TeamCapri
General => General => Topic started by: mcanchola2 on July 26, 2011, 04:38:00 AM
-
i was just wondering ok. A few years ago I attended an illegal race jijiji :D and I was shocked when this guy with a honda hatchback smoked a srt-4 and a evo. I know the srt-4 was a lil mod he is the fastest srt-4 here in the valley till date. Dont know about the evo other than he was boosting more than stock. Poor srt-4 and evo never had a chance not even the evo with awd the hatchback came out first on both races .
The hatchback had no turbo it was a all-motor with no spray
Has anyone made a capri like this. all-motor instead of the turbo mod?
-
Honda guys have 200+ HP engines that they can swap, then throw in some internal work they can get 300+ on a 2000lb car..That equals fast
No way the stock 1.6 B6 can do that without forced performance...
-
I think there are a handful all motor hondas running 300+ whp. Slap that in a gutted car like a CRX that would only weigh 1800lbs or less, and yeah you'll have an EVO killer. But Those motors are built to the hilt - super high compression, oversized valves, ridiculous cam grinds, blueprinted/balanced bottom end, dyno tuned standalone, maybe ITB's, etc. You can turn 9K+ RPM out of them.
But you're also talking an EASY $10,000 into the motor... you can put half that into a nice turbo setup and make twice the power much more reliably...
There's been a whole bunch of Escort/Protege guys that have built all motor BP's - they breathe so much better than the anemic B6. I think they've put down 180whp or better with ITBs, but it's been a while since I looked. I am building ITB sets that would fit the B6 though, so I may attempt it someday for shits 'n giggles, but the BP is where you will make much more serious power - both N/A & turbo.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v312/LtJerryRigg/ITB%20Pattern/2011-04-22_20-34-47_18.jpg)
Also, you'd wanna ditch the n/a Ftype transmission pretty quickly (http://smile.gif)
My 2¢
-Rocket
-
thats tru... hey rocket nice ITB good luck with that
-
KA guys run those a lot...
-
I grew up in Nor Cal. Even back in the day guys had hidden NOS systems.That can also explain how a grocery getter can beat a "modified" car.Just sayin,Rocky.
-
thats true but this guy had no nos
-
Like rocket said he has at least 10k into it
there is a evo running 12s here at the track all day with a retune & simple bolt on's. Give one of those cars the same spending limits & it would even be a close match.
Kinda why I like the DSM's It is truly bang for the buck. Stock block can handle 500+ hp & be reliable at it.
-
Hence the popularity. Its not too hard to put other Honda motors in the Honda car of your choice. Most honda motors wont float valves in the 9k's stock. Less than $3000 and not much of a build, mostly stock, gots the vtec, add a little hondatech and a good driver. Feather weight car and drivetrain. Nothing very exotic (sadly).
But I've seen some VERY affordable turbo kits on them too.
Anemic B6??? Be nice. Where does that come from?
Evos arent much of a drag car. The new ones are very well electronicaly protected. I think Russ has some good bragging numbers for a capri. Lots of B6 builds in other cars though. The Capri looks sportier than it is.
-
Anemic is on the nice side of describing it (http://smile.gif)
Where does that come from? I used to run a pretty maxed out B6T, and I am now running a BP+T (1.8 + turbo) The difference in the powerband is incredible, so much more power over a broader range. The ports in the head are substantially larger, even if it's only .2L larger - it can breathe! The 1.6 feels like it's wheezing when I drive them anymore (http://smile.gif)
-
I agree with Matt....except these motors aren't anemic, they're asthmatic! These poor little things can't breath! I've driven the GTXR2 - HUGE difference between the 1.6, and the 1.8!!
-
Russ,did the cams you put in one of your capris help with the breathing enough to justify the cost?Rocky
-
YES!! However, I got $800 cams for only $100! It pays to search the internet......
-
The choking isn't in the engine on the b6. When I feel the motors in perspective of what the motors sizes are, the BP to B6 feels about right as does the BPT and b6T. Most horsepower claims are on the same curve.
The low end starts where I want it in the 1.8, I can agree with that.
200cc alone is probably 20hp. Add it to 1600cc already there and its even more efficient. Thats about the same thrill a turbo adds to the B6 without the higher chamber temps etc etc etc. Size is so important, Mazda kept growing their motors.
If you get the chance, try the F2 2000cc. Its dated and not even a broad headed doch, but very easy to feel the bigger cc's.
The B6 breathes fine. It just wants modern cams.
I was hoping there was a link to a flow bench.
-
I disagree. The B6 does not breath, and the problem is not with the cams...it's in the valves. The BP head had valves that are almost 60% larger than the B6's. The difference is stunning. The cams I installed have higher lift and longer duration.....allowing the puny valves to work a little more efficiently, but I still need to work with what is there. Until someone re-works a B6 head to use much larger valves, these engines will continue to gasp for air like an elderly life-time chain smoker on a hike in the Himalayas...
-
so the engine is you russ?
-
Thats a visual man.
I'm not a pro engine builder. In an effort to defend a good design (not perfect, not anemic) the increase from 31-33mm doesn't equate a 60% increase in size, curtain, or flow. Mazda is very smart and I'm sure they know too large a valve will rob your torque.
In engines, there is waaaay more to getting more than adding more.
Too much duration, lift, valve, relief, etc etc etc (again) won't help anymore than too much piston, fuel, air.
There are flow charts for anyone who cares to find them (and please share the links). There is also a long time line in experiences in the aquisition of ability to apply aside from the tools and the numbers alone.
I am not astute enough to serve justice towards this matter in detail. I like the Capri, and believe the motor may be the best engineered feature of the car. There are far more technical forums than this which clarify that opinion very well.
-
You mentioned Russ's cars were putting down good numbers - I built Russ's Cars ;)
Here's some stock for stock numbers:
The N/A 1.6 Makes 116hp
The Turbo 1.6 Makes 132 hp
The N/A 1.8 makes 127hp
The Turbo 1.8 Makes 180hp (GTX version) or 210hp (GTR version)
And we all know how well even the 1.6 responds to modifications... now imagine that + more on a larger displacement motor (http://smile.gif)
The valves are not 60% larger...(russ! Stop talkin out yo ass!) But they are larger, I don't have numbers offhand. To give you an idea how well the 1.8 breathes here's some pictures comparing the intake ports:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v312/LtJerryRigg/2011-07-30_23-39-10_36.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v312/LtJerryRigg/2011-07-30_23-39-59_713.jpg)
The 1.6 port is 43mm wide & the 1.8 port is 49mm wide.
You're entitled to your opinion - But my opinion: the 1.8 is better in nearly every way (http://smile.gif)
-Rocket
-
I have no issue with considering the 1.8 to be a better performance engine in general. I don't believe I implied otherwise.
I will stand in my opinion that the Mazda B6 is not anemic. Nothing has been presented to justify the concept. A comparisom of a engine which displaces a different volume highlights the given concept that a engine must have more air in the area displaced to be effective. It does not establish that a motor of a different displacement acquires or discharges its volumetric equivilent with any difference in efficiency.
When measuring flow it is good to measure the flow. Refering to a gasket, or a port, or a valve is good when refering to a gasket, or a port, or a valve. Any valve control is another intricate topic aside from the others.
The B6dohc puts out numbers in a predictable corelation to the BP as does the narrow 16valve and less than 16valve versions of all displacement variants of the B series motors.
With all the manifolds, gaskets, valves, and even the cams ...Quick math puts the difference between a 115hp/1600 and a 132hp/1800 to be a efficiency increase in favor of the 1800 to approximate 2%. Which in my opinion is unremarkable.
As I understand it the SuperRoo is quite the respectable challenger capable of holding it's own very well. I don't know the output, of course I'd like to. If the owner were to permit, the builder of that motor could comment on its features and abilites .
There are a number of respectable builds finished by members of this board and I commend us all to that end. There is much to undrstand about automotive powerplants and sometimes the excitement we feel can ignite some off handed statements. Right or wrong.
I'm damn near $1 in .02pinions aren't I?
-
Ill take on the SuperPoo anyday (http://tongue.gif)
Except if I remember correctly it was being retired/dismantled... :/