B16 vs GSR Head Flow

  • Thread starter Thread starter posol
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 22
  • Views Views 21K

We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

posol

RETIRED
found this... thought it would be interesting to see the differences

b16vsgsrstock.jpg


More info:
http://www.alaniztechnologies.com/b16vsgsr...srflowtest.html
 
gsr head is :owned:

well, barely. i bet people still debate the flow characteristics of the two, and one being better than the other. doesnt really seem like it matters which you have.

but which one responds better to mods?#@
 
its about as reliable as it gets... its from a head porter company.. stock, same day- they have a cfm tester thingge.. they do heads, thats why they have that
 
either way you look at it they both have good flow.. i mean the gsr owned the b16 on the bottom, but the b16 has mid, but the gsr has a bit more near .5
 
Just so you guys realize this, that is the flow properties at cam lobe lift values.

the low flow is when the valve is just opening, and then as it opens further, the higher end of this graph comes into play.

AKA, a GSR head would be better for a higher revved engine than a B16a head, BUT a ITR head which is a b16a with a MILD port and polish job would OWN a b18c1 head, fo sho! B)

Did I mention I'm still running a stock head? OHHHH 1200 in head and valve work will be WELL worth it on my new turbo soon ;)
 
Which B16 head did they test? Are all B16 heads the same? Did they only test one of each kind of head? I think that the data presented has too many variables to take as a rule. Are the differences between the flow rates small enough to be attributed to a possible miscast head? They don't really tell you much about the control of their experiment so you can't trust their data.
 
All b16a port designs are the same. Things such as casting flash and stuff weren't really taken into account, they were STOCK so they just did this as "typical" results I'm sure.
 
But they cannot be given as typical when they only used one GSR and one B16 head. All that told me was that the GSR head they used flowed better than the B16 they used. If they tested several of each head and in most of those tests the results were similar to the ones they posted then they could call them typical.
 
Yes an ITR head would flow better than a GSR, but port the GSR head and it would flow better up top than the ITR head. Stock b16 vs. stock GSR, you won't notice the flow difference in your car.
 
Originally posted by lsvtec@Sep 30 2002, 12:31 PM
Are the differences between the flow rates small enough to be attributed to a possible miscast head?
Click to expand...

the heads arent cast are they? i thought they were cut from blanks.

2 cfms dont make much of a difference on small displacement engines. i say get whichever one is cheaper.
 
i think it all basically comes down to prefrence and budget.
 
You know you'd probably get better results from the GSR head's smaller combustion chambers resulting in slightly higher compression
 
Originally posted by SixtySecondAssassin+Sep 30 2002, 06:51 PM-->
SixtySecondAssassin @ Sep 30 2002 said:
lsvtec
Click to expand...
SixtySecondAssassin @ Sep 30 2002 said:
@Sep 30 2002, 12:31 PM
Are the differences between the flow rates small enough to be attributed to a possible miscast head?
Click to expand...

the heads arent cast are they? i thought they were cut from blanks.

2 cfms dont make much of a difference on small displacement engines. i say get whichever one is cheaper.
Click to expand...

The point was testing one of each head is far from meaningful. The scientific method won't fail. They need to try more than one of each head before the results can be called conclusive.

Mis-cast, or mis-cut the point is the same.
 
damn i didn't think this would cause this much arguement :) :sleep:
 
These results were posted before the crash, I made the same arguments against taking them as fact then. I don't think that the GSR head has to be better or vice versa, but I want to see someone conduct a meaningful test. These guys tried one of each head and then assumed that all other GSR or B16 heads would produce similar results.

<insert="Logic Professor"/>
 
TTT, this was a recent debate between some of you and I hope you get some answers from it, and yes it's valve duration.


Milan
 
Aaaaaaaaa!!!

It's the thread that wouldn't die!
 
Hey guys, I am super new to this and have purchased about a month ago a 1995 Del Sol. I've wanted one for about 2 years and now that i have one, it has had an engine swap to a B18B1(LS) I presume. It came like that and i have big plans for this car. Now to take off the LS head that's on it (which is not a VTEC). which should I put on the block? Which would be better for the LS/VTEC setup? (I do plan to make it forced induction) b18c1? GSR head? or b16a? :confused: Any info would be appreciated.Thanks
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
B17Block + 98 Gsr Head Questions
Replies
15
Views
4K
bocherks1
B
6
gsr head on b16?
Replies
17
Views
3K
newb
newb
UNDR8D
Head flow limiting an all motor LS?
Replies
14
Views
6K
UNDR8D
UNDR8D
B
b16 block + gsr head turbo setup...
Replies
7
Views
6K
phunky.buddha
phunky.buddha
W
b16 head vs. gsr head
Replies
17
Views
7K
StyleTEG
S
Back
Top