine the above statement highlighted in " "

Also for the record I understand what your talking about in your post you do not have to dress your self up with your immature insults and bashing me to make your self look smart

There was no intentional disrespect from my post so why on earth you felt you needed to "ETHUG" bash me I do not know

Either way thanks for your explanation my only hope is next time you take a deep breath before you come swinging at me!

I dont wanna do a d17 into a d16...lol..it was a question..i have my setup already.

Lots of BS here
 

I find the comments on this thread funny (with all respect).

First of all you CANNOT put a a D17 head on a D16 block or vice versa. I had both engines in my shop and can easily see that they DO NOT MATE UP. PERIOD.

Now as far as stroking a D16 with a D17 is concerned... Sorry if the R/S ratio numbers aren't acceptable to you theorists. Someone ought to tell Jim Truett that this idea will produce an engine that has "a penchant for cylinder walk". This type of comment seems to be from one who spends to much time reading theory and not enough time in the shop.

Jim Truett's stroker build:
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1908915

I also find it interesting that there are comments bashing Honda's choice in engineering their consumer car engine, I repeat, CONSUMER CAR ENGINE. As in, NOT DESIGNED FOR 9000 RPM on the track but for Grandmas and chicks on the road.

Re: Lots of BS here (sql_civic)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sql_civic &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Now as far as stroking a D16 with a D17 is concerned... Sorry if the R/S ratio numbers aren't acceptable to you theorists. Someone ought to tell Jim Truett that this idea will produce an engine that has "a penchant for cylinder walk". This type of comment seems to be from one who spends to much time reading theory and not enough time in the shop.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Not so much "theory" as common sense. Lower r/s = higher loading on the thrust side. Simple geometry. We already know it makes a difference because the D16s are notorious for popping head gaskets.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Jim Truett's stroker build:
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1908915</TD></TR></TABLE>

If the question was "could" you do it, then the answer is yes. You "could" do whatever you damn well please. That doesn't mean it's a good idea. People have been arguing the high comp turbo idea for years - still doesn't mean I buy into it.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I also find it interesting that there are comments bashing Honda's choice in engineering their consumer car engine, I repeat, CONSUMER CAR ENGINE. As in, NOT DESIGNED FOR 9000 RPM on the track but for Grandmas and chicks on the road.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Exactly. It's a consumer marketed piece of crap. Which is why I advise people to avoid the D17 like the plague.

Re: Lots of BS here (Semtec)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Semtec &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
D16s are notorious for popping head gaskets.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

well i have never had any problems with HG's or have anyone i know running d16's

as for

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sql _civic &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">This type of comment seems to be from one who spends to much time reading theory and not enough time in the shop.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

lol I would have to say that i understand and agree with both ideas of high revving and also the stroking of an engine as for which is better I guess that comes down to personal choice!


Although to pick upon what you said about reading and not enough building in this case I have to agree with SQL_CIVIC!

More provacative comments
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Semtec &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Not so much "theory" as common sense. Lower r/s = higher loading on the thrust side. Simple geometry. We already know it makes a difference because the D16s are notorious for popping head gaskets.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Reliable stroked D16s exist that don't pop head gaskets that run at leat 12,000 miles. Dude, it's not a matter of theory, simple common sense, but a simple fact. It works because it was built right.

D16s that pop head gaskets = bad builds by college kids rookie engine builders on a budget.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Semtec &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
If the question was "could" you do it, then the answer is yes. You "could" do whatever you damn well please. That doesn't mean it's a good idea. People have been arguing the high comp turbo idea for years - still doesn't mean I buy into it.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

The idea has merit since it adds low rpm torque which adds performance in the band where most modified daily driven cars spend their time. Sorry, I don't mean to get you to "buy" this but it would be more fair to say what the trade-offs are in engine design rather than to take one side and say that the other is crap. But maybe you're not interested in credibility.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Semtec &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Exactly. It's a consumer marketed piece of crap. Which is why I advise people to avoid the D17 like the plague.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Again, factory Civics are not race cars. For a daily driven reliable commuter car they are not crap.

Re: More provacative comments (sql_civic)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sql_civic &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
D16s that pop head gaskets = bad builds by college kids rookie engine builders on a budget.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif

Re: More provacative comments (richard7968)
 

The D series "bad" r/s ratio is not the end of the world; in fact there is a benefit to it.

Never blew a headgasket on a D16 and don't know anyone that has. I've come across plenty of 200k + D15's with blown headgaskets for sale on Craigslist, but I think you were referring to performance tuned motors.