1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

B16 Vs B18ls

Discussion in 'General Tech and Maintenance' started by heterosapian, Feb 24, 2003.

  1. heterosapian

    heterosapian Senior Member

    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2003
    Location:
    exit 152, I-95
    I read a kill story talking about an unmodded b18b takin an unmodded b16, both in similiar cars. That made me rethink my coarse of action. Is an LS in my crx going to run quicker/faster before fifth than a b16? i love the idea of having vtec, but i dont see myself racing much beyond the limits of third gear. And how about I/H/E on the two? Would similiar mods on both produce similiar results in a 0-90 drag? thanks in advance.
    peace
     
  2. xj0hnx

    xj0hnx I wanna be sedated VIP

    Messages:
    14,172
    Likes Received:
    48
    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2002
    Location:
    C.C.TX.
    My vote is B16 being quicker.
     
  3. SolReaver

    SolReaver Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,515
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2002
    In my experience, the LS is quicker up until 4th gear or so

    The 2 b16's i raced ( a sir2 in a ek hatch and a 00 si) the ek hatch pulled in 4th and the si didnt pull at all, but we only went up to like 50 mph. I say the ls owns the b16 in lower gears, but the b16 goes screaming by at high speeds. The LS tranny sucks balls.

    If you are definetly gonna go FI, i would go with a b18a. But if you want to keep it NA, get a b16 :)
     
  4. T0mMuNi$m

    T0mMuNi$m Senior Member

    Messages:
    129
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Just go through the extra work for an h series and no ls or b16 will come close. :D
     
  5. kyleirwin

    kyleirwin Retired OG

    Messages:
    2,420
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Location:
    Vegas

    you're a moron.

    i'm with solReaver, if you're gonna boost in the future: b18; if you're gonna stay na: b16.
     
  6. SimLS

    SimLS Junior Member

    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2003
    With the same driver the b16 will be quicker and more fun. Torque don't win race, horsepower do
     
  7. kyleirwin

    kyleirwin Retired OG

    Messages:
    2,420
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Location:
    Vegas

    first off, learn english... then get your facts stright. you got it backwards. torque is what wins races... not hp. hp is based on torque and rpm's. :ufucktard:
     
  8. chet

    chet Senior Member

    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Location:
    st petersburg, florida
    a good running b16a will always be faster than an ls motor in a crx.

    you CAN'T base your opinions on one particular setup...as i've seen an hf bottom end and dx head run 14.8's. does that mean every single cam runs 14.8's?

    and does that mean a b16a is always slower than an ls motor.

    obviously, no. and the b16a, with a vtec head is better for turbo and na.
     
  9. lsvtec

    lsvtec GNU/Linux Evangelist

    Messages:
    5,453
    Likes Received:
    3
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Location:
    Greater Portland, OR
    Wow, listen to yourself chet:

    Anyone else see a flaw in logic here?

    Personally I think that the LS is a horrible NA engine, but I think it is a better choice for boost. A little head work and it is a much better choice IMO. The larger displacement is likely to make more power.
     
  10. kyleirwin

    kyleirwin Retired OG

    Messages:
    2,420
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Location:
    Vegas

    i'd take the .2L extra displacement and lower overlap cams of the LS over a b16 anyday in a turbo setup.
     
  11. chet

    chet Senior Member

    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Location:
    st petersburg, florida
    my point in saying "a good running B16a" was to make the point that a b16a running well will always be faster than a strong ls motor. 160hp vs 130hp in this case is no contest, plus you have more power over a wider power band. on top of this, boost and vtec works EXCELLENT together and makes more power. your b18's run out of power at 6700rpm while the b16a will make power all the way to 8200rpm. once you see b-series vtec/turbo you will never want to go non-vtec turbo unless you have no other choice. now i'm not saying non vtec turbo setups can't be fast, because they can but its simply a better setup with a vtec head. these head's flow better, rev higher, and make more overall power...end of story.

    i think solreaver's example of the b16a being slower was due to poor tuning, a bad driver or a motor that simply didn't have good compression.

    i've seen an all motor b16a/hatch go 13.7@97mph. now if anyone has timeslips that put a b18b/a in the low 14's, i'd be surprised...unless that b18 has a lot of work.

    look at my setup if you want anymore proof, i have done NO internal work, am using an ECU that isn't designed for my car, and have only intake, header, exhaust and i put down 152whp. with tuning, i'll put down 160-165hp and should be right around 14.0's...with a b16a that has no work done to the internals at all.
     
  12. lsvtec

    lsvtec GNU/Linux Evangelist

    Messages:
    5,453
    Likes Received:
    3
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Location:
    Greater Portland, OR
    Thank you, that is a much more logical presentation. I don't agree with some of it and you still have no evidence to back you claim about the LS being slower. (A lack of timeslips is not evidence it just means you don't know anyone with an LS swap :) ). Your comparison between B16 and LS is meaningless. You take the HP numbers from the 2nd most powerfull B16 (not counting the B16B which has absolutely no place in this comparison) and from the least powerful B18A/B and compare them. That is comparing apples and oranges. How about B16A1 158 and B18A1 from a 93 Integra 140 or a B18B1 142? Those numbers are getting closer. And you don't even cover torque numbers.
     
  13. Domeskilla

    Domeskilla Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,948
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2002
    Location:
    Fort Wayne, IN

    :werd: :withstupid:

    TQ moves a car... not Hp. :)
     
  14. chet

    chet Senior Member

    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Location:
    st petersburg, florida
    i know what i've seen, and there are many cars around here with b18b's. i've seen a jdm b18 non vtec go 15.2 and they're supposed to have 147hp...or something like that. this was in a gutted civic...and i thought that was pretty good. now i've seen several other much slower cars run at the track, and i haven't been impressed.

    and very easily, a b16a can be tweaked to easily make more power, while its not as easy with the nonvtec b18's. i just know what i've seen, and i'm willing to bet me living in this area gives me access to many more setups and more people who know what they're doing, and everyone who is fast will agree that a b16a is infinitely better.

    i can't believe i'm even arguing with anyone about this, vtec vs non-vtec, its obvious.
     
  15. lsvtec

    lsvtec GNU/Linux Evangelist

    Messages:
    5,453
    Likes Received:
    3
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Location:
    Greater Portland, OR
    Until your last post this wasn't an arguement. I am not saying that it was a discussion then got heated or anything. What I am saying is that you failed to present any evidence to support your claims. I just got finished reading your posts in the H22A into a Civic thread in the Civic/CRX/Del Sol/Integra Forum. You made the same mistake in both places. You throw out a blanket statement with either little or no evidence to stand behind your claim.

    IMO there is no comparison on an NA engine between VTEC and nonVTEC. Unlike yourself (or so it sounds, this could be wrong) I have tried both routes. The LS engine NA is a waste of time, especially in the Integra. On the other hand, the B16 is a torqueless wonder. I could do much better turboing the B18A in my car than swapping a B16. IMO the B18C or a well built LSVTEC/CRVTEC owns the B16 anyday. No contest.

    All I am saying is consider what you are typing before you hit the Add Reply button. If your post has zero evidence or some major logical contradiction be prepared for someone to come down on it.
     
  16. xj0hnx

    xj0hnx I wanna be sedated VIP

    Messages:
    14,172
    Likes Received:
    48
    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2002
    Location:
    C.C.TX.
    170@7600
    116@7000

    142@6300
    127@5200

    Since the B16 is made too rev higher the argument of "well what good is power if it is at 1221434rpms" is pretty much useless,since the B18B reaches it's designed peak sooner,and the B16 has more room.I don't see 11ftlbs propelling a civic faster,enough to the point that it is going to beat the B16 in an absolutelyequal situation.There really is no win to this "discussion" as there are too many variables in everyday situations.But based on pure numbers,in a vacuum,it looks to me that the B16 has the advantage.
     
  17. Domeskilla

    Domeskilla Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,948
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2002
    Location:
    Fort Wayne, IN
    As i explained to chet..

    Domestic talk here.....


    big block = upper rpm power (b16)

    small block = lower rpm power (b18a/B)

    If you dont have the gearing to get the big block up there to its power, you wont be using it! So the small block will walk it, if its geared to take advantage of the tq.

    Chet also said HE has walked b18a/b's.. well, he has an ITR tranny, keeps him in VTEC more.. of course he will!
     
  18. Integra1990

    Integra1990 Senior Member

    Messages:
    275
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Location:
    omaha nebraska
    LS hands down, i hav a b18a with cai, h , e, lightened flywheel, etc., and i hav yet to lose to a b16a. just not enough tq, my ls on the other hand is all tq
     
  19. 2 litre EG

    2 litre EG Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2002
    Location:
    so cali
    OMG i agree with chet completely... only do an LS/T if you have no other choice... if you have the money and time to spend in getting your car to run right the VTEC/T is the ONLY WAY TO GO [if going F/I]... LS/T is preferred by many cause you dont have to deal with overlap or whatever it is you guys are talkin about as well as the fact it is a CHEAPER SET UP... it was posted before price comparisson's between the two motors [buying the motors, building them and dropping a turbo kit on them].... of course the LS/T is gonna be the cheaper route, if GSR motors were the same price as LS motors, who would honestly still pick the LS/T

    sure as hell it would not be me, i've had friends run 10's on LS/T daily driven, and if you dont believe me call rev hard and ask about norman peralta from oxnard... so dont get me wrong, im still down for LS/T if thats the only route you can afford.... but if you can afford it, then go VTEC/T

    but yeah back to the main question... i would pick the b16 hands down [no matter if your going Turbo or N/A]... if i had the money then i would guarantee anyone on this board that i could make a b16 [turbo/nitroused or N/A] faster than any LS turbo, or LS/nitrous or LS all motor... :D
     
  20. Integra1990

    Integra1990 Senior Member

    Messages:
    275
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Location:
    omaha nebraska
    Ls all motor, haha thats lik an oxymoron
     
Verification:
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page