Boosting the H22 ?

[Joey GT-R]

I was considering putting a K24A2 crank in my spare H block I'm building. I know .2L isn't much but hey, I can still rev to 8K

[deevergote]

Has that been done before? Something tells me a K crank wouldn't work in an H block... though I have nothing to back that up.

[98vtec]

Has that been done before? Something tells me a K crank wouldn't work in an H block... though I have nothing to back that up.

been done already. Rosko runs a K24 crank in his motor.

[Joey GT-R]

Civic Guys have been doing it for years since they've been swapping Ks for a while.

to put a K24 crank in a H22A4 the hardest part is machining the crank snout to fit the crank pulley everthing else is easy because of yours truely and this is all with Honda Factory parts and there's no need to mod the crank for the rods

H22A4 at 87.5mm will yield 2390cc
F23 rods same rod journal width as K24 0.780 inches

pistons and compression
H22A4 USDM comp 13.47
H22A JDM comp 14.52
H22 Type S comp 15.23
H23A1 USDM comp 11.10
F23A1 comp 10.05
F20B comp 15.50
F22A1/A4/A6 comp 10.29

now the setup with K20 rods

H22A4 at 87.5 will yield 2377
K20 rods also 0.780 rod journal width

pistons and compression
H22a4 USDM comp 10.96
H22A JDM comp 11.62
H22A Type S comp 12.05
H23A1 USDM comp 9.39
F23A1 comp 8.65
F20B comp 12.22
F22A1/A4/A6 comp 8.83

There you have it....

[deevergote]

Well there we go. I should've known you're not one to randomly pick parts to slap together!


Still, it seems like more work than necessary for a very small increase in displacement. For a naturally aspirated engine, every little bit helps... but for turbo, I really don't imagine it's necessary. A proper turbo setup can provide more power than you'll need from a street car throughout the most usable powerband with the 2.2L. As would a supercharger (I'm seeing more and more supercharger projects underway on here.)
To me, such a thing is really only good for bragging rights (especially if you're among the first to do it), or for drawing attention to a tuner shop/store (like Rosko has.)

[gloryaccordy]

Well the thing w/turbo setups is, more displacement = less boost for the same power, which means more reliability, faster spool up (i.e. more torque at lower RPMs) and a whole host of other little things

Plus for a street car the turbo is gonna be in the heart of its efficiency range in the midrange RPM zone, which makes the loss of top end RPM capability kind of irrelevant.

Plus undersquare motors are better at making low end torque and are just torquier in general... I remember this distinctly between the F22 and H22... which is important for off boost response, where a street car will spend a lot of (if not the majority of) its time. Stroking puts the H squarely in the undersquare zone.

My only wonder is how VTEC interacts with the turbo. A system like Nissan's VVEL that lets the intake and exhaust cam lobes switch separately would be awesome; I'd imagine letting the exhaust cam open up early would let the turbo spool up even more quickly.

[98vtec]

Well there we go. I should've known you're not one to randomly pick parts to slap together!


Still, it seems like more work than necessary for a very small increase in displacement. For a naturally aspirated engine, every little bit helps... but for turbo, I really don't imagine it's necessary. A proper turbo setup can provide more power than you'll need from a street car throughout the most usable powerband with the 2.2L. As would a supercharger (I'm seeing more and more supercharger projects underway on here.)
To me, such a thing is really only good for bragging rights (especially if you're among the first to do it), or for drawing attention to a tuner shop/store (like Rosko has.)

i picked up 30whp/25tq after putting in my old stroked and bored bottom end.

stroking an NA motor is where its at. how do you think all these high HP na 4 cylinders are making 300-400whp? They wouldnt even bein the ballpark if they tried to stay with stock stroke. Hell my motor isnt even considered a big block anymore with the new technology thats out there. Its just a baby.

[deevergote]

Oh yeah, N/A will benefit. With turbo, though, it's overkill. At least for a FWD street car.

[mndude07]

You think the stroke increase outweighs the potential rpm multiplier for total power production?

[tutsuo]

Hey guys i read a post in here where it stats (lock the rev limiter at 7k) is there a specific reason for that ?

I would boost the H... fuck it you only live once

Get some proper pistons + rings and an F22A crank. Get that nice meaty midrange, drop VTEC xover, cap the redline at like 7000. Midrange was my favorite part of my H22 CB, not really the top. I'd go turbo to augment that

[toycar]

Increase in stroke will factor into piston speed, which is where I see the issue coming to play with a turbo motor and a k24 crank.

Turbo motors thrive on less stroke, which equates to less dwell times and faster rev's.


Im not trying to get into a pissing match about engine design, but longer stroke on turbo motor is counterproductive in my opinion and that is one that is shared by many quality engine builders. Not just me.

On a turbo motor the faster the engine turns with slower piston speeds the better. The turbo makes the power, not the stroke or compression of the pistons.


You can bump compression and finess stroke to make additional power, but the general approach should be setting the motor up around the turbo, not the other way around.

Under positive pressure, the turbo is moving a lot more air than the stroke or compression of the engine. This is why low compression pistons are used with a turbo application, and shorter stroke is also an added benefit.


***Edit***

And before someone starts the whole "turbo k24's make huge power" arguement, I just want to point out that k24 cylinder heads are designed to adjust cylinder pressure through valve overlap, valve lift and duration with the accompanied i-vtec system.

Very different from a k24 crank in an h22 engine

[Joey GT-R]

That's a good point. I just like the idea of maximum displacement. These are FWD cars afterall, and after a certain point it's not how much power you're making, but how you're putting it to the ground. I would much prefer a turbo "H24" making 350/400, vs an H22 making 475/290. (If such results as the former are possible.)

[98vtec]

Increase in stroke will factor into piston speed, which is where I see the issue coming to play with a turbo motor and a k24 crank.

Turbo motors thrive on less stroke, which equates to less dwell times and faster rev's.


Im not trying to get into a pissing match about engine design, but longer stroke on turbo motor is counterproductive in my opinion and that is one that is shared by many quality engine builders. Not just me.

On a turbo motor the faster the engine turns with slower piston speeds the better. The turbo makes the power, not the stroke or compression of the pistons.


You can bump compression and finess stroke to make additional power, but the general approach should be setting the motor up around the turbo, not the other way around.

Under positive pressure, the turbo is moving a lot more air than the stroke or compression of the engine. This is why low compression pistons are used with a turbo application, and shorter stroke is also an added benefit.


***Edit***

And before someone starts the whole "turbo k24's make huge power" arguement, I just want to point out that k24 cylinder heads are designed to adjust cylinder pressure through valve overlap, valve lift and duration with the accompanied i-vtec system.

Very different from a k24 crank in an h22 engine

counterproductive is a terrible choice of words

[toycar]

counterproductive is a terrible choice of words

Why? If you are applying the effort, or being productive, by putting a custom crank/rod/piston combo together, you may as well take advantage of a shorter stroke crankshaft.


So, it would be counterproductive in my opinion if you were to put that effort out, to not do it with overall performance in mind.

Counterproductive; Adjective: Having the opposite of the desired effect





If changing from an OEM crank is your desire, and you are building a turbo motor, a longer stroke would have the opposite of your desired effect. A shorter stroke/longer rod combo would be much more beneficial if you were going to swap cranks out.







I think it was an ideal choice for a word.


Maybe try not being so sensitive....

[98vtec]

So your whole argument is over r/s ratio and theoretical jargon?

Pretty mute point to begin with.

The only group i can think of who may factor in r/s ratio and care about mean piston speeds is F1 and NASCAR, none of which is a DD honda or engine meant hold together for 1/4 mile.