2l Na B18c Stroke Choice

Hey everyone, i am nearly finished my high power 2L b18c and just got one last decision to make, stroke size. I am after a little more torque so at the moment i am thinking to go with 89mm over the 87.2 because it will give me a rod/stroke ratio of about 1.70 along with the raised deck, My question is how much difference in torque will there be if i go for the 89mm or even 92mm stroke over the 87.2, nothing higher than that because i still want to keep a good ratio.

If anyone can help that would be really great.
Thanks

87.2 = 1.73
89 = 1.70
92= 1.64

Go the 92m stroke.
1.64 r/s ratio is still capable of 8.5krpm and the torque will be unbelievable.

Whats the point of having a raised deck if you dont take full advantage of it and use the longer 92mm stroke?

The stock is about 1.58 and they still rev to 9.5k+, The advantage is the better rod/stroke ratio, and the added strength of the ERL superdeck II.
http://www.erlperformance.com/index....=115&Itemid=98

9.5k+ rpm stock hey? allriiiiiiteeeo!

Im always amazed how much tripping goes on around this forum....

Where do people get their info from ? some parallel universe?

9.5k+ rpm will give you this....
http://www.ozhonda.com/forum/showthr...17#post1612117

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProECU

9.5k+ rpm stock hey? allriiiiiiteeeo!

Im always amazed how much tripping goes on around this forum....

Where do people get their info from ? some parallel universe?

9.5k+ rpm will give you this....
http://www.ozhonda.com/forum/showthr...17#post1612117

---

U are clearly an idiot or you just cant read, notice how i said the stock rod/stroke ratio is about 1.58 and they can rev to 9.5k, nothing about the motor or how it is built but the rod/stroke ratio! I said nothing about a motor running cams and boltons with stock valve springs. What u got to say about that, or have u got more sarcasm pouring out ur mouth like dioareah.

just more sarcasm...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProECU

just more sarcasm...

---

So what r u saying? that a motor with a rod/stroke ratio of 1.58 cant hit 9.5k
tell me that genius

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B18cEG

The stock is about 1.58 and they still rev to 9.5k+,

---

show me a stock b18c that is capable of this...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProECU

show me a stock b18c that is capable of this...

---

ur an idiot, i just told you im not talking about a stock b18c but the stock ratio of 1.58

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B18cEG

ur an idiot, i just told you im not talking about a stock b18c but the stock ratio of 1.58

---

then show me an example of this one....lol

rofl :)

you guys are speaking 2 different languages.

stock b18c not go to 9.5k rpm
b18c stock ratio can go to 9.5k rpm (engine head of course would not be stock and have uprated valve spring cams etc but the rod stoke ratio is stil unaltered and can reach 9.5k rpm)

go the 92mm man as whtcrx mentioned "1.64 r/s ratio is still capable of 8.5krpm and the torque will be unbelievable."

thankyou very much 55EXX, like i stated about 3 times i am talking about the ratio, some people just dont get it and instead fill the forum with SHITE.

If anyone has ever seen the JG engines, there 2.3L race engine has max rpm of 9000 and that will have a rod/stroke ratio of at least 1.54 and there 2L race engine has a max rpm of 10500, not saying that mine will be the same engine but my head is from them and im getting the block from ERL, But the engine will be very very similar component wise, so there 2L will be about 1.64-1.7 at best. i am after peoples experence please not rumors and examples of people who didn't build there engine properly.

Thankyou

Also if the engine makes power way up there why not take it there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B18cEG

Also if the engine makes power way up there why not take it there.

---

also if someone who knows their shit, say....like ProEcu offers you their opinion perhaps not call them an idiot?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr_will

also if someone who knows their shit, say....like ProEcu offers you their opinion perhaps not call them an idiot?

---

Agreed
B18C your posts/comments have been somewhat confusing at best.

The ability to rev a motor not only depends on R/S geometry, but also the heads ability to retain forces due to cam profiles.

Got this in PM, lol,I've been told!

"Go sort out ur ero issues else where, not on my thread. U obviously dont know on this subject so just leave it!"

How about you learn to structure a sentence together,..clearly!
And If i know nothing about this topic, then clearly you know even less...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProECU

Got this in PM, lol,I've been told!

"Go sort out ur ero issues else where, not on my thread. U obviously dont know on this subject so just leave it!"

How about you learn to structure a sentence together,..clearly!
And If i know nothing about this topic, then clearly you know even less...

---

he are engrish goot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr_will

he are engrish goot

---

oooooo i wrote ero not ego, big deal, ur kids, this thread is for rod/stroke ratio answers not bullshit