Horsepower vs Torque F22 vs H22

[TheProfessional]

This is total non-sense. Inch for inch a higher tech engine will own the lower tech one every time. You can say you prefer the power delivery or whatever, but in terms of sheer output, the higher tech engine will always win.

I'd have to disagree with that. That's like saying the SI-K20 is superior to say, a Euro R, only because it's the newer, more technologically advanced motor (Truthfully stated the only TRUE difference between the two is a chain driven system and a newer, more efficient rocker arm assembly, despite the K Series design platform being sourced almost exclusively from the H), and we know that's not the case. The Euro R makes more power and torque and like the k can make it's power to 8 grand.


It applies to an extent, but not always, I mean truthfully stated people would Opt for the H over the K (the k20) if they did some reading, and they'd opt for the H over the K24 if they had money for a Bore and Stroke kit and custom pistons. I honestly believe that the newer = fad. It hasn't really proved STILL to be that tmuch more superior over the older designs, K's are still being beaten by Worked B or H series motors on a daily basis.


Newer Tech is great, Out of the box you get performance, but the gap can easily be bridged with after-market parts, and know-how. Just my opinion.

[owequitit]

I'd have to disagree with that. That's like saying the SI-K20 is superior to say, a Euro R, only because it's the newer, more technologically advanced motor (Truthfully stated the only TRUE difference between the two is a chain driven system and a newer, more efficient rocker arm assembly, despite the K Series design platform being sourced almost exclusively from the H), and we know that's not the case. The Euro R makes more power and torque and like the k can make it's power to 8 grand.


It applies to an extent, but not always, I mean truthfully stated people would Opt for the H over the K (the k20) if they did some reading, and they'd opt for the H over the K24 if they had money for a Bore and Stroke kit and custom pistons. I honestly believe that the newer = fad. It hasn't really proved STILL to be that tmuch more superior over the older designs, K's are still being beaten by Worked B or H series motors on a daily basis.


Newer Tech is great, Out of the box you get performance, but the gap can easily be bridged with after-market parts, and know-how. Just my opinion.

You can disagree all you want.

1) You are twisting what I am saying. I said that if two engines are of equal size, the more high tech one will win, and I stand by that. It is a simple matter of volumetric efficiency. Look it up. Nothing was stated about the H or the K.

2) I will also disagree with your assertion of the H vs K. I have both currently, and in stock form the K outpowers a slightly modified H in my Accord. It is smoother, more responsive, more energetic below VTEC, and ultimately, the head is superior.

The H series is NOT the source of the K series. The K series is based primarily on the F20C/F22C to the extent that with minimal machining the cranks are interchangeable. A K head can also be mounted on an F20/F22 block with relative ease.

The head on the K series is unquestionably superior in flow characteristics to the H series. It has been proven time and again on flow benches stock for stock and even modified vs modified. The H22 is a relative struggle to get anywhere near 300WHP, whereas the K will get into that ballpark with relative ease.

The K24 is not a good high RPM engine because the stroke is too long, however, if you mount an F22C crank in a K series block, you get a 2.2L that will happily rev to 8.5-9K, will make 280-300WHP and 170-190 lb-ft with ease. Tune it right and you can be making ~90+% of peak power from 2K to 8K. This would be with a fairly lightly modified head. So again, inch for inch, the higher tech engine is going to win because it will have better VE in most cases.

The main advantage that the H22 holds is in the bottom end. It has larger bearing surface area, so theoretically, it is more durable under high rev situations. I say theoretically because the K has proven to be reliable at up to 8600RPM in stock form in many forms of racing. Honda even puts a warranty on the K20R in the Civic Type R with a factory set 8600RPM rev limit. With mild building (like an H22 would need), the K has lasted to 9K+.

3) As for "new" being a fad, you can believe that if you want. While I like old as well as new, and I greatly admire old Hondas it isn't all doom and gloom with new technology either. Compare a J35 from the new Accord to a 5.0 from 1990 and tell me which is the better overall engine. And the V6 is much smaller, lighter and more fuel efficient.

I like B series, H series, F series, K series and C and J series Hondas.

[TheProfessional]

You can disagree all you want.

1) You are twisting what I am saying. I said that if two engines are of equal size, the more high tech one will win, and I stand by that. It is a simple matter of volumetric efficiency. Look it up. Nothing was stated about the H or the K.

Clarifying it like that i'm inclined to agree MORE with this statement so no rebuttle there.

2) I will also disagree with your assertion of the H vs K. I have both currently, and in stock form the K outpowers a slightly modified H in my Accord. It is smoother, more responsive, more energetic below VTEC, and ultimately, the head is superior.

This, I disagree with, I have both as well, and i'm inclined to ask WHICH H do you have?? I have a Euro R H22 in a CB7 coupe and I destroy my crew-mates K-Swapped Cb7 coupe on a regular basis across the entire power band, drag, downhill, circuit, it's a win. You can make the argument that the K is a more responsive, or even a smoother motor but numbers aren't subject to opinion, one CLEARLY has higher Crank/Wheel numbers then the other, and those numbers are a totally different characteristic from behavioral traits which you are giving the K the nod in. I myself will agree that from a behavioral standpoint the K is infact more responsive and smoother, but No stock k20 of equal health and mileage out powers THAT particular H, or even the Type S for that matter.

The H series is NOT the source of the K series. The K series is based primarily on the F20C/F22C to the extent that with minimal machining the cranks are interchangeable. A K head can also be mounted on an F20/F22 block with relative ease.

This is an odd sentiment seeing as how the F20C's roots have ties to the F20B which is nearly an anatomical match to an H22 (It's essentially a destroked H22), We'd be splitting hairs, Considering the identical natures of the H and F series motors (And their interchangability) it makes no sense to split hairs here.

The head on the K series is unquestionably superior in flow characteristics to the H series. It has been proven time and again on flow benches stock for stock and even modified vs modified. The H22 is a relative struggle to get anywhere near 300WHP, whereas the K will get into that ballpark with relative ease.

I agree here, hence why i've put forth the money to have the K's head slapped onto an H22 bottom end. The K head flows better, has a superior rocker arm design, it has the cards in this particular comparison. As for the 300hp all motor mark? Wasn't that hard for me, 2.7L Bore/Stroke Kit, High compression custom pistons and a Jun-Stage 2 Head package and I kicked down the door on 300 fairly easy. I will admit that a K (24) would do the same with less work tho, so there is truth to what you're saying, as I got my k24 to touch similar numbers simply swapping out pistons and cams.

The K24 is not a good high RPM engine because the stroke is too long, however, if you mount an F22C crank in a K series block, you get a 2.2L that will happily rev to 8.5-9K, will make 280-300WHP and 170-190 lb-ft with ease. Tune it right and you can be making ~90+% of peak power from 2K to 8K. This would be with a fairly lightly modified head. So again, inch for inch, the higher tech engine is going to win because it will have better VE in most cases.

That was a sound point, no argument there.

The main advantage that the H22 holds is in the bottom end. It has larger bearing surface area, so theoretically, it is more durable under high rev situations. I say theoretically because the K has proven to be reliable at up to 8600RPM in stock form in many forms of racing. Honda even puts a warranty on the K20R in the Civic Type R with a factory set 8600RPM rev limit. With mild building (like an H22 would need), the K has lasted to 9K+.

This is sound. Although with higher durability, I would be inclined to believe that the only inhibiting factor of a stock H going this high is the displacement/Stroke. You durability point stands even more true with the F20B which has arguably the stoutest bottom end of them all, and is capable of that epic 9 grand spin straight out the box. Again, I find your point to be sound, not alot to argue with there.

3) As for "new" being a fad, you can believe that if you want. While I like old as well as new, and I greatly admire old Hondas it isn't all doom and gloom with new technology either. Compare a J35 from the new Accord to a 5.0 from 1990 and tell me which is the better overall engine. And the V6 is much smaller, lighter and more fuel efficient.

Are we talking about a 5.0? As in a Ford 5.0? Just clarifying because if that's the case then yes, CLEARLY the newer J35's aren't a fad thats actual technological supremacy. I was more so referencing the insignificant gap between the K and H. Comparing J's and 5.0's, is a bit broader and obvious, and I'm in agreement if you're coming from that angle.

I like B series, H series, F series, K series and C and J series Hondas.
As do i.

I love a mature opinionated debate good sir, good show.

[SOHC-FTW]

Hell a new Accord V6 will run 14 flat at 100MPH with a secretary behind the wheel...



This is total non-sense. Inch for inch a higher tech engine will own the lower tech one every time. You can say you prefer the power delivery or whatever, but in terms of sheer output, the higher tech engine will always win.

LOL technology can be brought to any build. As i said build for build, money for money. This is why the SBF and SBC continue to live on, but also continue to get better power and efficiency it's simple times have changed, but their is still 7 second carbureted cars. I love a small engine but size does matter in the power race even with technology.

[toycar]

LOL technology can be brought to any build. As i said build for build, money for money. This is why the SBF and SBC continue to live on, but also continue to get better power and efficiency it's simple times have changed, but their is still 7 second carbureted cars. I love a small engine but size does matter in the power race even with technology.

I think that what he is saying is per cubic inch, if the exact same size engine was low tech vs new tech, the newer wins every time due to a more efficient design.



I sort of disagree with this.


In DSM land a 6 bolt 4g63 pwns all. Even evo guys swap in a first gen 6 bolt. And to this day its still pwns 99% of the time when built vs built comes to play.

[Jarrett]

I think that what he is saying is per cubic inch, if the exact same size engine was low tech vs new tech, the newer wins every time due to a more efficient design.



I sort of disagree with this.


In DSM land a 6 bolt 4g63 pwns all. Even evo guys swap in a first gen 6 bolt. And to this day its still pwns 99% of the time when built vs built comes to play.

That's because the statement is painfully general. New tech? What kind of technology? Fuel efficiency? Emissions? Newer technology doesn't always mean that it was made for raw power. In fact it rarely does.

And to the H vs. K argument, they're all similar in design. The newest K20Z has the same bore spacing as the F18A did when it came out in 1989. The newer models are just derivations of the one they're replacing whether it's an H22A, F20B, F20C, K20A or K24A. Laboring this argument is pointless.

[toycar]

Laboring this argument is pointless.

Well I think there is merit to some of the arguement.


Example given is valve train management. As that evolves, the efficiency of N/A motors is skyrocketing.


Just as an example. I don't really think tech is the end of the conversation, but there is merit in the point. Just like SOHC said though, there are still plenty of carb'd 7 sec cars.

[gloryaccordy]

What exactly is the argument?

You can make any engine do anything if you build/configure it the right way. We have had 100HP/L NA engines since the 70s. Today we have 200HP/L NA engines. On motorcycles. How? They rev to 14,000 RPM and don't need any power under 3-5K. And they have crazy short stroke (S1000RR = 40mm, compared to F22's 95mm) that lets them rev that high reliably.

Likewise you can boost a motor to all hell if you are just going to have it do a few drag runs, but that is different from boosting a car for DD use. So I think looking at engines in cars like these from 1 single metric is kind of silly. You can have a 200whp F22A that sucks to drive, easily

[Jarrett]

Well I think there is merit to some of the arguement.


Example given is valve train management. As that evolves, the efficiency of N/A motors is skyrocketing.


Just as an example. I don't really think tech is the end of the conversation, but there is merit in the point. Just like SOHC said though, there are still plenty of carb'd 7 sec cars.

My reference to the "argument" was in regard to which of the aforementioned engines derived from the other and which ones are dissimilar. They're all similar.

[PR CB7]

Well I think there is merit to some of the arguement.


Example given is valve train management. As that evolves, the efficiency of N/A motors is skyrocketing.


Just as an example. I don't really think tech is the end of the conversation, but there is merit in the point. Just like SOHC said though, there are still plenty of carb'd 7 sec cars.

it's getting twisted again, if you're about to bring something to the discussion, at least let it be apples, dont bring grapefruits or olives to the debate please

technology will always win, sure a razr was the shit back when it first came out, but in reality it aint no match for a 4s

from
valve timing, valve lift, roller rockers, direct injection, etc. all these pieces of technology combined makes for a really efficient and powerful engine

an engine thats able to control cam timing on the fly is an engine that will have both low end torque and top end power

engines with variable lift can use smaller and bigger profiles lobes open when needed making getting the most out of it, decreasing the need for a higher cam

engines with direct injection use their fuel injector to spray fuel directly to the dome of the piston automatically cooling the dome, making 12:1 compresssion engines that can run on 87oct fuel, something you cant really do with non direct (skyactive tech, etc) for example the new scion fr-s has a compression ratio of 12:1 and makes 200hp on regular gas, even thought the exact whp might be different, its a its a really high number, coming from an engine without no variable lift

roller rockers......... any v8 guy can tell you this works, reducing drag from your valvtrain assembly


newer technology means big power and fuel economy

for a long time there is the discussion between the ls engine vs the ford 4 cam 32 valve
it almost fits this discussion, even though its a doch 4 valve engine, its prey for a ls9
when comparing them, the gt500 engine is 355cc and the ls7 is 427cc, clearly almost 100cc difference, a 1.2l difference, if the gt500 engine was a 7l with those heads it would be a game changer
this debate can keep going but in reality technology will always win

p.s. a 6bolt 4g its not part of this debate, the 6bolt 4g its just a strong strong engine, although the bottom might not be as strong, a mivec head has the capacity to outflow a 6bolt head

[toycar]

although the bottom might not be as strong, a mivec head has the capacity to outflow a 6bolt head

The 420a head outflows the 4g63 head, and it was considered a POS engine by most tuner standards.



The 420a cylinder head on the N/A 2g DSM was designed by lotus. Chrysler picked up the project after lotus ditched the 2.0 design.


Whats the point? 6 bolt or bust in dsm land and it is 20+ year old design that outperforms ANY turbo 2.0 motor.

[TheProfessional]

Wouldn't the argument of "Newer Tech"..be straight nullified considering ANY OLD motor can simply be upgraded with after-market parts tho????..



So I mean debating it out is pointless, considering that for the money there isn't much you can't do to an OLD motor that's done to a new Motor out of the factory. It's just the question of cost effectiveness in correlation to the cost of the newer motor fresh out the factory.


People argue Heads outflowing another == Port and Polishing
People argue Cam profiles === Custom Grinding (Really not that expensive)
Rocker arm designs ====Again, an aftermarket upgrade readily avail. for decent expense.

I dunno, the tech argument just doesn't seem to hold that much weight considering that with the right amount of money any old motor can be simply brought up to standard.

Stock for Stock yea it applies, but the majority here mods don't they?? So that's the more applicable argument.

[gloryaccordy]

Wouldn't the argument of "Newer Tech"..be straight nullified considering ANY OLD motor can simply be upgraded with after-market parts tho????..



So I mean debating it out is pointless, considering that for the money there isn't much you can't do to an OLD motor that's done to a new Motor out of the factory. It's just the question of cost effectiveness in correlation to the cost of the newer motor fresh out the factory.


People argue Heads outflowing another == Port and Polishing
People argue Cam profiles === Custom Grinding (Really not that expensive)
Rocker arm designs ====Again, an aftermarket upgrade readily avail. for decent expense.

I dunno, the tech argument just doesn't seem to hold that much weight considering that with the right amount of money any old motor can be simply brought up to standard.

Stock for Stock yea it applies, but the majority here mods don't they?? So that's the more applicable argument.

Even with mods this isnt necessarily true. You can't put i-VTEC or direct injection on an F22A, at least with any off the shelf parts. So a stronger more advanced, higher displacement base engine will always win out in the end.

[gloryaccordy]

Whats the point? 6 bolt or bust in dsm land and it is 20+ year old design that outperforms ANY turbo 2.0 motor.

Outperforms how?

[TheProfessional]

Even with mods this isnt necessarily true. You can't put i-VTEC or direct injection on an F22A, at least with any off the shelf parts. So a stronger more advanced, higher displacement base engine will always win out in the end.

I see your point but at the same time that's crossing a huge gap, DOHC Technology onto a SOHC Motor, I mean, I don't expect that to be possible either. However, they DO offer the same rocker arm technology (not off the shelf, I forget the company or companies that can fabricate and provide the assembly tho, I'll get it from my grandfather) for the F22 that's found in the more up to date motors (The K, and the J Series, the J Series might actually be a more form fitting template because it's a SOHC motor), so I don't know how far fetched an idea it is to throw I-VTEC or at least a Psuedo-I-VTEC system onto the F22 considering they do sell Rocker Arm and custom cam profiles for these motors.


I used to think like this to, that newer simply was better because Older didn't have it but once I stepped into the realm of custom-to-spec parts purchasing it blew the doors off the joint.

Just as an example, and this is something I'm going through now, having a K20 Head put onto my H22 bottom end, one of the questions I was askinig was if I would be able to utilize the I-Vtec system seeing as how I'm using the K20 Head and was told that the conversion to a Chain Driven System and addition of the VTC was more then a possiblity.

So I dunno I wouldn't count any old platform out nowadays. Money seems to be the great saving grace, if you can afford it..it can be done.