# Honda > VW? WHY!!!!????



## vdubspeed (Jul 19, 2002)

Got your attention huh








I've been spending a lot more time at http://www.honda-tech.com. Their forced induction section is pretty large and has lots of good info.
Anyway...I've always been and always be a VW person at heart but those damn Honda's make SO MUCH more Horsepower and torque than us so easily. And then they don't have to worry about 020 this and 02a that...
Here's a sample...this guy turboed his 1.6L D16 with a used greddy kit w/ 10psi and made 250hp AND torque!!!
http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=707635
Someone PLEASE explain why they get so much more power per pound of boost. And it's not just the D series motors...the B series motors give them WAY more power.
To finish on a good note...
VW>Honda
Thanks,
Jason


----------



## SSj4G60 (Aug 13, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (vdubspeed)*

b/c their heads flow ALOT more air than VW heads, i havent found any CFM#s but ive heard round 300cfm+ but dont quote me


----------



## just-in (Jun 13, 2004)

what kind of work would it take to make one of our heads flow like theirs?


----------



## B4S (Apr 16, 2003)

*Re: (just-in)*

A complete redesign, hundreds of hours in R&D, new castings....


----------



## SSj4G60 (Aug 13, 2001)

*Re: (B4S)*

i wonder how the head on the new 2.0T flows


----------



## just-in (Jun 13, 2004)

Hmm considering I'm only semteen, and on quite a budget I should just be satistfied with the head on my car now.


----------



## nycvr6 (May 4, 1999)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (vdubspeed)*

Head flow and high revving motors allowing them to run larger turbos.


----------



## bobqzzi (Sep 24, 2003)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (SSj4G60)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SSj4G60* »_b/c their heads flow ALOT more air than VW heads, i havent found any CFM#s but ive heard round 300cfm+ but dont quote me 

The 5 valve VW head flows as well as or better than the honda heads. Since Honda engines are designed for high specific output in normally aspirated form, they have large camshafts. Boost pressure is not a measure of airflow, it is a measure of inlet tract restriction, and short cams (like most VWs) increase restriction. Given equal cams a 1.8T will make just as much power per PSI.


----------



## Cabby-Blitz (Sep 2, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (vdubspeed)*

Yea Honda-Tech is great. Im over there a lot more now. But in GDD mostly.
Though it seems like every person who boosts a Honda, makes good power. Makes me want to boost my B18 Integra but I gotta keep reminding my self I want a good daily driver with out power to get in trouble.


----------



## TAIVW Boosted-Dubs (Dec 4, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (Cabby-Blitz)*

I have been reading Honda-Tech for 2 years and I can't even begin to think how many blown motor posts I have read in the FI forum!
Honda=F1 technology,BUT they do have to spend a lot to build up their blocks.They have to get them sleeved,etc.And V-Tec allows a aggresive cam profile unlike anything VW makes...


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (vdubspeed)*

we envy their heads.
they envy our blocks.


----------



## TURBOPHIL (Jan 31, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (TBT-PassatG60)*


_Quote, originally posted by *TBT-PassatG60* »_we envy their heads.
they envy our blocks.









Well said, I have seen a few with holes in the block from turbo and N02, but you really have to admire the amount of cc the head flows, bottom line is anything that revs over 8k rpm gotta make some power with boost.


----------



## GTijoejoe (Oct 6, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (nycvr6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nycvr6* »_Head flow and high revving motors allowing them to run larger turbos. 


exactly, but boy do they blow up easily...


----------



## blackmkIII (May 18, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (GTijoejoe)*

what nycvr6 said......and they have the ability to run upwards of 40 psi with a sleeved block.



_Modified by blackmkIII at 5:57 AM 2-11-2005_


----------



## veedub11 (Mar 10, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (blackmkIII)*

Not another H>VW post!







JK, these discussions are good because people like tech. and good performance instead of being bias to one manufactorer. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
BTW, they also envy our torque.


----------



## Scirocco20v (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (veedub11)*


_Quote, originally posted by *veedub11* »_
BTW, they also envy our torque.


They now have a fix for that. Its called the K24/K20 hybrid. My friend and I are building one for his Integra. Looking to get over 400whp on pump. 
BTW: the same friend put down 285whp 193wtq on his GSR at 8psi. 193wtq is plenty to keep them spinning into 3rd gear.


----------



## Cabby-Blitz (Sep 2, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (Scirocco20v)*

Yea those k20 look to be a sweet motor. I would love one in a hatch.
Check this one out http://hybrid-racing.com/image...1.wmv


----------



## dohc (Sep 28, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (Scirocco20v)*

Ya, they make great power, but have you seen where full boost hits?
Its usaully around 5000rpm+
But once full boost hits, the torque does stay nice and flat http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
I've own a few honda's and for everyday driving nothing beats the off boost torque of a VW (4cyl. vs. 4 cyl.)
I think VW engineering traded high flow numbers for flow velocity at low speeds so we have some torque http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
Now only if we had a vvt....


----------



## SSj4G60 (Aug 13, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (dohc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *dohc* »_Ya, they make great power, but have you seen where full boost hits?
Its usaully around 5000rpm+


Thats cause they run real turbos








But realize they rev to 8krpm, find a turbo that will spool by 4k and still pull efficiently till 8krpm and your looking at $$.


----------



## vdubspeed (Jul 19, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (SSj4G60)*

so what would it take to run high RPM?
head porting, better valve springs, bigger CAM, bigger turbo???
Let's take two DOHC 16V motors...the Honda B18LS(non-vtec) and match it against the 1.8L 16V VW engine.
what do we need to do to make more hp per psi?
Great discussion guys...


----------



## nycvr6 (May 4, 1999)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (veedub11)*


_Quote, originally posted by *veedub11* »_
BTW, they also envy our torque.

Envy our torque? Theyre learn otherwise once they start making more torque and break everything like we do. Ill gladly trade 100 ft lbs for 100 whp any day of the week.


----------



## nycvr6 (May 4, 1999)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (bobqzzi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *bobqzzi* »_The 5 valve VW head flows as well as or better than the honda heads. Since Honda engines are designed for high specific output in normally aspirated form, they have large camshafts. Boost pressure is not a measure of airflow, it is a measure of inlet tract restriction, and short cams (like most VWs) increase restriction. Given equal cams a 1.8T will make just as much power per PSI.

You have to be kidding me right? The 1.8T is crap, even VW phazed out the 5 valve per cylinder head, because it's junk. I remember hearing claims that the 1.8t head flows better than a 9 sec hondas head, what a load of crap, then why does it take 30 psi to make 350 whp on a 1.8T?


----------



## Scirocco20v (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (vdubspeed)*


_Quote, originally posted by *vdubspeed* »_so what would it take to run high RPM?
head porting, better valve springs, bigger CAM, bigger turbo???
Let's take two DOHC 16V motors...the Honda B18LS(non-vtec) and match it against the 1.8L 16V VW engine.
what do we need to do to make more hp per psi?
Great discussion guys...


Its just not in the head, look at stroke, rod length, and piston diameter. I know people with LS motors and t3 super 60's making over 300whp 300wtq


----------



## nycvr6 (May 4, 1999)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (SSj4G60)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SSj4G60* »_Thats cause they run real turbos








But realize they rev to 8krpm, find a turbo that will spool by 4k and still pull efficiently till 8krpm and your looking at $$. 

Oh us poor VW folk run "fake" turbos.


----------



## dohc (Sep 28, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (vdubspeed)*


_Quote, originally posted by *vdubspeed* »_so what would it take to run high RPM?
head porting, better valve springs, bigger CAM, bigger turbo???
Let's take two DOHC 16V motors...the Honda B18LS(non-vtec) and match it against the 1.8L 16V VW engine.
what do we need to do to make more hp per psi?
Great discussion guys...

More flow. IE bigger valves, smaller valve stems and more cc's in the ports. You can put in bigger valves with small stems, but if you port volume remains the same, you won't get anywhere the increase in flow you'd think. Vise Versa is true as well. But you don't want to go nuts with the port volume, you want the least amount of volume you can get away with to obtain the flow numbers you want.
Next is port shape, usaully the straighter the better...and since I've got to go back to work I'll talk more about shape later


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (nycvr6)*

It takes 30psi because the lift of the stock cams is abysmal. The head only can flow to the limit of valve lift. The 1.8T head is constrained in the fact that you can only increase the max valve lift so much before the cam lobe touches the side of the head. It's going to take a good amount of work to get around this. Great flowing head limited by valve lift


----------



## nycvr6 (May 4, 1999)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_It takes 30psi because the lift of the stock cams is abysmal. The head only can flow to the limit of valve lift. The 1.8T head is constrained in the fact that you can only increase the max valve lift so much before the cam lobe touches the side of the head. It's going to take a good amount of work to get around this. Great flowing head limited by valve lift









Right, so it is not a great flowing head because it can't be used to it's full potential. Dont use poor flowing heads as an excuse of not making power at high boost, us vr6 people have to deal with one of the most archaic head designs ever and we make power.


----------



## rbr20 (Jul 28, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (vdubspeed)*

Nice post http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (nycvr6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nycvr6* »_
Right, so it is not a great flowing head because it can't be used to it's full potential. Dont use poor flowing heads as an excuse of not making power at high boost, us vr6 people have to deal with one of the most archaic head designs ever and we make power.









A poor flowing head will create a lot of restriction, hence boost. The actual flow into the chamber will not be that great though. So is it an excuse? Maybe.


----------



## nycvr6 (May 4, 1999)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (tyrolkid)*

So, maybe the vr6's and the 1.8T's have the same problem, just seems to be worse for 1.8T's. Anyways, see you at Carmine's tonight. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## skillton (Sep 26, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (nycvr6)*

8v counterflow > 20v, 16v & VR


----------



## 2kjettaguy (Dec 24, 2000)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (skillton)*

So many of us say the same damn thing when we're first turboing our cars:
"I don't want to lose my low end torque"
T3 super 60's are not big HP makers... we need big ass turbos, compression lower than 10:1, head work, cams, and TUNING. 
just IMO


----------



## SSj4G60 (Aug 13, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (nycvr6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nycvr6* »_
Oh us poor VW folk run "fake" turbos.









No just that avg. people (Not including You and some others) dont run that big of a turbo. Good amount of them running SC61s or bigger yet how many here running that size turbo. Avg. person here running 50 trim (not saying its a bad turbo) but its small compared to what a good amount of them are running


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*B18C vs AEB*

Before we can obtain a solution,we must analyse the problem

_Quote, originally posted by *VW AEB* »_
*Displacement* = 1781cc
*Bore* = 81mm
*Stroke* = 86.4mm
*Block Height* = 220mm (236mm with ABA Block)
*Rod Length* = 144mm (can be made 162mm using a ABA Block)
*Head Flow CFM* = 225 Stock...can be ported to over 275?+ CFM's
*RPM Limit* = 7600 with Hydraulic Lifters



_Quote, originally posted by *HONDA B18C* »_
*Displacement* = 1797cc
*Bore* = 81mm
*Stroke* = 87.2mm
*Block Height* = 270mm
*Rod Length* = Over 170mm (need to verify this but it makes sense)
*Head Flow CFM* = 300+
*RPM Limit* = 10,000 (VTEC kicks in @ about 7000 Rpm's)


----------



## veedub11 (Mar 10, 2002)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (Wizard-of-OD)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Wizard-of-OD* »_Before we can obtain a solution,we must analyse the problem


That would be spot on.


----------



## nycvr6 (May 4, 1999)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (veedub11)*


_Quote, originally posted by *veedub11* »_That would be spot on.

You didnt finish your sentence. That would be spot on, if analyze was spelled correctly.


----------



## Scirocco20v (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (nycvr6)*

Its sad, theres a guy in upstate CT that puts down over 240whp and 150wtq on his all motor honda. 1.8t guys get that hp by running 15psi+ on upgraded turbos. 
Dont start will ohhh...it doesnt have torque. Line up to him if you think you can beat an 11 sec street car.


----------



## nycvr6 (May 4, 1999)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (Scirocco20v)*

Like i said before, screw torque, it only breaks parts.


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (nycvr6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nycvr6* »_You didnt finish your sentence. That would be spot on, if analyze was spelled correctly.









*analise*
there yuh happy?







(woops...poor sentence strucher)
*On Topic:*
How to Get more power out of the AEB (highest flowing engine VAG has to offer).Its a start...

_Quote, originally posted by *VW ABA/AEB* »_
*Displacement* = *1869.12*cc
*Bore* = *83mm*
*Stroke* = 86.4mm
*Block Height* = *236mm*
*Rod Length* = *164mm* (staying with 86.4 Crank + Custom Rods)
*Head Flow CFM* = 300 CFM's? - Couldnt find any documentation of such a high fly with a 20V Head.
*RPM Limit* = 10,000 with custom mechanical Lifters and Cams.


----------



## bobqzzi (Sep 24, 2003)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (nycvr6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nycvr6* »_
You have to be kidding me right? The 1.8T is crap, even VW phazed out the 5 valve per cylinder head, because it's junk. I remember hearing claims that the 1.8t head flows better than a 9 sec hondas head, what a load of crap, then why does it take 30 psi to make 350 whp on a 1.8T? 

Uh...no, I'm not kidding. If you were to look at some flow charts you would see that I am correct. The idea that the 1.8T is unduly constrained by an inability to run bigger cams is a myth. The stock cams are very small-they were shooting for 150-225HP with a turbo and wanted low end grunt, hence the small cams/turbos. Honda's come with much larger cams because, as I explained before, they are designed for high output in normally aspirated form. Add a turbo and they make excellent power per PSI, but a 1.8T with equivalent cams will make the same power. There are currently cams available for the 1.8T that would be good to 10,000rpm with a turbo.
VW went away from the 5 valve head becuase they went to direct injection which doesn't leave enough room for 3 intake valves
I made 360 hp on pump at 1.1 bar on a superflow engine dyno at 6500 rpm- we couldn't run it higher becuase of a sensor problem. I'll be back on the dyno in 2 weeks and will post results once it is tuned.
It may take 30 PSI to make 350WHP on a stock cammed 1.8T, but that is because the cams are so short. PSI doe NOT equal airflow, just inlet restriction.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (bobqzzi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *bobqzzi* »_The idea that the 1.8T is unduly constrained by an inability to run bigger cams is a myth. 

I stand corrected then


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (bobqzzi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *bobqzzi* »_There are currently cams available for the 1.8T that would be good to 10,000rpm with a turbo.

Yes you can obtain cams from anywhere,the Problem is are you going to fork out $3000+US for a Mechanical Lifter Kit from DahlBack?


----------



## Scirocco20v (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (Wizard-of-OD)*

3 grand = built GSR engine
I think Im going with a B18C1 in the Rabbit. Who needs torque when you weight 1900lbs.


----------



## bobqzzi (Sep 24, 2003)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (Wizard-of-OD)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Wizard-of-OD* »_
Yes you can obtain cams from anywhere,the Problem is are you going to fork out $3000+US for a Mechanical Lifter Kit from DahlBack?

No, I'd just make some, or buy the CAT suff.
http://www.catcams.be/800x600/...xx.js


----------



## nycvr6 (May 4, 1999)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (bobqzzi)*

Until youve made any sort of power, you are merely speculating . The proof is in the pudding, prove me wrong, id like to see this. so say what you want, it's all talk in my opinion. The vr6 has a pathetic head design, i made 632whp at 32 psi. Let's see you top that in a 1.8T with that geat flowing head.


----------



## nycvr6 (May 4, 1999)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (nycvr6)*

Stock head and stock cams on my vr6 as well.


----------



## nycvr6 (May 4, 1999)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (bobqzzi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *bobqzzi* »_PSI doe NOT equal airflow, just inlet restriction.

Thanks for teaching me, i didnt know what i was doing till you came along.











_Modified by nycvr6 at 7:19 PM 2-11-2005_


----------



## bobqzzi (Sep 24, 2003)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (nycvr6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nycvr6* »_Until youve made any sort of power, you are merely speculating . The proof is in the pudding, prove me wrong, id like to see this. so say what you want, it's all talk in my opinion. The vr6 has a pathetic head design, i made 632whp at 32 psi. Let's see you top that in a 1.8T with that geat flowing head. 

Well, I'm not going to run 32 PSI, but I would expect to make more than 630hp if I did.....but you are comparing aplles to oranges now. A VR6 is 2.8 liters..... about 55% larger. So 632x .643 = 406.376 HP. There are a number of 1.8Ts making that sort of power. 
Despite your claims to the contrary, the 1.8T head is an excellent head on an excellent bottom end.


----------



## Impact_Wrench (Nov 22, 2003)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (nycvr6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nycvr6* »_Like i said before, screw torque, it only breaks parts. 

its also useful for moving your car around.... 
Wizard of OD: thanks for posting the honda engine specs, I hadn't realized the B18 was running such a high rod/stroke ratio compared to the VW motor, with the longer stroke thats gotta make for some huge piston speeds.


----------



## 2kjettaguy (Dec 24, 2000)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (Impact_Wrench)*

Can someone explain Rod/Stroke ratio?


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (2kjettaguy)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2kjettaguy* »_Can someone explain Rod/Stroke ratio? 

From another thread....my reasoning,could be wrong.

_Quote, originally posted by *Wizard-of-OD* »_
*Rod Ratio = Rod Length/Stroke*
Since your stroke isnt changing (*86.4mm*) then the only thing you can do to increase your rod ratio is to increase the length of the con rod.A longer con rod creates a narrower Rod : Piston angle when the piston is halfway down the cylinder ,causing less friction which means a smaller force is needed to move the piston.With a larger rod : piston angle there is more vibration in the engine.
Just simple mechanics


----------



## PITGUY (Nov 16, 2003)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (Wizard-of-OD)*


_Quote, originally posted by *HONDA B18C* »_
Displacement = 1797cc
Bore = 81mm
Stroke = 87.2mm
Block Height = 270mm
Rod Length = Over 170mm (need to verify this but it makes sense)
Head Flow CFM = 300+
RPM Limit = 10,000 (VTEC kicks in @ about 7000 Rpm's)

The honda rods aren't that long


----------



## 2kjettaguy (Dec 24, 2000)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (Wizard-of-OD)*

Thank Wiz, never really thought about that http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## dohc (Sep 28, 2001)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (Wizard-of-OD)*

B18A rod length is 137mm
B18C rod length is 138mm
Stock 1.8L length for all but the G60 is 144mm.
G60 is 136mm.


----------



## dohc (Sep 28, 2001)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (dohc)*

Running higher boost to make the same kind of power is not necessarly a bad thing. Depends on the compressor you choose. It might just be more efficient at higher boost (with the same airflow).
If it is, then you win twice. Your compressor is more efficient, and your off boost performance will be better (smaller ports/valves).


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (dohc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *dohc* »_
B18A rod length is 137mm
B18C rod length is 138mm

Was told they were taller than the ABA units and having a block height of 270mm confirmed it.Guess I was wrong,Thanks for confirming that. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

_Quote, originally posted by *2kjettaguy* »_Thank Wiz, never really thought about that http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

np,anytime...you can read up more here (just click the picture)


----------



## fvdub00 (Jan 19, 2005)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (dohc)*

Any specs on the new 16vt fsi. Do anyone think it's going to make more hp than the 1.8t or the vrt.


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (fvdub00)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fvdub00* »_Any specs on the new 16vt fsi. Do anyone think it's going to make more hp than the 1.8t or the vrt.









It is rumoured to flow less than the current AWP (which is less than the AEB) and the valve surface area in the 2.0FSi = valve surface area in the 1.8 20V.
So its back to the AEB's it seems.


----------



## Bad Habit (Nov 27, 2002)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (Wizard-of-OD)*

I made 318 whp with a T3 with my 16V at 17 psi.When i get a "real" turbo and actually build a motor i will be expecting a lot more.If i bought some cams,besides the stock units im using and could spin my motor to 10K there would be at least one VW making power to match the Honda boys but with torque to boot.I actually would have made more if i could spin past 7300 as i hit the chip with the current setup i have now(stock management).Vw's are capable,i dont want to hear the whining about hondas anymore


----------



## fvdub00 (Jan 19, 2005)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (Bad Habit)*

damn


----------



## veedub11 (Mar 10, 2002)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (fvdub00)*

Thanks Wiz, thats some great info and citations. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## veedub11 (Mar 10, 2002)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (Scirocco20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Scirocco20v* »_Its sad, theres a guy in upstate CT that puts down over 240whp and 150wtq on his all motor honda. 1.8t guys get that hp by running 15psi+ on upgraded turbos. 
Dont start will ohhh...it doesnt have torque. Line up to him if you think you can beat an 11 sec street car. 



ITBs of course?


----------



## Scirocco20v (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (veedub11)*

Yeah, b20 block, b16 head, cams, itb's, hondata. Thing sounds







and hauls ass.


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (Scirocco20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Scirocco20v* »_Yeah, b20 block, b16 head, cams, itb's, hondata. Thing sounds







and hauls ass. 

?


----------



## StreetRyda (Nov 23, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (nycvr6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nycvr6* »_us vr6 people have to deal with one of the most archaic head designs ever and we make power.









That was beutiful.......... thank you lol


----------



## lugnuts (Jul 26, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (StreetRyda)*

Honda B series engine specs:
http://www.g-speed.com/pbh/b16a/
I'll clarify some misinformation here, along with some reminders.
The honda block deck height is measure differently... they have shorter rods as posted before. EDIT: the Honda deck height is 212mm.
-Rod/stroke ratio is simply that... 
example 1.8 GTI 144mm rod/86.4mm stroke=1.666-1 rod ratio
Now pay attn. because this part is important.....
- Rod ratio does not in itself make power!!!
Compare the following numbers and tell me if the light bulb glows.....
B16, 81mm, 77mm, 134mm, 1.74:1
B18b, 81mm, 89mm, 137mm, 1.54:1
B18c, 81mm, 87.2mm,137.9mm, 1.58:1
H22, 87mm, 90.7mm, 143mm, 1.58:1
------------------------------------------------
GTI 1.8 81mm, 86.4mm, 144mm,1.66:1
9A 2.0 82.5mm,92.8mm,144mm, 1.55:1
ABA2.0 82.5mm,92.8mm,159mm, 1.71:1
By you peoples rationale, the ABA should be the hot setup... does this make you think perhaps it is only part of the equation?
- Rod ratio is good for piston/cylinder wear.... thats it. It is not going to give you magic beans or lots of whp.
- Rod ratio=durability is greatly exaggerated... I know people running the LS crank and rods (1.54) spinning to 10,000 RPM...... 
-Notice the rod/stroke ratio of our 2.0 16v and 1.8 GTI is right there with the Hondas... 
-*The reason they make more power is their greater flowing cylinder heads.... and yes the camshafts are part of the cylinder heads!
The Honda guys are making peak torque last from 7000-9000+ and that my friends is what makes gobs of HP*.
- NYCVR6's statement was correct.... a high flowing head with large cams will have a powerband going to 8-10,000 RPM.... when you can rev like that the 5000 RPM spoolup of a big turbo doesnt seem so bad does it?
-Regardless of how well the AEB head flows... it has cams that belong in a truck... and what you will find out when you finally pony up for "huge' cams is that the VW 20v head has a another limiting factor nobody has mentioned yet in here... try to run a lot of duration and the valves (I and E) hit each other on overlap. Cant do a thing about that.... (well except got to a 16v head








)
Now, before you guys grab for the razor blades keep this in mind....
- Professor Nate Romero is making over 240+ whp all-motor with his 95.5mm/83.5mm AEB setup..... Schrick solid lifter setup (1/2 ass with the solid pieces replacing the hyd. lifter guts)... his cams are almost "maxed out" where they hit like I mentioned..... BUT that is more than enough power for you kids to look up to. 
But one look at the torque curve and you know it will NEVER make enough torque to keep producing peak HP until 10,500 RPM like the Hondas do. Even with the 92.8mm crank, it didnt have the top end potential.... so he went 95.5mm and bigger slicks and made a bigger powerband work for him.
- SEM has the 1.8t in their MK3 drag car, they went 143MPH in the 1/4 so I estimate they were making at least 425-450whp.... If I had to guess they made more than that on the dyno too......
Where was I..... oh yeah... use this info, quit talking and go build something! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

_Modified by lugnuts at 6:57 AM 2-12-2005_


_Modified by lugnuts at 7:15 AM 2-12-2005_


----------



## mechsoldier (Aug 14, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (lugnuts)*

Some of you people are trippin balls I think....
There head sets them apart, the Honda guys aren't really doing anything that the Dodge guys or most other people are doing. Our heads flow like ass...
VW's are still better though, we run crazy amounts of boost without having to worry about block sleaving and all that crap. And per capita I'm pretty sure that the vw crowd is more knowledgeable. I think dollar per dollar because of what they have to do to get to that point it's about the same for both of us, we're just giving attention to different areas than they do.
And on top of that, pretty much every engine that came in our cars in the states has been put in the 11's or faster....Can't say I've ever heard of a D15 ever doing that.


----------



## racintweek (May 30, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (mechsoldier)*

To start I own both, 91 civic hatch w/ an LS and a 92 carat (will be VR within the next year)
I wouldnt say I am a honda genious but i do know more than most.
For a honda street car you dont need sleeves, piston, etc. until you start making 300whp+ on a B-series, on a D-series you can make ~250whp before anything else is needed. And sleeves dont protect a Honda engine any better than tuning does. Tuning is the key to longevity on a Honda engine. 
I must say that there is more idiots flaming people on HT than info being given out. HT is just one big mess of people trying to spend more than the other guy. There is some good info there but mostly its the same ?'s asked over and over again. HT is not the place to find people trying new things or thinking differently. 
I try to take a VW guy's approach to my Honda, do what makes more power, hadling better, etc. without having to try and out do everyone else. My car is for me, it might not make as much power as yours but it is MY car. I think the biggest difference in VW and Honda is the attitude their owners take towards them.

For the differences in engines, the best approach is to combine both.
The next project for the Civic is boost. Looking for ~180whp using as many VW parts as posible.
CRX Si engine (D16A6) and trans
K03S turbo and 02 GTi intercooler

I already have Rado wheels on my car, my next project will make it a real Hybrid.

peace


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (2kjettaguy)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2kjettaguy* »_Can someone explain Rod/Stroke ratio? 

also, the longer the rod, the longer the piston stays at TDC. which leads to be combustion and burn.


----------



## nycvr6 (May 4, 1999)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (bobqzzi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *bobqzzi* »_Well, I'm not going to run 32 PSI, but I would expect to make more than 630hp if I did.....but you are comparing aplles to oranges now. A VR6 is 2.8 liters..... about 55% larger. So 632x .643 = 406.376 HP. There are a number of 1.8Ts making that sort of power. 
Despite your claims to the contrary, the 1.8T head is an excellent head on an excellent bottom end.

Don't get me wrong, i would love to see 1.8T's making power, it would be great for vw's. I just havent seen any making great power yet. I'm going to keep an eye out and see what type of progress you make. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## rbr20 (Jul 28, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (lugnuts)*

Lugnuts pretty much sumed it up. Nice write. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## dohc (Sep 28, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (lugnuts)*


_Quote, originally posted by *lugnuts* »_ Rod ratio is good for piston/cylinder wear.... thats it. It is not going to give you magic beans or lots of whp.
- Rod ratio=durability is greatly exaggerated... I know people running the LS crank and rods (1.54) spinning to 10,000 RPM...... 
-Notice the rod/stroke ratio of our 2.0 16v and 1.8 GTI is right there with the Hondas... 

There is more to it then that, there are many positive dynamic effects that result from higher ratio's that really don't come into play on a street car. For street cars, especially NA, heads are what need to be adressed.
For turbo cars, a favourable rod ratio is very important. If someone asks I'll explain.
All the race motor builders are always looking for room to get longer rods into the motors, especially those who runs boost.


----------



## vdubspeed (Jul 19, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (dohc)*


_Quote, originally posted by *dohc* »_For turbo cars, a favourable rod ratio is very important. If someone asks I'll explain.

okay...I'll ask...why is it more favorable?


----------



## 1.8t rabbit (Nov 7, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (nycvr6)*

lets get some people to put some big cams into their engine and see what happens. I believe that some big cams along with a modified aeb head will make power that;ll be very similar to a honda head. you just have to be different and try new things.
From http://www.porttuning.com
1.8T 20V Hydro engines 
These cams are cast chilled harden available 2/28/04. 
Part Number Description Duration @0.050" Duration @0.1mm Timing @ 0.050" Max Lift (inch) Lift @ TDC (inch) Lobe Center Lifter Type price

100-3651C Turbo cam, Adds 20hp & 22ft-lbs 200/210 246/262 -10/30, 35/-5 0.324"/0.392" 0.020"/0.031" 110 Hydro $750.00 
100-3653C Non-Turbo Applications 208/214 238/244 -6/34, 37/-3 0.346"/0.427" 0.028"/0.035" 110 Hydro $750.00 
100-3653C Race cams 220/226 266/280 0/40, 43/3 0.364"/0.432" 0.047"/0.063" 110 Hydro $750.00 

These cams are light weigth steel billet, and have Adj. sprockets available now.
100-3651S Turbo cam, Adds 20hp & 22ft-lbs 200/210 246/262 -10/30, 35/-5 0.324"/0.392" 0.020"/0.031" 110 Hydro $999.00 
100-3653S Non-Turbo Applications 208/214 238/244 -6/34, 37/-3 0.346"/0.427" 0.028"/0.035" 110 Hydro $999.00 
100-3653S Race cams 220/226 266/280 0/40, 43/3 0.364"/0.432" 0.047"/0.063" 110 Hydro $999.00 
These cams can be used with the standard valve spring and retainers.

1.8T 20V Solid lifter engines 
These cams are light weigth steel billet, and have Adj. sprockets available now. 
Part Number Description Duration @0.050" Duration @0.1mm Timing @ 0.050" Max Lift (inch) Lift @ TDC (inch) Lobe Center Lifter Clearance Price

110-3753 242/250 278/286 11/51, 55/15 0.412"/0.459" 0.094"/0.126" 110 0.008"/0.014" $999.00 
100-3754 254/250 290/286 17/57, 55/15 0.434"/0.459" 0.118"/0.126" 110 0.008"/0.014" $999.00 
100-3752 254/246 290/278 17/57, 53/13 0.434"/0.462" 0.118"/0.114" 110 0.008"/0.010" $999.00 
These cams require the 20V kit (Springs, Solid lifters).

get the biggest cams that can fit into a 20v head, go with solid lifters, have an AEB head ported, make your botum end a 2.0 (aba) and then see how much power you'll make. I garantee that you'll be in honda turbo territory.
now alll you need is to have some extra money, and get this too:
Solid lifter parts & kits 
VW 1.8T 20V solid lifter conversion kit w/ steel billet adjustable cams (RPM limit 9500rpm) 98-03...1800cc turbo $2599.00 
This price inclused the cams so its not that bad...


----------



## dohc (Sep 28, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (vdubspeed)*

Quick explanatiion is this.
At slower speeds, NA motors create most of their power within the first 15-25 degrees of power stroke. This means that a small rod ratio is favourable because it allows the rod to be closest to perpendicular to the centreline between the rod and crank journal.
As the motor speeds up, the pressure in the chamber does not have enough time to build before the piston "runs away" from the flame front. A longer rod would slow the acceleration of the piston from TDC, allowing pressure to build and act on the piston. Also because at elevated speeds, the usauble cylinder pressure is further down in the power stroke, the rod angle is closer to perpendicular with a longer rod. There is also the added benefit of less cylinder wall to piston friction force.
FI motors create more usauble pressure for longer during the power stroke (ie. the cylinder pressure does work on the piston for 90 degrees instead of 25 degrees during the power stroke). With a longer rod, this means that you are putting more force into turning the crank then into cylinder wall, and that the angle of attack of the rod is more ideal while the cylinder pressure is doing the work on the piston.


----------



## Stephen Webb (Apr 12, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (vdubspeed)*


_Quote, originally posted by *vdubspeed* »_Got your attention huh








I've been spending a lot more time at http://www.honda-tech.com. Their forced induction section is pretty large and has lots of good info.
http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=707635


First off, in that link you may notice that at least a few different people are questioning those particular numbers 1.6 liter, 10 psi, 250 lb-ft & 250 HP -- it's hard to believe (the torque in particular).
Others have suggested that the high flow heads, higher revving engines, and ability to take high pressures account for the higher-than-you-would-expect horspeoer numebrs that Hondas can churn out...But, in this case at least, none of those come into play. The boost is low, and the peak torque (and power, more or less) happen at 5200 RPM or so. 
What it looks like to me is either:
He's running more boost than he says
He's running a larger engine than he says
The correction factor that the dyno operator used was outrageous
(or some combination)
250 lb-ft of torque out of a 100 inch motor (at 10 psi) just doesn't sound right *at all*.
I think you are doing pretty well to get 1 lb-ft per cubic inch (NA), and if you take into account the turbo at 10 psi, he'd be doing well to break 170 lb/ft. 250 is incredible (as in "I don't believe him").
As for them not worrying about transmissions -- true -- but did you notice how the other people on the forum were surprised that he did that on stock pistons/rods....So one thing VW has against Honda is a better stock bottom end.

-Steve


----------



## rbr20 (Jul 28, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (Stephen Webb)*

I'm running the same engine (D16) but mine is built. At 8psi I make 
271WHP/[email protected] with a T3/TO4E
Like Steve said something is not right. It takes x amount of air to make x amount of torque. In this case somewhere around 25lbs/[email protected]pm


----------



## edot (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (rbr20)*

i know a few 1.8t's that make well over 300 and i would thing twice about running them.
250 whp is nice but guys make it seem like its so crazy, 250 is nice 350+ is crazy. thats when u start fighting the car to go straight.
honda's can't make 300+ on stock intrnals we can, with a head spacer u are in.
i respect them,but i will clean then up.


----------



## vdubspeed (Jul 19, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (edot)*


_Quote, originally posted by *edot* »_i know a few 1.8t's that make well over 300 

at what psi? you completely missed the idea here.
you are right in saying 250hp and torque is no big deal.
BUT BUT BUT...those numbers with only 10lbs of boost...that's good.



_Modified by vdubspeed at 1:22 PM 2-13-2005_


----------



## LagunaSecaBlueMK3 (Mar 16, 2003)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (vdubspeed)*

maybe someone can correct me if im wrong, but from my experience with many people i know that are both friends and just people i see at local hangouts honda guys love to talk.
everyone and their grandparents have gsrs in hatchback etc, and every single time i talk to these guys their stories just get more and more outrageous.
one example : buddy has a stockish GSR in a hatch, he tells me the motor ran a 13.8 in another hatch







he comes back from the track with a 14.9







. I see a lot of honda guys claiming big numbers but when you test them oh, my boost controller isnt working, oh my vtec didnt kick in







OK, not to say they arent fast, typically they are faster then dubs, but for instance in this case, something doesnt add up to me. ie. someone is lying about something.


----------



## edot (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (vdubspeed)*

at 10 psi i made 297whp with a vrt. eip stage 2 chip
my buddy has a 3 liter turbo that made 430whp 454fpt at 18 psi. wolf 3d
brother has a 1.8t in a mk2 that makes 373whp at 17 psi wolf 3d
i have a couple friends with hondas that make power they all say the same thing there blocks with or with out sleeves don't hold up.
honda http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif 
i'm a die hard dub head


----------



## dohc (Sep 28, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (edot)*

Who cares if one car makes the same power at lower boost, as long as your making the power.
If the turbo is capable of pushing higher boost efficienty, then why does it matter? Run a bigger intercooler...sheesh


----------



## liquidtension (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (dohc)*

VW > honda! the VW spirit is worth 10000000000hp by itself dont you know that ?







http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## MDTurborocco (Aug 24, 2003)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (liquidtension)*

I was debating swapping a gsr engine/tranny into a 92-95 hatch and putting like 3k into it for the longest time..... The honda FI scene seems to be growing huge, theres countless aftermarket speed shops willing to take peoples money and build a rediculous engine setup..... Put a huge turbo and rev it to 10k rpm, of course its gonna be sick. If more vw people would just build vw engines (rods/pistons) with a proper fuel management which is nothing compared to a fully built honda, we wouldnt be soo far behind, plus an indestructable tranny (lol here we go again) . But still I dont think we will ever be on par with honda because were already behind. If this dyno doesnt wanna make you switch I dont know what will







.
B18C, 84mm 9:1
RLZ Engineering head
JG Intake manifold
70mm tb
GSR cams
SC61 turbo
Rev Hard cast manifold
Greddy Evo exhaust 2.75"
XS Engineering ic
Motec M4
C16 fuel











_Modified by MDTurborocco at 8:39 PM 2-13-2005_


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

we have been over this before.... 
AEB heads flow just fine, and you can run a cam more then hot enough for FI with the valve setup how it is... 290+ degrees duration is possible on the head. 
I feel that the price of head work is the #1 factor holding back the 20v world. 
the new 2.0 FSI is probably going to suck so might as well not get your hopes up. 
if you wanna drool over some honda stuff check this out
509 whp on 91 octane / 14 psi 
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=1704775


----------



## Danno13 (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

Most of these honda guys are running equal length manifolds, its something you dont see a lot in the VW crowd, mostly log manifolds, i read a report somewhere on the net. They ran a motor with an equal length and then with the typical log, guess what, the log cant compare to the equal length, I dont know why its so over looked when we build motors, possibly the price, but i think if more ppl start using them (there are a few) numbers would increase quite a bit


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

i've got one. 
tubular is the term too not equal length, almost none of them are actually equal length and it makes little to no difference.


----------



## Bad Habit (Nov 27, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (MDTurborocco)*


_Quote, originally posted by *MDTurborocco* »_I was debating swapping a gsr engine/tranny into a 92-95 hatch and putting like 3k into it for the longest time..... The honda FI scene seems to be growing huge, theres countless aftermarket speed shops willing to take peoples money and build a rediculous engine setup..... Put a huge turbo and rev it to 10k rpm, of course its gonna be sick. If more vw people would just build vw engines (rods/pistons) with a proper fuel management which is nothing compared to a fully built honda, we wouldnt be soo far behind, plus an indestructable tranny (lol here we go again) . But still I dont think we will ever be on par with honda because were already behind. If this dyno doesnt wanna make you switch I dont know what will







.
B18C, 84mm 9:1
RLZ Engineering head
JG Intake manifold
70mm tb
GSR cams
SC61 turbo
Rev Hard cast manifold
Greddy Evo exhaust 2.75"
XS Engineering ic
Motec M4
C16 fuel










_Modified by MDTurborocco at 8:39 PM 2-13-2005_
.
If i had the money this guy has in his engine i believe i would make more.Im not stoked,what boost?


----------



## MDTurborocco (Aug 24, 2003)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (Bad Habit)*

I dont think so. Your saying you can make your vw rev to 10.5k rpm?? Im not saying you strait up cant but this guy prolly made a few calls to some shops and was good to go. You would have to go through countless hours of R&D...... How bout that guy that built a 16v turbo in a rabbit with the holset turbo. His **** was sick but still was revving to 8k rpm. Think about a B18C with rods pistons and a big turbo. Its just that much easier.........


----------



## SSj4G60 (Aug 13, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (Bad Habit)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Bad Habit* »_.
If i had the money this guy has in his engine i believe i would make more.Im not stoked,what boost?

25psi w/ an SC61
http://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1146623


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

ehhh that sucks for 25psi on a honda.


----------



## Ghetto-8v (Jun 3, 2001)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (Wizard-of-OD)*

Turbo Hondas own. Always have always will. Espically when they have sleeves tested up to 55psi.


----------



## vdubspeed (Jul 19, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (edot)*


_Quote, originally posted by *edot* »_ *at 10 psi i made 297whp with a vrt*.

that's 2.8 liters man...a little bigger than 1.8. I would even talk about the 3.0 engine you mentioned.

_Quote, originally posted by *edot* »_honda http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif 
i'm a die hard dub head








Don't be ignorant. there is nothing wrong with Honda "the brand". It's the fools behind the wheels.
As for being a die hard dub head...no one was questioning your car orientation...we all like Volkswagens here....
closed minded much
fast_a2_20v - you and your friends b18 are stupid







J/K...that's bad ass power for 10psi!!! If I could only rev to 10K


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

yup, once you can, then keeping the cylinders filled is the next trick


----------



## Bad Habit (Nov 27, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (SSj4G60)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SSj4G60* »_
25psi w/ an SC61
http://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1146623

Exactly,look at the list of parts.The Motec alone would cost me 3K and we are dealers.SC61 is a fair sized turbo.I seem to remember a guy on here that did the same power with a 5 valve VW engine.I think his name was billyT or something.Dont be scared of Hondas,just build your setups using the right parts.The power will be there,just like this particular honda.The power actually seems low for 1.7 bar


_Modified by Bad Habit at 9:52 AM 2-14-2005_


----------



## edot (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (Bad Habit)*

i have alot a kids that i roll out to the races with that drive honda's.
and some of them make power. like i said i respect them,but unlike some of u i don't fear them.
second of all, i don't build honda killer's i clean up m's and evo's, sti's, and supra's. what i look like running a bubble.








and also what ever setup u run is your biz, 3.0,20v,2.8vr,but u might as well take some thing that has power to make power.
honda is a good car company, but vw's are special.
its the people, the cars, the shops. and as much as we butt heads we are all a family.
we are volkswagen,not the car company.


----------



## dohc (Sep 28, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (edot)*


_Quote, originally posted by *edot* »_i have alot a kids that i roll out to the races with that drive honda's.
and some of them make power. like i said i respect them,but unlike some of u i don't fear them.
second of all, i don't build honda killer's i clean up m's and evo's, sti's, and supra's. what i look like running a bubble.








and also what ever setup u run is your biz, 3.0,20v,2.8vr,but u might as well take some thing that has power to make power.
honda is a good car company, but vw's are special.
its the people, the cars, the shops. and as much as we butt heads we are all a family.
we are volkswagen,not the car company. 


http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## dohc (Sep 28, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (Bad Habit)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Bad Habit* »_
Exactly,look at the list of parts.The Motec alone would cost me 3K and we are dealers.SC61 is a fair sized turbo.I seem to remember a guy on here that did the same power with a 5 valve VW engine.I think his name was billyT or something.Dont be scared of Hondas,just build your setups using the right parts.The power will be there,just like this particular honda.The power actually seems low for 1.7 bar

_Modified by Bad Habit at 9:52 AM 2-14-2005_

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## SSj4G60 (Aug 13, 2001)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (dohc)*

Ive seen the M4 go for alot less than 3k on some BMW sites. But even then you could get just as much power w/ another Standalone beit 034,sds,haltech,etc...

ive been tossing the idea between either an SC61w/.48 or GT3255e w/.63 for my 16v setup since both can be had for similar prices 
edit to spec. which gt32 since precision has a couple 


_Modified by SSj4G60 at 12:56 PM 2-14-2005_


----------



## edot (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (SSj4G60)*

go with the gt32


----------



## skillton (Sep 26, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (SSj4G60)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SSj4G60* »_
25psi w/ an SC61
http://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1146623

holy ****, that's a serious powerband, 5k-10.5k. No VW engine can achieve that.


_Modified by skillton at 4:08 PM 2-14-2005_


----------



## edot (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (skillton)*

u don't know that did any of us try it, thats the difference with honda guys they are not scared to try anything.
there are plenty of underground tuners that i know that can build crazy sh*t . a motor is as sick as u make it.
and u never tried it u drive a mk2 16, what do u have a intake , must be a beast


----------



## skillton (Sep 26, 2002)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (edot)*

You can't put an intake on CIS-E.
Only power mods so far and cat-back, shaved head and fuel enrichment. Putting in cams next month.
I didn't try anything because I can't afford it yet. If I ever decide to make serious power it'll be in a RWD car.


_Modified by skillton at 4:43 PM 2-14-2005_


----------



## liquidtension (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (skillton)*

well to each his own







personally i love spinning wheels on the highway and watch people look & think "wtf?a VW?"








it doesnt get better than a torquey VW for me
who cares about HP numbers and how much you can rev.. id rather drive a stock mk2 16v than a 1000hp honda


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

you don't need any ****in M4 to make power on a honda, in fact we just converted a car FROM m4 to hondata. 
jason is making almost 900 whp on cheap ass hondata.


----------



## vdubspeed (Jul 19, 2002)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

we need volkdata


----------



## PinoyVR6 (May 24, 2003)

*Re: (vdubspeed)*


_Quote, originally posted by *vdubspeed* »_we need volkdata








 lol thats was funny


----------



## the4ork (Mar 10, 2003)

*Re: (PinoyVR6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PinoyVR6* »_ lol thats was funny

we have it, and im running it... 034
so lets see, from what i've been reading in this thread...
2.0T... if i did all the headwork i could to my crossflow, a shorty intake manifold, and a tubular exhaust manifold... and im running efi so i can utilize huge cams with proper tuning=more flow=higher rev=more hp...
i dint really get all the stuff with the bottom ends, i think im going to end up running some eurospec rods and ross 8.5:1 forged pistons on a stock forged crank.
so since heads are the most limiting factor (and our trannies







) who does the best headwork on crossflows?


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: (vdubspeed)*


_Quote, originally posted by *vdubspeed* »_we need *volkdata*










_Quote, originally posted by *the4ork* »_we have it, and im running it... *034*


Took the words right out of my mouth








That being said I have been analysing these Honda HP/TQ curves.They really dont make power until VTEC kicks in








We all know the secret to making Horsepower is revs,more revs you have,the more power you will make,but whats the secret to making torque?
We all know VW's have lots of it ....and thats why the do such poor times on quarter mile compared to Honda's.VW's spend about 10 secs getting traction and the other 1.5 blazzing down the quarter


----------



## skillton (Sep 26, 2002)

*Re: (Wizard-of-OD)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Wizard-of-OD* »_
We all know the secret to making Horsepower is revs,more revs you have,the more power you will make,but whats the secret to making torque?


Displacement, long strokes, restrictive heads, short cams, small turbos


----------



## PinoyVR6 (May 24, 2003)

*Re: (Wizard-of-OD)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Wizard-of-OD* »_
Took the words right out of my mouth








That being said I have been analysing these Honda HP/TQ curves.They really dont make power until VTEC kicks in








We all know the secret to making Horsepower is revs,more revs you have,the more power you will make,but whats the secret to making torque?
We all know VW's have lots of it ....and thats why the do such poor times on quarter mile compared to Honda's.VW's spend about 10 secs getting traction and the other 1.5 blazzing down the quarter

















 true story http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif gotta love the torque though its like crack hehe







http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## veedub11 (Mar 10, 2002)

*Re: (the4ork)*


_Quote, originally posted by *the4ork* »_
we have it, and im running it... 034
so since heads are the most limiting factor (and our trannies







) who does the best headwork on crossflows?


Allen, 81 vw pick aka blue turbo rabbit from NJ, built my head and was building other crossflows to turbo specs. He was doing some serious R&D, by building head for other vortexers but I think he ended up getting shorted by people on the tex that send him heads then never paid. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif Anyways, the crossflow is a simple, cheap head that seems like some more R&D would help to advance numbers.


----------



## SSj4G60 (Aug 13, 2001)

*Re: (veedub11)*


_Quote, originally posted by *veedub11* »_Allen, 81 vw pick aka blue turbo rabbit from NJ, built my head and was building other crossflows to turbo specs. He was doing some serious R&D, by building head for other vortexers but I think he ended up getting shorted by people on the tex that send him heads then never paid. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif Anyways, the crossflow is a simple, cheap head that seems like some more R&D would help to advance numbers.

i have a head done by him for sale


----------



## veedub11 (Mar 10, 2002)

*Re: (SSj4G60)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SSj4G60* »_
i have a head done by him for sale 


What did you think of the head? Allen is a good guy and was very easy to deal with and seemed like he was making a real effort to help advance the crossflow.


----------



## racintweek (May 30, 2004)

*Re: (veedub11)*

check out this dyno, its a stock B16 vs stock B18A, tell me which engien you would choose









This just proves V-tec isnt special, even at peak torque the B16 doesnt make as much as the LS at 1500 rpm. I have an LS in my civic and a lot of people talk like its nothing. IMO they are mad because they paid for hype, not a decent engine.
There is a reason all v-tec engines gave such short trans', the have no torque so they need to make up for it some how. 


_Modified by racintweek at 2:56 PM 2-15-2005_


----------



## Scirocco20v (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: (racintweek)*

You're comparing a 1.6l to a 1.8l. Compare a B18C1 to a B18a


----------



## racintweek (May 30, 2004)

*Re: (Scirocco20v)*

since you asked, this is a B18C w/ bolt ons








comparing engines to engines, not engines and their respective transmissions, i would choose an LS over either of them any day.
They are pretty similar to each other, the GSR only revs higher to make more HP, would be a good race.



_Modified by racintweek at 9:13 AM 2-15-2005_


----------



## SSj4G60 (Aug 13, 2001)

*Re: (veedub11)*


_Quote, originally posted by *veedub11* »_

What did you think of the head? Allen is a good guy and was very easy to deal with and seemed like he was making a real effort to help advance the crossflow.

Isnt the "prettiest" head (had a few people bitching about the ports not being perfectly polished in first FS: post), But theyr all nicely ported and its not like theyr just hogged out and theyr all pretty similar so its not like ones been ported more than the other. He as good to deal w/ getting back to me w/in a day.
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=1806036


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

damn i walked into an 034 efi info mercial
how is 034 anything like hondata? hondata is plug and play people. You take your ecu out, send it out like you were getting chipped, put it back in and you have standalone. 
Last i checked, 034 and all the others about as far from that as you can get. 
In fact, the ONLY thing that makes 034 any different from the other standalones is that you can run the OEM coolant and IAT sensors. big whoop.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_In fact, the ONLY thing that makes 034 any different from the other standalones is that you can run the OEM coolant and IAT sensors. big whoop. 

DTA can do it, heck even MegaSquid can do it. WHOOP.


----------



## edot (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: (need_a_VR6)*

wolf 3d can also do it. easy to install and easy to use.
but i also feel standalone is going to become a thing of the past
they have a ton of piggy backs that are able to be used on vw's.
to name a few i saw used 
split second 
apexi afc
greedy emanage
honda's have been leading the import race community because of technolgy, not saying they don't make power.but u can build anything but it has to be programed, for years guys where building turbo vw's tring to run 15+ psi and the chips where not able to handle it.


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: (skillton)*


_Quote, originally posted by *skillton* »_
Displacement, long strokes, restrictive heads, short cams, small turbos

Figured as much....
as for the 034EFi comments....


----------



## Batan (Dec 15, 2000)

*Re: (racintweek)*


_Quote, originally posted by *racintweek* »_since you asked, this is a B18C w/ bolt ons








comparing engines to engines, not engines and their respective transmissions, i would choose an LS over either of them any day.
They are pretty similar to each other, the GSR only revs higher to make more HP, would be a good race.

Not everbody will track their car...and for the majority that don't that's one uglyass graph IMO.


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

ehhh piggy backs are pretty much :-/


----------



## veedub11 (Mar 10, 2002)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_ehhh piggy backs are pretty much :-/

a cheap way of trying to tune your car motor


----------



## lugnuts (Jul 26, 2001)

*Re: (the4ork)*

so since heads are the most limiting factor (and our trannies ) who does the best headwork on crossflows?>>>
Joel's crossflow head flowed good enough to make 441 whp no nitrous - with a 8mm smaller compressor wheel then Allen's.
Custom cam "lugnuts spec", everything else pretty standard cunningham rods, ross pistons (- the eip"coating"), Joel-fabbed turbo manifold, Billy Matter (Riders) head and intake manifold.


----------



## racintweek (May 30, 2004)

*Re: (Batan)*

i agree that is an ugly graph, compare it with the stock B18A graph i posted, you can see why i chose the B18A
a B18A may not make as much power, but it is a much smoother graph than the B16 or B18C
this should prove to everyone H-T is hype, no real thought goes into their engine choices. they are the most gullible people out there(most of them). 



_Modified by racintweek at 2:57 PM 2-15-2005_


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

*Re: (lugnuts)*


_Quote, originally posted by *lugnuts* »_ with a 8mm smaller compressor wheel then Allen's.


Anything is smaller then that. That wheel is out of a jet engine, no joke.


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

ehhh a properly tuned B18c makes a plenty smooth graph. 








pump gas. 
it helps if your tuner doesn't suck sweaty donkey balls


----------



## gltuner (Oct 7, 2004)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

Is it me, or do honda owners typically tend to focus more on top end power instead of low/mid range torque? Seems thats why they tend to push big numbers. It looks to me that their dyno graphs show practically no useable (on the street) torque, but insane top end, while VW's seem to get more down low, useable torque, and a flatter top end power curve. Just my thoughts on it.


----------



## need_a_VR6 (May 19, 1999)

*Re: (gltuner)*

Here's my take on low end torque.. F IT. With my NA VR6 I couldn't put down my whopping 197whp in 1st or 2nd on street tires. Why would anyone need more power then that on the street. Passing power on the highway? Please. Give me meaty top end and a soft low so it's actually drivable without shredding tire everytime you tap the gas a-la .58 A/R'd VR6 setups.


----------



## racintweek (May 30, 2004)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

that is quite the impressive dyno, tuner could have done better.
tth torque dropped off as soon as the A/F did. there is plenty of torque left in there(300+). but it isnt anything an LS cant do, and the LS would prob have better bottom end


----------



## gltuner (Oct 7, 2004)

*Re: (need_a_VR6)*

I was talking 4 cylinders, nothing more. Show me a honda v6 dyno, and you will see they have low end/midrange torque. Same concept with the VR. The point I was trying to make, is if your going to make power for the street, focus on midrange power and not so much top end. The ONLY cars I see needing so much top end are F1 racers and Gran Tourismo racing (not the game). Look at the top tuners for Honda. Mugen and Spoon both put their focus on top end power (Spoon more so than Mugen), but they also circuit race their cars, so they need all that top end as 75% of their rpm usage is way above 6000. Drag racers don't even put their main focus on all top end power, since they go from a stand still. Yes, they focus on top end, but you will see that they put more towards mid range torque to get going.


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

that is on 13 psi and 91 octane. 
we simply wanted it to be safe on pump gas. That engine should produce a similar curve, but 750+ whp on race fuel. 
but yes, thats something an LS can't do. 

PS import drag raceers do not particularily care about low end or mid range power either. That car is a drag car... so are many others with similar curves. HP is king. Slip the clutch to get off the line. 



_Modified by fast_a2_20v at 10:37 PM 2-15-2005_


----------



## the4ork (Mar 10, 2003)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

anyone know how well tmtuning stage 10.2 can flow? do they even do good work, i've never heard feedback, anyone tried a 10.2 or know anything about it?


----------



## Bad Habit (Nov 27, 2002)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_ehhh a properly tuned B18c makes a plenty smooth graph. 








pump gas. 
it helps if your tuner doesn't suck sweaty donkey balls

Why so rich up top?I think the boost level yu have in your post is divided by 2.


----------



## B4S (Apr 16, 2003)

*Re: (edot)*


_Quote, originally posted by *edot* »_wolf 3d can also do it. easy to install and easy to use.
but i also feel standalone is going to become a thing of the past
they have a ton of piggy backs that are able to be used on vw's.
to name a few i saw used 
split second 
apexi afc
greedy emanage
honda's have been leading the import race community because of technolgy, not saying they don't make power.but u can build anything but it has to be programed, for years guys where building turbo vw's tring to run 15+ psi and the chips where not able to handle it.

Standalone is going to become a thing of the past????????!
Um....pass me some of those shrooms man, cause they MUST be good! A factory ECU is in no way tuned for performance no matter what piggy back is attached to it. Standalone is the only way to go for a trouble free car with high HP. I would not trust a S-AFC to fuel my lawnmower because it is simply not smart enough to handle it. Dumping intake air restrictions (such as a MAF) is the best first step to making power, and standalone enables that.
The only people interested in piggyback systems like the S-AFC or Emanage are people who want the world to know they have a show car...and not a go car. Real drag cars run standalone http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: (B4S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *B4S* »_
The only people interested in piggyback systems like the S-AFC or Emanage are people who want the world to know they have a show car...and not a go car. Real drag cars run standalone http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif

Word http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Speed Racer. (Sep 3, 2002)

*Re: (B4S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *B4S* »_
The only people interested in piggyback systems like the S-AFC or Emanage are people who want the world to know they have a show car...and not a go car. Real drag cars run standalone http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif

Yup


----------



## edot (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: (Speed Racer.)*

that is true i was just saying there are a few things out there that dose allow u to play with your ecu setting, but you r telling the trueth when it comes to making 300+


----------



## the4ork (Mar 10, 2003)

*Re: (B4S)*


_Quote, originally posted by *B4S* »_
Standalone is going to become a thing of the past????????!

The only people interested in piggyback systems like the S-AFC or Emanage are people who want the world to know they have a show car...and not a go car. Real drag cars run standalone http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif

can i 3rd this? http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## 2kjettaguy (Dec 24, 2000)

*Re: (the4ork)*

Piggybacks may become a thing of the past. 
As car companies build more complex engine management systems, piggybacking becomes harder and harder. Newer engine mangement systems have so many self-preservation systems that piggybacking only trips the thresholds for voltage alterations. 
The main drawback to piggybacking a VW is the MAF. MAF's are no good for boost! They wokr great for low power, exact output applications. On top of this, VW MAFS are junk. 
A piggyback of the future will be even more complex than a standalone system. Take the 1.8t for example. 
In order to piggyback that over-mangement system you need to do the following all in one device
Feed the ECU a fake MAP sensor output. 
To adjust timing, you need to alter engine speed sensor frequency as well as cam poition sensor simultaneously. 
You can't ramp up MAF sensor voltage too high or you'll trip the threshold, AND you'll throw off the load calculation functions done by the DBW throttle system. 
EDIT: You will need to run with 02 sensors unplugged to give the motor fuel, and deal with CELs and codes due to this. 
I spent 1.5 years screwing around with a piggyback system that in the end got me too little power at high boost, lots of a crappy bugs, inconsistent pulls, bad track times... 
I wish I had not been so *cheap* and had gotten standalone from day one.  Even something as simple as SDS will ourtperform Motronic under boost. 
Just me ranting...
Evan


_Modified by 2kjettaguy at 9:56 PM 2-15-2005_


----------



## Scirocco20v (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: (2kjettaguy)*

Thats it, Im buying an Evo or STI. Heres a dyno chart for a GT35R 1.06a/r 30psi on C16, stock block STI.


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

*Re: (Bad Habit)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Bad Habit* »_Why so rich up top?I think the boost level yu have in your post is divided by 2.

its rich up top because we decided better to be safe then sorry on pump ass. 
nope, really is just 13 psi, well, creeps to almost 14 up top, but yea. 
engine is a built b18c1 head work done by endyne, full race top mount manifold, 4" downpipe and exhaust by yours truely. 9800 rpms. Turbo at the time was a gt40 turbine .81 exhaust housing / t67 compressor, turbo on it now is a PT71 (t04... GT-Q turbine wheel, 71mm compressor) 
look at the torque, if it was running 30 psi you'd see a helluva lot more torque then that. as i said, that motor should produce high 700's / low 800's whp @ 30-32 psi boost. 
You can see video of the dyno run here, it spretty easy to tell its not running a lot of boost even from just sound. 
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=1704775
we'll hvae the race fuel pass in a couple weeks once we get the bigger fuel system in there. But, FWIW, courtneys car which has less parts / less exotic parts (regular full race manifold, headwork done by local, etc etc etc) was making 740 whp @ 30 psi and 460 on 14psi. 
You can see info on courtney greens car in various magazines, bucks is the same setup with way more toys


----------



## vfarren (Sep 11, 2000)

*Re: (Scirocco20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Scirocco20v* »_Thats it, Im buying an Evo or STI. Heres a dyno chart for a GT35R 1.06a/r 30psi on C16, stock block STI. 

VW 16vs have made that kind of power, on a stock block haha. Look here: It is more peaky, but if you had this in a race car, who cares? Courtesy of Killa's grenade waiting to happen. Stock rod bolts too, I believe.


----------



## Scirocco20v (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: (vfarren)*

Actually, STI = AWD so it makes alot more power at the crank. Also, killa built that motor using stock parts not a completely stock engine. If you threw on a .82a/r instead of the 1.06a/r that car was running you'd make alot more mid range power.


----------



## Yorldi (Jul 20, 2004)

*Re: (edot)*

Well, the new e-manage's gonna be HUGE. It doesn't use MAF, it work straight with a MAP signal and acts directly on the injectors. So you have a base map (Standard ECU), and then you're free to do anything you wish. You can program it inside the car without computer, or with computer, turbo controller, nistrous switch, launch control..... AUTO AFR CORRECTION... Anything you would like, is there. And cheap! Must consider that option


----------



## veedub11 (Mar 10, 2002)

*Re: (Scirocco20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Scirocco20v* »_Actually, STI = AWD so it makes alot more power at the crank. Also, killa built that motor using stock parts not a completely stock engine. If you threw on a .82a/r instead of the 1.06a/r that car was running you'd make alot more mid range power. 

Why not an EVO? I heard they have stronger stock blocks and those twin scrolls are nice, even thought the JDM STI has one.


----------



## Bad Habit (Nov 27, 2002)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_
its rich up top because we decided better to be safe then sorry on pump ass. 
nope, really is just 13 psi, well, creeps to almost 14 up top, but yea. 
engine is a built b18c1 head work done by endyne, full race top mount manifold, 4" downpipe and exhaust by yours truely. 9800 rpms. Turbo at the time was a gt40 turbine .81 exhaust housing / t67 compressor, turbo on it now is a PT71 (t04... GT-Q turbine wheel, 71mm compressor) 
look at the torque, if it was running 30 psi you'd see a helluva lot more torque then that. as i said, that motor should produce high 700's / low 800's whp @ 30-32 psi boost. 
You can see video of the dyno run here, it spretty easy to tell its not running a lot of boost even from just sound. 
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=1704775
we'll hvae the race fuel pass in a couple weeks once we get the bigger fuel system in there. But, FWIW, courtneys car which has less parts / less exotic parts (regular full race manifold, headwork done by local, etc etc etc) was making 740 whp @ 30 psi and 460 on 14psi. 
You can see info on courtney greens car in various magazines, bucks is the same setup with way more toys









Oh,wait a minute.I thought you said WHP.Then i saw the 1.17 correction factor.My fault


----------



## Scirocco20v (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: (veedub11)*

Personally Id buy an Evo, I think they are a much nicer car. Just did a o2 housing, downpipe, cat and cat back 3" system, intake, boost controller, and a fuel pump on an MR edition yesterday. This saturday its gonna go for a ecu flash, the owner wants 300whp on pump.


----------



## PinoyVR6 (May 24, 2003)

*Re: (Scirocco20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Scirocco20v* »_Personally Id buy an Evo, I think they are a much nicer car. Just did a o2 housing, downpipe, cat and cat back 3" system, intake, boost controller, and a fuel pump on an MR edition yesterday. This saturday its gonna go for a ecu flash, the owner wants 300whp on pump.
 how did my uncles car sound??? is it faster than his old one


----------



## GTRTim (Jun 28, 2003)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_its rich up top because we decided better to be safe then sorry on pump ass. 
nope, really is just 13 psi, well, creeps to almost 14 up top, but yea. 
engine is a built b18c1 head work done by endyne, full race top mount manifold, 4" downpipe and exhaust by yours truely. 9800 rpms. Turbo at the time was a gt40 turbine .81 exhaust housing / t67 compressor, turbo on it now is a PT71 (t04... GT-Q turbine wheel, 71mm compressor) 
look at the torque, if it was running 30 psi you'd see a helluva lot more torque then that. as i said, that motor should produce high 700's / low 800's whp @ 30-32 psi boost. 
You can see video of the dyno run here, it spretty easy to tell its not running a lot of boost even from just sound. 
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=1704775
we'll hvae the race fuel pass in a couple weeks once we get the bigger fuel system in there. But, FWIW, courtneys car which has less parts / less exotic parts (regular full race manifold, headwork done by local, etc etc etc) was making 740 whp @ 30 psi and 460 on 14psi. 
You can see info on courtney greens car in various magazines, bucks is the same setup with way more toys









STOP BRAGGING ABOUT INFLATED SAE CORRECTED DYNO NUMBERS!!
Everyone knows that Turbo cars at Altitude lose very little power compared to N/A cars so to use a 1.17 correction factor is a JOKE.
You say Cort's car was making 740whp, but the car never tapped over 144mph.
So why are the cars in NJ making low to mid 600whp and going 145-147mph ??
Also you say 25psi w/ SC61 and 560whp is **** tuning ??? So I guess Cunha is a **** tuner? cause he only made 590whp @ 30psi .... Oh wait I forgot Dyno Numbers wins races...
Also to the person who said Honda motors suck stock.... we've seen them hold 500whp, though it's a ticking bomb... at 460-470whp it last ed a couple months.
At 400whp, lasted a year and a half before he turned up the boost to make more power.

_Modified by GTRTim at 6:17 AM 2-17-2005_


_Modified by GTRTim at 7:08 AM 2-17-2005_


----------



## GoKart_16v (Dec 17, 2004)

*Re: (GTRTim)*

There's a guy with a 1.7L (bored b16) with type r head, cams, piggyback (hondata?) or whatever...sleeved. Made like 500hp+ @ 9000rpm with a 10,000 redline...pushing alot of boost on normal compression, race gas, and crazy timing i guess. 
But the power only came like at around 5000-6000rpm and start to rise. And I don't think he ran that boost for everday driving either. With 20-35psi...alot of well tuned engines may get some high hp for sure...nomatter if its vw, honda, mitsu, subaru. But the powerband is not always pretty IMO. But even with the 500hp.


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

the car has a freaking open diff and stock axles. what do you expect, a huge trap speed? hell it doesn't hook until half way down the 1/4
jasons car is trapping well over 145-147 and its a freakin piglet. 
who ever said anything about winning races anyways this thread was about honda ENGINES


----------



## GTRTim (Jun 28, 2003)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_the car has a freaking open diff and stock axles. what do you expect, a huge trap speed? hell it doesn't hook until half way down the 1/4
jasons car is trapping well over 145-147 and its a freakin piglet. 
who ever said anything about winning races anyways this thread was about honda ENGINES 

LMAO now it' doesn't hook up till halfway down the track..
In previous posts you brag how Cort pulls 1.5-1.6 60fts, but he doesn't hook up till halfway down the track ???
You want me to search your posts and quote you ? Also what does stock axles have to do with hooking up ??? NOTHING
My buddy went 10.57 @ 141mph with Stock Axles and Open diff making 550whp...
Stop making excuses.
So then how do Brian Ballard and Jason Hunt get huge trap speeds??? They don't hook till half track either and have no problem trapping 150+ with 625-650whp ??
Yea... and you also just got done saying Jasen's car is making 900whp and in the past i've seen him claim over 800whp, I sure hope he traps higher then 145-147.
As for me making the Dyno numbers don't win drag races comment... you sitting here bragging about how much HP your friends made but yet when it comes down to where using that HP counts, they don't take the win light.


----------



## gltuner (Oct 7, 2004)

*Re: (GTRTim)*

I find it funny how you two are are arguing about how more horsepower wins races. Think of the logistics of a front wheel drive chassis. There is literally a limit to how much horsepower/torque you can have before you get no traction. Hearing people with honda's pushing well into the 600whp mark and only running mid to high 140 trap speeds, I can see why. Definetly get your facts straight before you start braggin about your 60ft times and then claiming slow (relativly) trap speeds. I say, if the car (or chassis) can handle the power (as well as you), then go for it. I think that is what divides us VW guys from Honda's. Honda owners generally push the limits of their cars and imaginations while us VW guys tend to be a bit more conservative in our approaches with tuning our rides that we don't want to just burn through rubber.


----------



## Scirocco20v (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: (PinoyVR6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PinoyVR6* »_ how did my uncles car sound??? is it faster than his old one


I didnt get a test drive. I had to leave early, Ryan says its quicker. I cant wait till it gets tuned. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## LagunaSecaBlueMK3 (Mar 16, 2003)

*Re: (gltuner)*

i think honda guys just flap their gums a lot and then when they realize that nothings gonna happen, they push the limits so they dont get stuck with the foot in mouth syndrome.


----------



## GTRTim (Jun 28, 2003)

*Re: (gltuner)*


_Quote, originally posted by *gltuner* »_I find it funny how you two are are arguing about how more horsepower wins races. Think of the logistics of a front wheel drive chassis. There is literally a limit to how much horsepower/torque you can have before you get no traction. Hearing people with honda's pushing well into the 600whp mark and only running mid to high 140 trap speeds, I can see why. Definetly get your facts straight before you start braggin about your 60ft times and then claiming slow (relativly) trap speeds. I say, if the car (or chassis) can handle the power (as well as you), then go for it. I think that is what divides us VW guys from Honda's. Honda owners generally push the limits of their cars and imaginations while us VW guys tend to be a bit more conservative in our approaches with tuning our rides that we don't want to just burn through rubber.

I thinks it's funny that you need to learn to read what is written..
I most definately NOT arguing that HP wins races.. Since here I am saying that my friends with LESS HP are running quicker times.
We were arguing how the dyno numbers he always claims are Inflated N/A Correction factor at high altitude.
The thing that seperates HONDA's from VW's with the same WHP = TORQUE. 
So how quick should a honda with 600-650whp be running since mid to high 140's is "SLOW" what other car with 600-650whp is trapping 150mph ???
Before you start talking **** like YOU KNOW what your talking about why don't you get YOUR FACTS Straight.
VW's owners just don't PUSH period... How many VW's run the Sport FWD class ? How many VW's across the country compete at import events??
You got Chris Green in Florida, then the NJ,NY,PA,MD Crew... who else ????


----------



## Yorldi (Jul 20, 2004)

Ok guys, I can't understand you!! Really..... I've never driven a Turbo Honda, and as sad as it sounds, I've never seen one working (hey, it wasn't my decission to born in Spain!!) You're talking about silly hp numbers for the street, but..... CAN THOSE CARS TURN?? I doubt a 500WHP FWD car, don't mind if it's a Honda, a VW, an SRT4 or whatever can get to turn well. With the previous G60 I had, with a mere 245hp at the flywheel, it was "interesting" to try and attack a twisty uphill road (we don´t have quarters over here) fast. Thanks to my work, I've done and driven some fast machines, and some FWD, and all them get the same test road, and none of them is fast on the twisty stuff... Even a Civic TypeR CAN'T beat a 150hp Clio Williams when it comes to take bends fast, not in style, fast! I know you're focused only on drag, and I understand it, but I'd prefer my Rallye with just 350whp (it's the goal of the new engine) and a revised Haldex 4WD system over ANY Honda with as much hp you like. Why? Just traction, and the fact that I can exploit the full potential of the car on the twists, instead of entering without gas, and open again once I'm pointing straight. Everybody can be fast on a straight line, but not everybody/car can do it on a twisty uphill. 
Hey, and for fast quarters, why don't you just build up a Muscle Car? I'm sure a well built Barracuda could embarrass any Honda..... Well, my .02!!!! If you wanna quote me, you're free to do it. It's just the opinion of a European guy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## vdubspeed (Jul 19, 2002)

*Re: (Yorldi)*

Yorldi...what the [email protected]#k are you talking about?
This thread is about Honda engines making h/p easier than VW engines. 
This is not about turning, not about 1/4 mile times, your best friend's brother's cousin's car...or whatever.
if you have something about the topic please add it but if you want to talk about something else...start another thread.
Jason


----------



## Yorldi (Jul 20, 2004)

I'm talking about you're only focused on "my car makes more power than yours". My opinion about why Honda makes SO much power is simple. FIRST, is a much better and efficient NA engine than VW, and there's no denying about it. They can easily make the 100hp/l, while we have to heavily modify heads to get what they have as standad. If a head flows this well (or that BAD) in NA form, what it'll do when turbocharged? 
And second, they have MORE years of advantatge on tuning their engines with mad kits, and MORE tuners that do it. Just count how many bolt-on complete turbo kits you have for a 16VT, a 1.6 16VT small block, and then just count how many kits do you have for a B16. If you sum the ability to breath, and the amount of specific parts, it's understandable they make so much more power than we do.


_Modified by Yorldi at 4:52 PM 2-18-2005_


----------



## shmaptoe (Aug 6, 2003)

*Re: (GoKart_16v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *GoKart_16v* »_There's a guy with a 1.7L (bored b16) with type r head, cams, piggyback (hondata?) or whatever...sleeved. Made like 500hp+ @ 9000rpm with a 10,000 redline...pushing alot of boost on normal compression, race gas, and crazy timing i guess. 
But the power only came like at around 5000-6000rpm and start to rise. And I don't think he ran that boost for everday driving either. With 20-35psi...alot of well tuned engines may get some high hp for sure...nomatter if its vw, honda, mitsu, subaru. But the powerband is not always pretty IMO. But even with the 500hp.


this is a lil off topic of the thread, but a response to your post:
the thing to remember especially with honda motors, is that the transmissions are geared so short, that when racing you are never below say 5k rpm, providing you launch above that.
example, im running an integra ls motor (1.8L 16v dohc non-vtec) with an integra gsr tranny, and when i redline my motor at 7k rpms and upshift, i drop into my next gear at 5k rpms (and my tranny is not even as closely geared as a b16/type R trans). this will allow me to run a turbo with which i will not hit my full boost until around 4500-5000 rpms. it will produce nice top end, and even though it wont be full spool in the 4k rpm range, it wont matter because i will never see 4k rpm in a race, so these weird powerbands you see are actually very useable when racing.
sorry if this post is pointless, its definately past my bedtime


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (Wizard-of-OD)*

Christ 5 pages and you guys are spewing out the drag times bs.I thought this topic was supposed to be on HOW we can make VW's faster....not why they arnt faster.
I am going to call the pink ballerina company down the road and order up a new closet for half you girls.So if you plan to carry on a pointless argument then full out this form:
*Name :*
*Shoe size :*
*Dress Size :*
....








*ON TOPIC.*
How do we get 300 CFM's and 10,000 Rpm's efficiently?And go.... http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

_Quote, originally posted by *VW AEB* »_
*Displacement* = 1781cc
*Bore* = 81mm
*Stroke* = 86.4mm
*Block Height* = 220mm (236mm with ABA Block)
*Rod Length* = 144mm (can be made 162mm using a ABA Block)
*Head Flow CFM* = 225 Stock...can be ported to over 275?+ CFM's
*RPM Limit* = 7600 with Hydraulic Lifters



_Quote, originally posted by *HONDA B18C* »_
*Displacement* = 1797cc
*Bore* = 81mm
*Stroke* = 87.2mm
*Block Height* = 270mm
*Rod Length* = 138mm
*Head Flow CFM* = 300+
*RPM Limit* = 10,000 (VTEC kicks in @ about 7000 Rpm's)


----------



## GTRTim (Jun 28, 2003)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (Wizard-of-OD)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Wizard-of-OD* »_Christ 5 pages and you guys are spewing out the drag times bs.I thought this topic was supposed to be on HOW we can make VW's faster....not why they arnt faster.
I am going to call the pink ballerina company down the road and order up a new closet for half you girls.So if you plan to carry on a pointless argument then full out this form:


You wanna know how to make VW's fasters GO TO THE F-U-C-K-I-N-G TRACK !!!!!!
Step 1 - Learn How to Drive
Step 2 - Don't be ******* and put slicks on the car
Step 3 - Don't be ******* and take a little weight out the care
Step 4 - Learn How to Drive
Cause last time I checked people on the East Coast have no problem going quick.
I mean everytime I read one of the major rags with some type of Euro Shoot out I VOMIT laughing at the 1/4 mile times these cars are pulling.


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

FWIW jason made 850 whp 2 nights ago on 24.5" slick on the dyno. still no traction. 
And before you ask he was trapping low 150's at 4500 ft, on the old setup.


----------



## Bad Habit (Nov 27, 2002)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

My freind this,my freind that.My freind at street machines unlimited just made 1600 horsepower,without boost.Big deal


----------



## GTRTim (Jun 28, 2003)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_FWIW jason made 850 whp 2 nights ago on 24.5" slick on the dyno. still no traction. 
And before you ask he was trapping low 150's at 4500 ft, on the old setup. 

Ok and at Sea Level in Vegas and Pomona and Texas he never even trapped 150.... 
So 850whp with your ridiculous 1.17 SAE correction factor ?? or 850whp Actual ?


----------



## Scirocco20v (Mar 25, 2004)

*Re: B18C vs AEB (GTRTim)*


_Quote, originally posted by *GTRTim* »_
You wanna know how to make VW's fasters GO TO THE F-U-C-K-I-N-G TRACK !!!!!!
Step 1 - Learn How to Drive
Step 2 - Don't be ******* and put slicks on the car
Step 3 - Don't be ******* and take a little weight out the care
Step 4 - Learn How to Drive


Agreed, God doesnt like cowards. Go out there and break sh*t, learn something and get back out there the next weekend and try to go faster.


----------



## EVLG35 (Jun 30, 2000)

*Re: Honda > VW? WHY!!!!???? (Stephen Webb)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Stephen Webb* »_
First off, in that link you may notice that at least a few different people are questioning those particular numbers 1.6 liter, 10 psi, 250 lb-ft & 250 HP -- it's hard to believe (the torque in particular).
Others have suggested that the high flow heads, higher revving engines, and ability to take high pressures account for the higher-than-you-would-expect horspeoer numebrs that Hondas can churn out...But, in this case at least, none of those come into play. The boost is low, and the peak torque (and power, more or less) happen at 5200 RPM or so. 
What it looks like to me is either:
He's running more boost than he says
He's running a larger engine than he says
The correction factor that the dyno operator used was outrageous
(or some combination)
250 lb-ft of torque out of a 100 inch motor (at 10 psi) just doesn't sound right *at all*.
I think you are doing pretty well to get 1 lb-ft per cubic inch (NA), and if you take into account the turbo at 10 psi, he'd be doing well to break 170 lb/ft. 250 is incredible (as in "I don't believe him").
As for them not worrying about transmissions -- true -- but did you notice how the other people on the forum were surprised that he did that on stock pistons/rods....So one thing VW has against Honda is a better stock bottom end.

-Steve

Not really...considering just a Vortech on a 1.6 [data below taken from Vortech's website]
HONDA/ACURA SUPERCHARGER SYSTEMS 
4HC218-010SQ Civic SI 1.6 DOHC `99-`00 V-5 SQ G CCW 6 160/111 *218/142 *Stock Stock 155 10-12 48 $3,449.95 D-213-21 
4HC218-020SQ Civic SI 1.6 DOHC H.O. with cooler `99-`00 V-5 SQ G CCW 8-9 160/111 *277/175 *Stock Stock 155 16-21 90 $4,722.95 D-213-21 
4HC218-030SQ Integra GSR 1.8 DOHC `94-`98 V-5 SQ G CCW 7 170/128 243/168 Stock Stock 190 8-12 48 $3,681.95 D-213-21 
4HC218-040SQ Integra GSR 1.8 DOHC with cooler `94-`98 V-5 SQ G CCW 8-9 170/128 278/192 Stock Stock 190 16-21 90 $4,722.95 D-213-21 
4HC218-060SQ Integra LS/RS/GS 1.8 `94-`01 V-5 SQ G CCW 7 140/124 201/158 Stock Stock 190 8-12 48 $3,681.95 D-213-21 
4HC218-070SQ Integra LS/RS/GS 1.8 with cooler `94-`01 V-5 SQ G CCW 8-9 140/124 226/184 Stock Stock 190 16-21 90 $4,722.95 D-213-21 
4HC218-090SQ Integra Type R 1.8 with cooler `97-`01 V-5 SQ G CCW 7-8 195/130 298/195 Stock Stock 190 16-21 90 $4,722.95 D-213-21 
4HS218-010SQ S2000 `00-`03 V-2 SQ SC CCW 7-8 240/153 358/214 Stock Stock 255 10-12 73 $5,243.95 D-213-2


----------

