what does it take to make ap2 rev to 9k 9000 rpm
05-19-2007, 02:57 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: 951
Posts: 3,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Burgman,May 19 2007, 02:28 PM
The increased crank throw on the AP2s used to increase the displacement to 2.2 has increased the piston speeds at the higher revs.
9,000 RPM would cause more strain on the AP2 engine parts than it does on the AP1 engines. THe AP2 engines would not last long at those rpms.
9,000 RPM would cause more strain on the AP2 engine parts than it does on the AP1 engines. THe AP2 engines would not last long at those rpms.
05-19-2007, 03:40 PM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Dry Branch
Posts: 7,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=Burgman,May 19 2007, 05:28 PM]The increased crank throw on the AP2s used to increase the displacement to 2.2 has increased the piston speeds at the higher revs.
9,000 RPM would cause more strain on the AP2 engine parts than it does on the AP1 engines.
9,000 RPM would cause more strain on the AP2 engine parts than it does on the AP1 engines.
05-19-2007, 03:42 PM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Dry Branch
Posts: 7,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by afwfjustin,May 19 2007, 06:18 PM
I have a 00 ecu for sale 
Too bad you're not selling an F22C shortblock for the price of an ECU.
05-20-2007, 04:01 PM
#15
Registered User
Originally Posted by RED MX5,May 19 2007, 06:42 PM
Do you have an F22C in your car now? ???
Too bad you're not selling an F22C shortblock for the price of an ECU.
Too bad you're not selling an F22C shortblock for the price of an ECU.
05-20-2007, 04:32 PM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Los Angeles/Orange County
Posts: 1,874
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Billman250,May 19 2007, 12:57 PM
The peak HP is not at 9k....but rest assured, it will pull hard all the way to 9. Trust me
05-20-2007, 05:18 PM
#17
Moderator
Originally Posted by Burgman,May 19 2007, 05:28 PM
9,000 RPM would cause more strain on the AP2 engine parts than it does on the AP1 engines. THe AP2 engines would not last long at those rpms.
The following users liked this post:
WilloW (07-20-2020)
05-20-2007, 07:44 PM
#18
Registered User
to the original poster...
the 06-07 models cannot be "converted" to run at 9K with the 00-03 ECU because the 06-07 model is substantially different. You can, however, get the ECU reflashed for a higher redline, which is something you can't do with the earlier cars.
On the F22 at 9K...
When Honda upped the stroke, they did it by making the crank bigger and the rods shorter. In a perfect world, to stroke a motor you also make the block longer so you DON'T have to shorten the rods. Honda didn't, probably due to fitment issues; they used basically the same block. Why are shorter rods bad? Because they increase the side loading on the cylinder walls. As the rods get shorter, the angle gets closer and closer to horizontal when the piston is at bottom dead center. The crank is then pushing the rods harder on a horizontal vector instead of a more vertical one.
Does this show any damage? No, not yet. A 2.0-2.2L isn't a major restroke, but I'd imagine the cylinder walls will deform faster over time. The result is less compression. How long or how much is a big question, but the science supports it. You can stroke all the way to 2.5L, but the number of failures doing this is high.
Also, you may bring up the K series and how that goes all the way to 2.4L with no trouble. Well, the K24 block is taller than the K20, which means the rods don't have to be as short.
the 06-07 models cannot be "converted" to run at 9K with the 00-03 ECU because the 06-07 model is substantially different. You can, however, get the ECU reflashed for a higher redline, which is something you can't do with the earlier cars.
On the F22 at 9K...
When Honda upped the stroke, they did it by making the crank bigger and the rods shorter. In a perfect world, to stroke a motor you also make the block longer so you DON'T have to shorten the rods. Honda didn't, probably due to fitment issues; they used basically the same block. Why are shorter rods bad? Because they increase the side loading on the cylinder walls. As the rods get shorter, the angle gets closer and closer to horizontal when the piston is at bottom dead center. The crank is then pushing the rods harder on a horizontal vector instead of a more vertical one.
Does this show any damage? No, not yet. A 2.0-2.2L isn't a major restroke, but I'd imagine the cylinder walls will deform faster over time. The result is less compression. How long or how much is a big question, but the science supports it. You can stroke all the way to 2.5L, but the number of failures doing this is high.
Also, you may bring up the K series and how that goes all the way to 2.4L with no trouble. Well, the K24 block is taller than the K20, which means the rods don't have to be as short.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
beaudin223
S2000 Modifications and Parts
2
09-06-2017 06:15 AM
whatthephucker
S2000 Modifications and Parts
10
02-01-2011 06:44 AM