Re: R/S ratio
 

R/S ratio is a rich man's N/A game, for turbo cars its a lie.

Re: R/S ratio
 

R/S is a unitless number.... and you dont need to put "__:1" you can leave it out when you are talking

BTW a b16 is like 1.74 B18b is like 1.52 for comparisons sake... in general hondas are pretty high.... VW's are normally pretty low..... explaining why VW's always beat us torque wise and we rape them power wise

Re: R/S ratio
 

im sittin at 93 bore 89 stroke... want to take it to 94 and 94...

Re: R/S ratio
 

94-94, a perfectly square r/s ratio, giving you more linear hp/tq curves?

Re: R/S ratio
 

B16B FTW.... 77.4mm stroke 142.3mm rod... 1.84 RS :-*


Rod Stroke Ratio summed up real quick: higher the number the less wear and tear on the motor, also has less torque, but more revablity. the higher the number the more wear on the motor, more torque, peak power at lower RPMs...

thats not saying that a low RS motor will not last a long time, the B18A/B motors have a "shitty" RS of 1.54 and still will last a couple hundred thousand miles... and in our game your gonna ---- your motor up before the average life expectancy of the motor. so it doesnt matter...

so in closing: you want nice low end power run a low RS, you want all your power at topend and dont mind reving the ---- out of it you need to go with a higher RS. either way if your reading this you will need to rebuild that ---- in a couple years anyway...

Re: R/S ratio
 

Stock torque numbers can be fixed with a turbo ;D

Re: R/S ratio
 

they will just argue that the tq is too low for the hp then... it should still be in good proportion between the hp/tq numbers

Re: R/S ratio
 

i want more torque than hp numerically, but modeled after stock powerbands.


i can give like a .9 rs ratio if i really want, there is a 97mm stroker crank out there thatll take me to around 2.7l outside of boring to a max of 95.5 which i think is 2850cc? ------ huge for a 4cyl

Re: R/S ratio
 

madmax: TDC dwell is going to be the same as BDC.

i'm sorry madmax your wrong on that, with a short rod engine, the dwell time at BDC is longer than at TDC, it's easy to figure, picture the crank swinging at BTDC and ATDC, the crank only has to swing a few degrees to promote a change in rod angle, the opposite is true of a long rod engine, at BDC, the rod is able to swing further for any givin degree at BBDC and ABDC, allowing for a lower dwell time. this relates to piston speeds, long rod engines have higher piston speeds than short rod engines. this kind of debate is all in theory, but it's really pointless, honda engines have superlight rotating assemblies and ya this crap really has no effect, maybe when your talkin an 850+ cube diesel engine for highway use, then for sure it has an effect when you have a piston and rod assembly that weighs over 25 pounds and your max engine speed is 2100, lol.

Re: R/S ratio
 

But a perfectly square r/s ratio gives you proportional hp/tq curves?