even better yet, i did your research for you http://www.cnblocks.com/projects.htm

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by snoochtodanooch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">even better yet, i did your research for you http://www.cnblocks.com/projects.htm</TD></TR></TABLE> Thanks man I really appreciate it. I don't mean to talk **** about people, I just hate haters. You have been rather helpful when it comes down to it. I can't say the same for other people as well. cstay was hating for a while but once we both got our **** talking out he/she has been a big help as well. Now I see where your coming from cstay, so your suggestion to make the motor capable of higher revs is to have a smaller bore but slightly longer stroke to equal the displacement lost in the downsized bore? That is just how I read it, correct me if I'm wrong.

 

You want technicalities? Do you really want me to put you through the gauntlet of questions you seem to be provoking with such bloated, pointless claims?

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Hmmm you make less and less sense to more you post. I will not HAVE this engine engineered specifically for me, I will do the engineering.</TD></TR></TABLE>

se·man·tics Audio pronunciation of "semantics" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (s-mntks)
n. (used with a sing. or pl. verb)

1. The meaning or the interpretation of a word, sentence, or other language form: We're basically agreed; let's not quibble over semantics.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">40+ years of Honda has made the choice to ignore this. The reason is they have two types of vehicles, all out race and production. Their production cars focus on fuel economy, reduced emissions, safety, fit and finish etc. Of course they aren't going to produce a V8 there is no point for them. They can make enough power out of their V6 for their production cars.</TD></TR></TABLE>

They can make enough power out of their V6's, eh? A brutal 290hp and 224tq! WOAH! Hold on to your ****, the NSX is coming through! That's a DOHC V6 with VTEC: the closest thing to your pipe dream that Honda has bothered to mass produce (insofar as the NSX is mass produced), and it's still a laughable, overpriced whipping boy compared to almost every other sports car in the world.

You, on the other hand, think that by taking two B16 heads and putting them on some as-yet-undetermined-displacement V8 block, you will be able to create something reliable, powerful and unique. Have you any clue as to the number of DOHC V8's on the market today? GM's Northstar, Ford's Modular, Infiniti's 5.6L, Toyota's 4.7L, etc.

Do you think your engine will be A.) significantly different or B.) as powerful and reliable as any of the above listed powerplants?

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Your attempt to minimize my ideas and ambition has failed miserably my friend. My bad, I didn't run my spell check on my post pertaining to a egotistical bone head from Colombus, OH, big ****** deal. You posted a few times in this topic, and yet none of the post show you have any know-how except in talking ****. That will get you far in life.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Oh, I think you're quite wrong in that assertion. I think we've all seen, through my posts and others', that you're doing nothing other than trying to gain attention: as poor reason for spending money as any other you can name short of funding the slaughter of orphans or something.

Nobody likes an attention *****. I mean, seriously: If you wanted to do something significant with two B-series engines, why would you not make an inline by siamesing crankshafts and working out a fluidamper between them? Is that not unique enough for your ricer mind or is it "too easy"? LOL.

I've personally seen the build up of a pair of siamesed LT1 engines and, if that guy can do it with a pair of V8's, it should be no sweat for you - in all your majestic, superflous knowledge of engineering that you've managed to osmose from the universe without the help of institutionalized education - to pull off with a couple B16's.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">YOU need to grow up and realize everybody is better than you, no matter what special scholarships you got or any of that ****. They are all better than you because their lives have a point, your just wasting air and helping the landfills fill quicker. Do us all a favor and drive your car off a cliff. The world would be a much better place. Or actually post something with a point. I still think the driving task would be easier for you to accomplish. So grow up, **** OFF, you got a problem with my dreams then deal with it. It's your problem not mine. But anyway have a great day.. </TD></TR></TABLE>

That's very adult of you. I really can't respond to that with anything constructive, so I'll just move on to asking you some questions about your hypothetical pipe dream.

1.) what material are you casting the block out of?
2.) what displacement are you working with?
3.) what's your rod/stroke ratio and what are the measurements for each?
4.) does your crankshaft have balance shafts or is the entire reciprocating assembly internally offset?
5.) what are you running your water pump off of?
6.) what kind of ignition system are you running?
7.) what kind of engine management are you "inventing" that will be any different from Hondata or Motec or any of the myriad other stand-alone ECUs?
8.) what is the degree of offset between your cylinder banks and will that offset allow for the engine to be put in a - LOL! - Civic?
9.) timing chain or timing belt?
10.) do you realize that the size and shape of the B16's combustion chambers is going to limit the bore of your engine and, thus, the only way to increase displacement is by upping the stroke or shortening the rods...either of which will **** with your ability to rev to 10,000rpm?
11.) hood/ground clearance?
12.) firewall clearance?
13.) shock tower clearance?
14.) are you retaining any of the Civic's (LOL!) original unibody or are you tube-framing the entire car to accept the AWD/RWD system you want to use from the RL (yet another ricer dream...sigh)?
15.) what happens to the gas tank?

There are the 15 that came immediately to mind. Get to work.

EDIT-

16.) where do the accessories go? Even if you're only running an alternator, it has to go somewhere...


Modified by Archidictus at 5:03 PM 5/5/2005

 

I sent CN blocks an email, we will see what the verdict is on the machining work. I figure if it is under $30k-$35K it would be worth doing, we'll see..

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Archidictus &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">se·man·tics Audio pronunciation of "semantics" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (s-mntks)
n. (used with a sing. or pl. verb)

1. The meaning or the interpretation of a word, sentence, or other language form: We're basically agreed; let's not quibble over semantics.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Agreed, lets get down to business.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Archidictus &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
1.) what material are you casting the block out of?
2.) what displacement are you working with?
3.) what's your rod/stroke ratio and what are the measurements for each?
4.) does your crankshaft have balance shafts or is the entire reciprocating assembly internally offset?
5.) what are you running your water pump off of?
6.) what kind of ignition system are you running?
7.) what kind of engine management are you "inventing" that will be any different from Hondata or Motec or any of the myriad other stand-alone ECUs?
8.) what is the degree of offset between your cylinder banks and will that offset allow for the engine to be put in a - LOL! - Civic?
9.) timing chain or timing belt?
10.) do you realize that the size and shape of the B16's combustion chambers is going to limit the bore of your engine and, thus, the only way to increase displacement is by upping the stroke or shortening the rods...either of which will **** with your ability to rev to 10,000rpm?
11.) hood/ground clearance?
12.) firewall clearance?
13.) shock tower clearance?
14.) are you retaining any of the Civic's (LOL!) original unibody or are you tube-framing the entire car to accept the AWD/RWD system you want to use from the RL (yet another ricer dream...sigh)?
15.) what happens to the gas tank?

There are the 15 that came immediately to mind. Get to work.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Oh BTW the B-series head idea was out the window a while ago. K-series has been decided on. The block will be forged alluminum. Around 6.0L +/- .5L. TBD, Yes, second order balance system. Electric WP, they work better anyway. Probably MSD ignition, obviously modified to some degree. I'm not inventing any managment system. An ECU can be re-programmed using HEX editing of ROMs and burning them on an EMPROMM chip. Basically UberdataX2. Most likely 45 degrees. Timing CHAIN, could run the WP if I wanted but I would prefer electric. That's why B-series was done away with. Hood and ground clearances are trivial at this point, along with the firewall and shock tower clearances. This can all be changed. I will most likely retain some of the Civic's origional unit body, but it will be cut in 4 to 6 pieces before it's put back together. The Legend rear-end will work. Doubt it if you will. Running this setup may require me to also have a trans made custom to make the car AWD and manual. It will need gas? J/K Fuel cells. Now can we all just get along from here out?

 

i like the twin NSX engine power idea better. its funny that you brought this up because i used to tell my old mustang buddy that 2 b16s are better than his 302 hahaha....but seriously i think twin nsx power would be easier and more effective

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by HondaFanatic708 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Agreed, lets get down to business.

Oh BTW the B-series head idea was out the window a while ago. K-series has been decided on. The block will be forged alluminum. Around 6.0L +/- .5L. TBD, Yes, second order balance system. Electric WP, they work better anyway. Probably MSD ignition, obviously modified to some degree. I'm not inventing any managment system. An ECU can be re-programmed using HEX editing of ROMs and burning them on an EMPROMM chip. Basically UberdataX2. Most likely 45 degrees. Timing CHAIN, could run the WP if I wanted but I would prefer electric. That's why B-series was done away with. Hood and ground clearances are trivial at this point, along with the firewall and shock tower clearances. This can all be changed. I will most likely retain some of the Civic's origional unit body, but it will be cut in 4 to 6 pieces before it's put back together. The Legend rear-end will work. Doubt it if you will. Running this setup may require me to also have a trans made custom to make the car AWD and manual. It will need gas? J/K Fuel cells. Now can we all just get along from here out? </TD></TR></TABLE>

i hope you don't plan on making turns. You are going to have soooo much mass up high it is ridiculous.

Is the car going to be RWD first or FWD first?

You can use pretty much any rear and diff you want, as it will all have to be modified to fit anyway, you wouldn't have to stay to a specific honda model. Just get a strong one, and the s2000 one is not strong. 240sx pumpkin would be better.

Along with the AWD question how are you mounting the engine. longitudanally or transverse.

What front differential are you using?

do you know they made a AWD civic 5 door back in the day? you should look into that.

how about AWS?

 

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

i hope you don't plan on making turns. You are going to have soooo much mass up high it is ridiculous.

Is the car going to be RWD first or FWD first?

You can use pretty much any rear and diff you want, as it will all have to be modified to fit anyway, you wouldn't have to stay to a specific honda model. Just get a strong one, and the s2000 one is not strong. 240sx pumpkin would be better.

Along with the AWD question how are you mounting the engine. longitudanally or transverse.

What front differential are you using?

do you know they made a AWD civic 5 door back in the day? you should look into that.

how about AWS?</TD></TR></TABLE> I am aware of the old school AWD civic but that thought hasn't come to mind until you mentioned it. They cam in a MT as well correct? I wouldn't use the rear-end out of an S2K, it just wouldn't be enough as mentioned. The Nismo is a consideration but I am also looking at the RL/Legend rear end. The engine will be mounted longitudanally. I'm somewhat at a hang up as far as front diff. If I mount it longitudanally I may have issues transfering power to the front wheels, so it may be just RWD. Fitting this V8 with a trans transversly wouldn't be too difficult. (I plan on widening the overall dimensions of the vehicle by at least 10 cm) Maybe that would be the best option to make the car AWD. But if I only shoot for RWD longitudanally would work best IMO. I respect your concern about the vehicle being top heavy, I might have to widen the angle of the V to offset this a bit. Plus the extra track should lower the risks of a higher, heavier center of gravity. AWS might be more headaches than it's worth. I haven't worked on a 4ws car before, how is the turning transmitted to the rear wheels, mechanically or electronically? FWD was considered. I was thinking about using an NSX drivetrain if I go with this. Maybe the trans case from the AWD civic or a MT CRV would be a good starting point to work that AWD aspect in. Someone mentioned how CRV transmissions are junk and I agree, at least for this purpose. But a trans can always be built to suit. All I would use it for is the section that transfers the power to the rear diff. The RL trans is not an option because it is auto and the motor is mounted transversly. The following is a side by side comparison of related measurements between the EJ civic and the RL:

<U>*******************Civic*************RL*********** ********
Overall width.............1,700mm..................1,847mm (14.7cm difference)
Overall length............4,395mm..................4,917mm (not a major concern)
Wheelbase................2,620mm.................. .2,800mm
Front track................1,475mm...................1,5 76mm
Rear track.................1,465mm..................1,5 85mm
************************************************** *******</U>

Now I will obviously look to widen the entire car by what now looks like roughly 15cm. I will widen the back more than the front to create the wider rear track commonly found in AWD or RWD cars. Overall there is about 280kg in weight difference (494lbs exactly stock) but I will obviously bring up the weight on my car with this project.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by HondaFanatic708 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> You guys are just making yourselves look like idiots who don't have a brain to use.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yea, you've said it 100 times by now. We don't care.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by HondaFanatic708 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">What information have you added to this post that actually has a valid point, none, so STFU and leave. LOL</TD></TR></TABLE>
I've added that you're an idiot, and that's a valid point. I never knew you got to control who posts and doesn't post in your thread too, that's a new one to me

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by HondaFanatic708 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">braindead people make me appreciate life so much more. Go try and expand your brain power by drinking some more Guiness..</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yea, we know, you've already gloated about yourself 100 times in the thread, you &gt; all, right. How about I just don't add info because...*gasp* I just dont care

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sporkcrx &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Yea, you've said it 100 times by now. We don't care.


I've added that you're an idiot, and that's a valid point. I never knew you got to control who posts and doesn't post in your thread too, that's a new one to me

Yea, we know, you've already gloated about yourself 100 times in the thread, you &gt; all, right. How about I just don't add info because...*gasp* I just dont care </TD></TR></TABLE> No I=all who actually use their brains. That's all I have to say about this. Keep posting, I don't care, it's your time your wasting.

 

How are you going to get that displacement with the B16's combustion chamber diameter and retain your ability to rev? You didn't answer my question about rod/stroke and the length of each - which, honestly, is one of the most important figures in building an engine around specific characteristics - and what bore size are you planning to run (also constituent on the combustion chamber diameter)?

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Most likely 45 degrees.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Why? Do you know the benefits and disadvantages of a narrow-angle engine as opposed to a conventional 90 or 60-degree setup? Might want to do some research here.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Timing CHAIN...That's why B-series was done away with.</TD></TR></TABLE>

All this fab work and you don't think it would be easy to switch from belt to chain systems? It's just a cam gear. Speaking of OHC's, there's no need to run another crank-to-cams chain in the back of the engine: you can just machine the cams to accept the gears on the opposite side and then run the singular drive chain to a gear-drive that will reverse the direction of rotation so the cams rotate the correct way.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Hood and ground clearances are trivial at this point, along with the firewall and shock tower clearances. This can all be changed.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I disagree. The firewall can be pushed around and the hood can be utterly obviated, but you can't just hack up the shock towers of a unibody, originally-front-drive car and expect **** to work out. You're nearly doubling the weight in the front of the car, moving the largest of the many centers of mass and (I'm assuming) turning the engine to face the front of the car. I'd say that's more than a trivial issue.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I will most likely retain some of the Civic's origional unit body, but it will be cut in 4 to 6 pieces before it's put back together.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Why?

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The Legend rear-end will work. Doubt it if you will. Running this setup may require me to also have a trans made custom to make the car AWD and manual.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Why AWD? You'll need something like a four-link in the rear to hold the pumpkin and such, but that's only tertiary compared to setting the front up in combination. There's not enough room for a V8 and AWD. I mean, technically, there's not room for a V8 anyway, but this is something I guarantee you're going to abandon once you step back from the LSD and consider wtf you're imagining. AWD is wasteful. RWD is going to be the easiest, most successful path for this - ahem - "project".

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It will need gas? J/K Fuel cells. Now can we all just get along from here out? </TD></TR></TABLE>

Unlikely. I really would like to see you answer the rest of my questions concerning rod/stroke/bore, bank separation and chain drives, though. This can be a happy little circle jerk if and only if you convince all of us that you have more than 1% of the necessary intelligence to undertake this project. If not - and I wouldn't cross your fingers - you continue to be our main source of comedy.

 

have you thought about using that one corvette engine it was like the zr-1 or some thing that came in limited edition vettes in the mid 90's it had a dohc setup if you could modify one of those then what about using it as a template.
also i dont know why no one has tried this but what if you tried to fabricate a block instead of casting one? you could just get some titanium and carbon fiber from mcmaster-carr in preformed sheets they even have titanium sleeves that you could use for cylinders. that way you could find a stock crank for a v-8. with the amount of after market support there is you could get what ever stoke you needed then have a machine shop turn down the rod journals.
and considering that your built your own block then you're pretty much open to whatever drivetrain you can get your hands on. you would probably be best off using the mustang t-5 or t-6 due to their high after market support and ability to handle high horse power. in fact if you used the crank, flywheel, and tranny from the mustang you would have all kinds of support.
connecting the heads wouldn't be that much of a problem either if you just use the exhaust ports on the right head for the intake you could have the traditional v-8 plenum. considering you just built a block you could easily build an intake.
and for engine mangement just use a aem ems with an msd dis 4 distributor-less ignition. nuff said.

 

dont forget that if u use any other block that the cylinders need to lign up with the combusition chambers in the cylinder head along with the rod and the crank so getting somthing from another car that that will lign up is not probable

 

i'm sure that their is something out there that is close or dead on. did you ever think that you could use suzuki psitons in a d-series?

 

you can also use toyota supra pistons.

 

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

How are you going to get that displacement with the B16's combustion chamber diameter and retain your ability to rev? You didn't answer my question about rod/stroke and the length of each - which, honestly, is one of the most important figures in building an engine around specific characteristics - and what bore size are you planning to run (also constituent on the combustion chamber diameter)?

I disagree. The firewall can be pushed around and the hood can be utterly obviated, but you can't just hack up the shock towers of a unibody, originally-front-drive car and expect **** to work out. You're nearly doubling the weight in the front of the car, moving the largest of the many centers of mass and (I'm assuming) turning the engine to face the front of the car. I'd say that's more than a trivial issue.


Why AWD? You'll need something like a four-link in the rear to hold the pumpkin and such, but that's only tertiary compared to setting the front up in combination. There's not enough room for a V8 and AWD. I mean, technically, there's not room for a V8 anyway, but this is something I guarantee you're going to abandon once you step back from the LSD and consider wtf you're imagining. AWD is wasteful. RWD is going to be the easiest, most successful path for this - ahem - "project".

Unlikely. I really would like to see you answer the rest of my questions concerning rod/stroke/bore, bank separation and chain drives, though. This can be a happy little circle jerk if and only if you convince all of us that you have more than 1% of the necessary intelligence to undertake this project. If not - and I wouldn't cross your fingers - you continue to be our main source of comedy.</TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by HondaFanatic708 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Oh BTW the B-series head idea was out the window a while ago. K-series has been decided on. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Awd was only a consideration BTW, the more I look at AWD the less likely it is to be possible with the setup I have in mind...

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by baseballinmyass &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i'm sure that their is something out there that is close or dead on. did you ever think that you could use suzuki psitons in a d-series?</TD></TR></TABLE>

I'm sure I could find something as well, the only concern I have about finding something already in production is the likelyhood of the bolt patterns being close is highly unlikely. I don't think duct tape would maintain cylinder compression.

Just thinking 98MM-102MM on stroke, 100MM Bore, I'm thinking 132MM on rod length.


Modified by HondaFanatic708 at 9:28 PM 5/5/2005

 

whats the bore on a stock k series?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by cstay &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">whats the bore on a stock k series?</TD></TR></TABLE>Bore X stroke on a TSX is 87mm x 99mm (3.43x3.90) 10.5:1 compression ratio, 2354 cc displacement.

The RSX bore x stroke is 86 mm x 86 mm (3.39x3.39) 11:1 compression, 1998 cc displacement.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by HondaFanatic708 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Bore X stroke on a TSX is 87mm x 99mm (3.43x3.90) 10.5:1 compression ratio, 2354 cc displacement.

The RSX bore x stroke is 86 mm x 86 mm (3.39x3.39) 11:1 compression, 1998 cc displacement. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Answer my Goddamned questions and quit stalling. I don't give a **** if you're using a B-head or a K-head: the same problems apply. You were all about bashing people for not putting tech in their threads a minute ago, so it's only fair that you either return the favor or admit that you haven't thought it out:

How do you get 6.0L of displacement with a K-series combustion chamber and still be able to rev high enough to make power?

 

I think you might have to ditch the AWD-SH idea because as far as I know, SH is controlled by the ecu and an ATTS computer (like that one on the prelude).

People with BB6-SH's know that if they wanted to switch their stock ecu's to any aftermarket one, they would have to dump their ATTs/SH system. I don't think there's any way to program it into the ecu because if there was so, AEM or Hondata would have surely solved the problem already.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Archidictus &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
How do you get 6.0L of displacement with a K-series combustion chamber and still be able to rev high enough to make power?</TD></TR></TABLE>

I also wonder about this.
If revability was somehow maintained with that large amount of displacement (Mostly all V8s have low redlines), you're talking about an insane amount of heat produced during the two staged VTEC you intend to implement. How do you plan on solving this problem?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Kal &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I also wonder about this.
If revability was somehow maintained with that large amount of displacement (Mostly all V8s have low redlines), you're talking about an insane amount of heat produced during the two staged VTEC you intend to implement. How do you plan on solving this problem?</TD></TR></TABLE>

He's going to use nitrous oxide to cool the rods and pistons as the first VTEC opens up the valvetrain .

 

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

Answer my Goddamned questions and quit stalling. I don't give a **** if you're using a B-head or a K-head: the same problems apply. You were all about bashing people for not putting tech in their threads a minute ago, so it's only fair that you either return the favor or admit that you haven't thought it out:

How do you get 6.0L of displacement with a K-series combustion chamber and still be able to rev high enough to make power?</TD></TR></TABLE>
Simple. A K24 (TSX/Acord Euro R) have 2354 cc displacement over 4 cylinders multiply this by 2 and we are already at 4708 cc. That extra 1292cc will be able to be made up by adding a slightly larger bore and more stroke (a minimually lengthened rod could help as well.) Yeah my deck height will have to be a little bit higher than the TSX because of the extra stroke.

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

I also wonder about this.
If revability was somehow maintained with that large amount of displacement (Mostly all V8s have low redlines), you're talking about an insane amount of heat produced during the two staged VTEC you intend to implement. How do you plan on solving this problem?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Well as I mentioned well above I will be using an electric waterpump for this project. The benefit there as far as cooling is concerned is huge. Even at idle ~1K RPM the waterpump is working in the 12k-15k rpm range. Just to be sure it stays cool enough...

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

He's going to use nitrous oxide to cool the rods and pistons as the first VTEC opens up the valvetrain .</TD></TR></TABLE> I will... But probably not how Archidictus is speaking of it. He's probably still bashing a little bit but oh well. Nitro rings work wonders. Probably triggered by some sort of temp switch like the fan switch, it will give a little burst of nitrous to cool the rad. I think ice cold coolant flowing at 12k rpm should cool the motor down significantly.

Now if 13MM of additional bore will make the K24 head combustion chamber be the issue how do you suggest resolving it oh great one?


Modified by HondaFanatic708 at 9:09 AM 5/6/2005

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Kal &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I think you might have to ditch the AWD-SH idea because as far as I know, SH is controlled by the ecu and an ATTS computer (like that one on the prelude).

People with BB6-SH's know that if they wanted to switch their stock ecu's to any aftermarket one, they would have to dump their ATTs/SH system. I don't think there's any way to program it into the ecu because if there was so, AEM or Hondata would have surely solved the problem already.</TD></TR></TABLE> I'm sure they would have. But we are talking about 2 completely different platforms here. The BB6-SH and the Legend. There is quiet a generation gap there. As well as the model gap. Any electronic signal can be monitored and in turn reproduced. Nothing is impossible. Easy, **** no, impossible, definitely not. A **** load of hard work and frustration, you bet...

 

you would need to increase the bore to about 105mm that should give you just over 6.0 but i think you should be worring abuot other things because some cars run better on lower displacement those cylinderheads might not run correctly with that set up