Yes, It's probably been answered a thousand times...

Just for the sake of arguing with my other personality, please help me with my mind boggling questions.

I'd really like to swap my useless D15B7 for a higher output DOHC VTEC. I found a couple of websites that carry short-block crate engines. Those engines being: B16A, B16B, and the B18C. All three are supposed to be JDM's built by Spoon Sports. I'm wanting to go all-motor, (respect thing), but I'm curious which engine will give me the better power: low, mid, and top end. I'm one of those daily drivers who like to occasionally hand people their asses. So the reliaibility is a must. And is Spoon Sports a reliable company to go with, and if so, how much power and torque will a Spoon JDM B18C create? I've searched on the sites and get nothing. Also...Explain the difference between HP and TQ. Do they go hand in hand? Or are they two totally different things? Please help me with all these questions and it will be greatly appreciated and I will forever respect you all. Again, sorry if this has been answered 1,000 times. Just need the solutions to my problems. Thanks. :banghead:

b18c; no replacement for displacement

yup b18c. hp is nothing its just a number you get from tq. tq is the number

b18c; no replacement for displacement
matter of opinion.
Just for the sake of arguing with my other personality, please help me with my mind boggling questions.

I'd really like to swap my useless D15B7 for a higher output DOHC VTEC. I found a couple of websites that carry short-block crate engines. Those engines being: B16A, B16B, and the B18C. All three are supposed to be JDM's built by Spoon Sports. I'm wanting to go all-motor, (respect thing), but I'm curious which engine will give me the better power: low, mid, and top end. I'm one of those daily drivers who like to occasionally hand people their asses. So the reliaibility is a must. And is Spoon Sports a reliable company to go with, and if so, how much power and torque will a Spoon JDM B18C create? I've searched on the sites and get nothing. Also...Explain the difference between HP and TQ. Do they go hand in hand? Or are they two totally different things? Please help me with all these questions and it will be greatly appreciated and I will forever respect you all. Again, sorry if this has been answered 1,000 times. Just need the solutions to my problems. Thanks.
The b18c is an excellent motor. Where are you viewing these motor's? inlinefour.com? Please take in mind that anything with a spoon label is going to be much more expensive. Don't get me wrong spoon makes excellent equipment, but take in mind these motor's were merely rebuilt by spoon. try looking for a motor without a spoon label under it. Also I'm curious to know if you plan on adding forced induction?

matter of opinion.

why do you say that? its proven that a bigger engine makes more power.

why do you say that? its proven that a bigger engine makes more power.
Because there is a replacement for displacement; Forced Induction. I don't know if that's what he was refer to, but I agree with him that the statement is a matter of opinion.
You could have a B20 CRV motor against a d16z6 running 10psi and making 260whp. Of course the B20 has more displacement. Butwho's faster, who has more torque, and who would win a race? Of course if the B20 and d16 were both boosted and had the exact same whp, the CRV engine would have more torque and win in a ¼ race; but that has nothing to do with the conversation.

HP and Torque are ##'s Power to weight ratio is what really matters.

HP and Torque are ##'s Power to weight ratio is what really matters.

:iagree:

Too often people overlook the concept of power to weight ratios.

why do you say that? its proven that a bigger engine makes more power.
Like I said Its a matter of opinion the fact remains that honda's produce outstanding power utilizing less cylinder's and less displacement. By utilizing a short stroke and a large bore / (high RPM). Let me familiarize you with honda engineering in comparison to domestic muscle (I assume your reffering to muscle cars, when you say "bigger engine" either way just use this as an example). Alright muscle car engines are built for torque, rather than horsepower. As a rule, larger bore equals more horsepower, while a longer stroke equals more torque. A long stroke allows the engine to produce power for a longer period of time which equals more torque. Torque is never a bad thing to have but there is a drawback to a long stroke, b/c the piston must travel a longer distance, there is a physical limit to how many RPM's the engine can achieve. Now an engine with a large bore and short stroke will produce less overall torque, but has the ability to reach much higher RPM's, and more HP overall, using a lower displacement. Honda's utilize this technology- having the ability to rev much higher than most other automotives. Meaning that a honda won't accelerate as quickly right off the line as a domestic, but they are able to accelerate for longer in the same gear (9,000 rpm redline vs. a 5,500 rpm redline for example). Just b/c a engine has a lower displacement and/or less cylinders than another engine dosen't mean its more effective. Forced induction as was already stated below, is another reason he would not want a b18c1 (although anyone whom knows me, knows I seem to get the best results from b18c1's) The fact remains that now your looking at the problem of dual intake runners.

Forgive me for rambeling off topic.
honestly there are over a dozen of these no replacement for displacement threads which I've argued. The fact remains that its still just a matter of opinion. (I'm not trying to offend anyone)

honda's engineering is good, but if you think about it; the b18c revs just as high as the b16a. force induction and revs arent a replacement for displacement. no i wasnt refering to domestics; im talking about in general. people are excited about making a b16 hit 200whp fully built na, while there are fully built b18c's hitting 260hp, and stock internal k20's hitting 250hp. you guys are always comparing a larger displacement NA car against a smaller displacement turbo engines; thats not a fair matchup; and thats why they create different classes for them.
you talk about the d16 making more power, using boost; you're right about it not having to do with the conversation because he wants to go all-motor instead of FI.
think about it, its proven theres no replacement for displacement; even honda knows that: the nsx engines was bumped from 3liter to 3.2 liter, all b16 and b18 engines are replaced with a 2liter k motor, the b20, f-engines, and h-engines replaced with the even larger 2.4l k-motors.

i think you mean instead of opinion; its more of what your application and budget is*

No what I was saying is that the statement of "no replacement for displacement" isn't always true. I wasn't talking about anything to do with the original topic. And FI is a replacement for displacement. I was saying that instead of boreing a block out to get more displacement or buying a block with more displacement, you can replace it with a smaller engine and turbo it. So FI is a replacement for displacement. And I was refering to matching a turbo bigger motor and turbo smaller motor having nothing to do with the discussion; not turbo in general. Of course a turbo'd (say b20) would have more hp than a turbo'd (say d16). I was stating that a turbo d16 would beat an N/A motor with more displacement. Thereby being a replacement for displacement and futher explaining my opinion. So in the conversation of "no replacement for displacement" comparing N/A cars to turbo ones is a good example. Yes it's not a fair match up when comparing the differences in relation to other thing, but in that discussion it is. But you disagree with that, and I disagree with you; that's where it becomes a matter of opinion.

i believe that engines can only be compared when they are on a level field; like N/A vs. N/A and FI vs. FI. in the case of small displacement turbo vs. N/A in general; any FI motor is going to make more power. crank up boost and increase revs; such in the case of the old f1 cars that made over 1000hp with 1.5l turbo engines. but in this case; hes talking about all motor. in all motor, revs cant even make up for displacement in this case.

It's damn good to have hybridsol posting again!

That is all

honda's engineering is good, but if you think about it; the b18c revs just as high as the b16a. force induction and revs arent a replacement for displacement. no i wasnt refering to domestics; im talking about in general. people are excited about making a b16 hit 200whp fully built na, while there are fully built b18c's hitting 260hp, and stock internal k20's hitting 250hp. you guys are always comparing a larger displacement NA car against a smaller displacement turbo engines; thats not a fair matchup; and thats why they create different classes for them.
you talk about the d16 making more power, using boost; you're right about it not having to do with the conversation because he wants to go all-motor instead of FI.
think about it, its proven theres no replacement for displacement; even honda knows that: the nsx engines was bumped from 3liter to 3.2 liter, all b16 and b18 engines are replaced with a 2liter k motor, the b20, f-engines, and h-engines replaced with the even larger 2.4l k-motors.
It only rev's as high b/c of the dual intake sutup which is horrible for a turbo motor, (I was not aware he wanted to do all motor?) The intake runner incorporates 8 runners, 1 for each cylinder, unlike a regular intake which has 1 per cylinder. there is also a butterfly valve on four of the runners controlled by a solenoid and vacuum pressure. In the case of the b18c1, the motor runs on 4 runners, to breathe at 7500 rpms. the solenoid is actived, vacuum pressure opens the butterfly valves, and allows all 8 runners to feed air into the cylinders. The b16a2 does not work on this dual stage system, and still creates attiquite rpm's. Again this is Honda technology at work. (my first post was merely an example of why there is sometimes replacement for displacement, I used musle cars b/c they tend to have a larger displacement.)
i think you mean instead of opinion; its more of what your application and budget is*
(I assure you budget has nothing to do with it. I have two honda's both make over 260hp (The numbers you quoted above.))

I didn't know that having those secondary runners were bad for boost, how is that so? It's just a shorter path to the motor and more air + more fuel = more power. My motor has the same IM setup with the second set of runners and there have been a few people who have boosted these motors and haven't really complained about any problems with them. Care to inform the un-informed?

I didn't know that having those secondary runners were bad for boost, how is that so? It's just a shorter path to the motor and more air + more fuel = more power. My motor has the same IM setup with the second set of runners and there have been a few people who have boosted these motors and haven't really complained about any problems with them. Care to inform the un-informed?
ok the longer smaller diameter runners are much more restrictive because of there square cross section. Meaning when you look from an end view, the shape of the primary runner is square not round or oval, they also add aerodynamic drag on the flow. Since square shaped runners have more surface area, the boundary layer between the air flow and the runner wall is stickier and creates more turbulent flow which disrupts the speed of the flow and the amount that reaches the chamber. The design of the B18c1's intake manifold dual stage runners is to provide more low to mid rpm torque with the longer, narrower square runners and then increase flow for the upper rpm torque gains by having oval (low drag) larger diameter (low restriction) shorter secondary runners open up, along with the primaries in an N/A setup. The result is a wider torque curve that sits at peak torque across a longer rpm range. The 8 runners have a combined greater surface area and would restrict a turbo's efficiency for filling the chamber. You don't need long primary narrow runners to build up more flow velocity in the low to mid rpm torque with a turbo. Since you aren't filling the chamber like an N/A engine, you are actually stuffing in the air. Also the b18c1's intake manifold's plenum is really too small for a turbo. You need an intake manifold with a larger plenum volume and 4 runners (not 8 runners) for less surface area drag that are larger in diameter and shorter in length, it makes them much less restrictive.

the b18c doesnt use dual runners; and i was never referring to using a turbo engine. the whole runner length/diameter has to do with flow and resonance tuning. heres a good writeup on intake manifold design: http://www.hondalife.com/modules.php?name=Sections&op=viewarticle&artid=2

the b18c doesnt use dual runners; and i was never referring to using a turbo engine. the whole runner length/diameter has to do with flow and resonance tuning. heres a good writeup on intake manifold design: http://www.hondalife.com/modules.php?name=Sections&op=viewarticle&artid=2
....yes it does the GSR motor has dual intake runners.....

the b18c doesnt use dual runners; and i was never referring to using a turbo engine. the whole runner length/diameter has to do with flow and resonance tuning. heres a good writeup on intake manifold design: http://www.hondalife.com/modules.php?name=Sections&op=viewarticle&artid=2
If your reffering to an ITR, that entire motor was built for high rev, right down to the piston skirts coated with molybdenum. its a lightweight high compression motor, and also is all about high rev. right down to its high CR. I know the american copy of it very well, the b18c5 I have one in a del sol. I don't think he has reffering to a jap spec ITR...... That can be pricey.

since he said b16b im thinking he is also talking about the jdm b18c :shrug:

ah, I have been enlightened thanks hybrid.