STL engine builds?

[Greg Amy]

You're so not a Honda guy....

Thanks for the schoolin'.

Greg, how is your setup coming along?

I'm not planning on any engine changes this coming year, built too many this last year. Might work on a better intake/exhaust but the focus is to get the car down to its minimum weight, work on chassis and aero, and qualify to attend the 2012 Runoffs.

^ b17a1 I *think* hits the sweet weight min spot for my EG. Rare is an understatement.

2210# min weight, 160/117 hp/tq stock. Probably a revver? Can it be built from scratch from common other Honda parts?

Then again, the B16A2(?) from the Civic is 160/111 hp/tq stock, more readily available, DEFINITELY a revver, and you can weigh 130 pounds less... (back me up on my data there, "Honda guy"... )

GA

[coreyehcx]

Rod stroke ratio is 1.63 on the b17a1, 9.7:1 compression compared to the b16a2's 1.75 r/s and 10.2:1 comp so it should stand to gain more by getting to the 11.0:1 limit. The revving is going to be similar with the allowances on the motors and the r/s ratio still keeps it in the spinner zone.

The heads are pretty much identical with the same pr3 cast and it has all the lego compatibilities as the whole B series family.

It would be a very interesting choice, they only made I think 5k total 92-93 gsr's so sourcing these engines is a problem and they have a higher premium because of it.

It is not impossible to source a short block, get a pr3 usdm head and go to town.

Is it worth it over the b16? Probably not once the additional weight is added for the extra 100cc's. I have not seen very many b17a1 builds over the years so Im not really sure what they are capable of, they could possibly be a decent option for this at the weight given.

[Chip42]

2210 lbs (1.7L) vs 2080 lbs (1.6L) - if you cant get your car down to 1.6L weight, the B17 IS THE way to go, adds less than a 1.8, keeps the "ITR" head and high specific output (class driver) and will make slightly more power than the 1.6. soup, as they say.

[lateapex911]

Wait, the ITR is specifically disallowed......because it has too high of a specific output. (Which is due to the head and intake and cams), but using the head is okey dokey??

Error 404: logic not found???

[Greg Amy]

Error 404: logic not found???

Error 505: Logic flies over head.

Type R engine raw output is above class envelope. If it were all about specific output* then we'd allow in the 8.4L Viper, which to STL standards would have to weigh 10,920 pounds (+2.5% for RWD...)

GA

* YOU ("royal you") are inferring the specific output as a requirement or "standard" for excellence and/or limits in the class. The regs do not imply that in any way.

[R2 Racing]

So where are you at with that setup? (Im guessing 170 based off your site)

STL is at 11.0:1, .425 lift, port matching/gasket but no additional mods to the intake. So I would assume those increases alone would produce pretty decent power on a b18a/b1 with that type of compression and lift for FP.

I would have thought you could be at the 200+ mark with the allowances in FP but I guess not.

More than 170whp, no where near 200whp. The highest output all-motor B18 I've ever built was a JDM ITR B18C engine, with CTR pistons and shaving for ~13.0:1, leaded race gas, complete aftermarket intake manifold, Hondata S300, pimpy exhaust, a huge, lumpy cam, and a valvetrain that let it rev to the moon. It did 201whp.

2210# min weight, 160/117 hp/tq stock. Probably a revver? Can it be built from scratch from common other Honda parts?

Then again, the B16A2(?) from the Civic is 160/111 hp/tq stock, more readily available, DEFINITELY a revver, and you can weigh 130 pounds less... (back me up on my data there, "Honda guy"... )

GA

Corey & Chip got it. If I could reach minimum weight for the B16, I'd pick it. If not, go with the B17. Yes, the B17 is real tough to find.

Jake - saying the B16 & B17 heads are "ITR heads" isn't exactly right. The molds are very similar, to say that they do indeed flow well, but they don't have the machining done to them that the ITR head does. The GSR B18C1 head is the "bastard child" of them all, with a totally different manifold bolt pattern and worse flow.

[mossaidis]

In that vein, I think a CRX with a built B16 would do some damage in STL - it's been said before. I just invested $5K on a 10/10th ITA motor build and accessories (D16z6) so I don't see myself building a full STL B16 or B17 anytime soon. Given that fact I am now engaged, soon to be married and thinking about buyin a place in NYC... gulp... it may be 5 years or so. In the back of my head though, I wonder what would be the whp if we took my IT D16z6 motor, placed a (edit) CAI, .425 crower cam, ~11:1 pistons (less head shave) and alum flywheel in it. 173 whp based on 12 lbs/1 whp? no way... that's should be B16 territory as that's ~195 chp. Lots of torque from a STL D16? yup. It would be fun at shorter tracks.

Getting down to weight (2080) on a STL EG involves all the lexan and carbon fiber fixings, so 190 lbs less than non-ballasted IT weight.... more $.

[JS154]

What consitutes an engine swap as long as engine and chassis manufacturer are the same?

OK some are easy, like Honadcura, Toylexus, and Infinissan.

But what about GM stuff? Saturn/Pontiac/Chevy? Considered the same manufacturer?

Or what about the Pontiac Vibe/ Toyota Matrix?

Ford/Mazda?

Ford/Merkur?

VW/Audi...Porsche?

BMW/Mini? Tritec (manufacturer of engines for the 1stgen BMW Mini's) is now owned by FIAT. A Mini engine in a FIAT - hey I think I just solved the B-Spec FIAT problem!


Mercedes/Chrysler?

Plymouth (Conquest or Laser)/Mitsubishi (Starion or Eclipse)

GM/Suzuki?

GM/Isuzu...but Toyota now owns a portion of Isuzu...the Isuzu Trooper and Rodeo is a shared platform with the Honda Passport and Acura SLX...

GM/Saab...Subaru? (9-2X, the Saabaru) ...but Toyota now owns a portion of Subaru as well...

Oh Pleiades, this is getting complicated!



And now, for something completely different....

If we start with VW Group (Lamborghini and Audi and Porsche), but recall Porsche did the development work jointly with Mercedes on the E500 (cool car!) and there's the Mercedes/Daimler/Chrysler connection....and the Chryser/Plymouth Prowler came from that marriage...and Mitsubishi jointly developed the Starion/Conquest with Plymouth (Chrysler)....Mitsubishi is also involved in OEM production of Nissan vehicles, (Nissan is owned by Renault, and Daimler and Renualt make engines for each other). If we look a little further, we can see that the Nissan Pulsar and the Holden (GM) Astra are the same....which now also ties into the GM/Isuzu joint manufacturing. Going back to the Isuzu/Honda joint manufacturing....

Dammit, I'm putting a Honda B16A2 engine into a Porsche 924. It may need a different intake manifold with individual throttle bodies to fit though...

In all seriousness, I think the engine and chassis manufacturer definitions could use a little clarifying as to what's really allowed.

[coreyehcx]

I just want to clarify that the head is not an "ITR" head.

Chip, don't say that word or those letters!

[JS154]

Actually, now that I think of it, a Cayman 2.7L engine in an Acura NSX would be a great car for STU!

[Greg Amy]

What consitutes an engine swap as long as engine and chassis manufacturer are the same?

It's a fine question, one that we've debated within the committee. We got a request mid-year about the compliance of putting a VW engine into a Porsche. That led to a lot of "tree falls in the woods/makes a sound" discussions and in the end we said, "sure, if you want to put a VeeDub 4-cyl in your Porsche 944, have at it."



Now, does that allow one to put a Lexus V6 engine into a Lotus Exige or Pontiac Vibe because the car originally came with a Toyota engine? That's a good question, one I don't have an official answer for. But in my opinion, I'd suggest two things to consider:

- Is there a direct familial or structural relationship between the chassis and the desired engine to install? For example, I suggest - as an opinion - that since there is no direct structural or familial relationship between Lotus and Toyota (as far as I know), then that Lexus V6 into an Exige install would be non-compliant. However, there is/was a relationship between Porsche and Volkswagen.
- Ask first. Don't go through all that time, money, trouble, and effort just to get protested and lose on appeal. The VW/Porsche example shows that the CRB is reasonable on the idea/ideal, so in this case it's best to ask for permission instead of forgiveness.

This probably shouldn't be a game of "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon"... - GA

[Ron Earp]

What consitutes an engine swap as long as engine and chassis manufacturer are the same?

Why does the engine and chassis manufacturer have to be the same? An engine is an engine is an engine, it doesn't know who made it or what chassis it is powering. If the class is about displacement/weight then it seems like if you wish to run your Honda motor in VW chassis then it should be fine.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Still hoping someone will clarify the 100hp/liter target.

WHP or Crank?
Examples of cars that fit this target with some math?

Thanks.

[Knestis]

Why does the engine and chassis manufacturer have to be the same? An engine is an engine is an engine, it doesn't know who made it or what chassis is powering it. If the class is about displacement/weight then it seems like if you wish to run your Honda motor in VW chassis then it should be fine.

That question follows logically AFTER, "Why no JDM or Euro market engines from the SAME manufacturer?" There's no good answer from the CRB on that, so far as I can tell. The official line is crapola.

K

[Rabbit07]

That question follows logically AFTER, "Why no JDM or Euro market engines from the SAME manufacturer?" There's no good answer from the CRB on that, so far as I can tell. The official line is crapola.

K

Exactly.

[dickita15]

Why does the engine and chassis manufacturer have to be the same? An engine is an engine is an engine, it doesn't know who made it or what chassis is powering it. If the class is about displacement/weight then it seems like if you wish to run your Honda motor in VW chassis then it should be fine.

There is a class for that, it is called CSR.

[Greg Amy]

Wait, the ITR is specifically disallowed......because it has too high of a specific output. (Which is due to the head and intake and cams), but using the head is okey dokey??

Error 404: logic not found???

Follow up on this, I had a conversation with Jake last night, I wanted to make sure there are no other misunderstandings. Need some Honda Guy backup to make sure this is correct...

The GS-R's B18C1 engine is from the B-series family (obviously) but has that "bastard" head that Kevin described. It's a poor(er) design, not as good flow and it's coupled to a less-than-optimal variable-flow intake manifold with butterflies.

When Honda built the Type R's B18C5 engine they used the same bottom end basic design as the GSR engine but slapped on the superior B16 head, with better flow characteristics. More importantly (in my mind) the ITR got a 4-port, large plenum, no butterflies intake manifold and bigger throttle body. Because of the difference in the head, that intake manifold will not fit on the GSR head, but Skunk make a "repli-manifold" that will:

http://store.skunk2.com/engine-tunin...-manifold.html

So if you see that on my engine, you know I'm'a cheatin'... No clue why Honda went with that "bastard" head, maybe it was an initial B-sereis design that they later improved upon.

So, Jake, that B16/ITR head is NOT legal on the GSR, but it is the stock head design for the B16 engine.

GA

[mossaidis]

(part joke) Dear Nissan guy, google.com is our friend. Signed, Honda guy level 1. (Ruck us Hondaguy level 8+)

http://www.itrsport.com/technical.html



"Its additional horsepower, which is 25 more than the 170-horsepower Acura Integra GS-R, is the result of key technological achievements such as:

• High-compression, low-friction pistons,
• High-performance camshafts and valve gear.
• Larger throttle body and single-port intake manifold,
• Hand-polished intake and exhaust ports
• High-volume induction and exhaust system

The engine also features Programmed Fuel Injection (PGM-FI), a highly rigid crankshaft with eight full balance weights, a crankshaft reinforcing bridge, an oil cooling system and oil jet piston cooling, twin-spring intake and exhaust valves, a highly rigid integrated aluminum die-cast engine stiffener, and a number of other technologies to increase performance while maintaining reliability and durability, along with smooth operation."

EDIT More head differences...

https://www.google.com/#hl=en&cp=27&...w=1280&bih=851

for sure, combustion chamber differences.

[Greg Amy]

(part joke) Dear Nissan guy, google.com is our friend. Signed, Honda guy level 1. (Ruck us Hondaguy level 8+)

Dear Honda Guy: please Google the term "same bottom end basic design".

Signed,

Nissan Guy



On edit: as I recall, the bottom end was improved primarily to handle the increased RPM. The extra top-end power comes from the slightly-increased compression but most of it from the superior head, intake manifold, and cams. That head will apparently bolt right on to the GSR bottom end and vice versa...

[mossaidis]

(Eric Cartman voice) "Basic differences" are not same when it comes to ST rules young man... you have A LOT to learn about SCCA. uh... tree huggin hippies.

Differences between GS-R and ITR short block assemblies. Bore and Stroke Dimensions might be the same, but that's about it.

http://www.itrsport.com/technical.html#crank

So, Jake, that B16/ITR head is NOT legal on the GSR, but it is the stock head design for the B16 engine.GA

This is true. Now that I have wasted valuable forum place and viewer time, I will get my first cup of coffee.