2.2L Engine swap
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,135
Likes: 0
From: Somerville, MA, USA
Originally Posted by glagola1,Jan 23 2005, 09:35 AM
It's not about piston speed as much as it is about the leverage of the crank arm to the side of the piston wall at mid-stroke.
I seem to remember somewhere on the Honda site that the piston side skirts were shortened in the '04+ to "further reduce friction", but that would also result in higher side stresses.
To me, the question is how much safety factor Honda put in - and I would tend to agree that it seems like the safety factor is similar in both the 2.0 and 2.2 engines. However, in the 2.0 engine, it's not worthwhile increasing the red line even if it is safe, because power falls off too much above 9000rpm; the entire width of the peak power band is already available. In the 2.2 engine, revving a little higher would in contrast broaden the width of the peak power band, as the power peak occurs at or above the current redline.
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,246
Likes: 1
From: Atlanta
Originally Posted by kane.s2k,Jan 23 2005, 06:35 PM
wtf? He even quoted where billman said it's for a couple of s2000's that have no motor/blown motors. So lemme rephrase it for you since you didnt understand the first few times. The AP1 s2000's need a motor. Their motors are not running - blown motor. He's trying to see if the F22C will work fine with just the motor in the AP1 car (which doesnt have a working motor). He cant used the F22C ECU because of the immobilizer. That's why he wants to use the F20C ECU (original one from the car with the BLOWN MOTOR) and the F22C engine. The purpose is to see if there would be any problems.
Please take note of the supply and demand section of liqice's quote of billman.
Let me know if you still dont understand that the AP1's need a motor/currently have a blown one.
Please take note of the supply and demand section of liqice's quote of billman.
Let me know if you still dont understand that the AP1's need a motor/currently have a blown one.
The case we are talking about is not one of a blown motor (as far as I can tell). It's that simple and all this is beside the point anyway. Sure, there may be a couple ap1's that need motors but this thread isn't really about them. Only after Billman recieved some greif for the idea did he slip in the suggestion that it was a matter of economics.
As the second line of the thread title indicates, it's about testing if there's some magic in, what I believe to be, a half baked idea.
Why don't you reply to the meat of the matter so we can elivate this discussion?
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,372
Likes: 0
From: The Beach, CA
I know billman personally as we're all local and he's spoken to me on what this is all about over the phone before this thread was created. It is just to put a practically new F22C into a AP1 instead of getting a F20C off ebay with unknown milage and condition. It's not a performance thread. It's test run thread to report progess or even problems with the F20C ecu running the F22C. It started off asking questions to prepare for any major hitches and then that pre-planning stage was passed.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
This is very interesting, I would say if Honda is going to warranty this, they have already run tests past 8000 RPM. Perhaps they figured 9K rpm wasn't a selling feature in North America and dropped the RPM's to reduce repair costs. Remember, we are te only ones with the 2.2L. I'm sure you can rev it to 9K all day without any problems. Statistically, 2.2L engines reved to 9K rpm will fail more often than 2.2L's revved to 8K RPM. I'm sure they figured the 8K RPM wouldn't drop sales at all.
I am looking forward to the results.
I am looking forward to the results.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
This is very interesting, I would say if Honda is going to warranty this, they have already run tests past 8000 RPM. Perhaps they figured 9K rpm wasn't a selling feature in North America and dropped the RPM's to reduce repair costs. Remember, we are te only ones with the 2.2L. I'm sure you can rev it to 9K all day without any problems. Statistically, 2.2L engines reved to 9K rpm will fail more often than 2.2L's revved to 8K RPM. I'm sure they figured the 8K RPM wouldn't drop sales at all.
I am looking forward to the results.
I am looking forward to the results.
Thread Starter
Moderator
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 22,384
Likes: 1,834
From: Long Island, New York
Originally Posted by billman250,Dec 8 2004, 09:36 PM
This is going to be a touchy subject....first off, has anyone done this yet? I was told by well respected board member that it is likely possible to drop the 2.2 in a 00-03, using the existing ecu and all. It may not require any additional engine management. There's quite a few new 04 engines to be had, and I've got a few engine jobs on the hook. A local member is thinking of doing the swap, since the price is right, and he'll retain his orignal engine if needed.
Some concerns are.....
-the powerband may fall off at 8k (which is ok)
-is the engine physically capable of 9k? Very reliable sources say yes at this point...
Please add anything you can to this thread, and we'll see if this can fly!
Some concerns are.....
-the powerband may fall off at 8k (which is ok)
-is the engine physically capable of 9k? Very reliable sources say yes at this point...
Please add anything you can to this thread, and we'll see if this can fly!
The LOCAL MEMBER I am reffering to has been generous enough to donate his car to the cause. He is not the one with a blown engine, so he has his original engine if the project fails. Thank you to those who took the time to read the thread before posting
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,414
Likes: 0
From: Toronto
Originally Posted by Squeezer,Dec 10 2004, 03:07 PM
I don't think you have a grasp on whats happening. The piston's main forces are it accelerating and decelerating twice a cycle. At 9000 rpm, thats 300 times a second if I recall correctly. its also been calculated in this thread to 54 mph. thats a hell of a lot of force any way you look at it. along with the higher speeds at 9k on a 2.2L, you also have to take into effect if the valve springs are designed to open and close that fast. there was definitely a part number change, so that means they are different, which means a possible different spring rate, different material, who knows? so you could have piston/valve contact at 9k. also the retainers are known to go bad over long time at above 9k in a 2.0L engine. so since they will be working even harder in a 2.2L engine, they may fail over time in a 2.2L engine at 9k over time.
this is a big unknown area, and I congradulate billman250 for taking this bold step and can't wait for the results.
this is a big unknown area, and I congradulate billman250 for taking this bold step and can't wait for the results.
WTF?
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 831
Likes: 0
From: Bellingham, WA
I am a mechanical engineer with many years experience in jet engine design and a long-time interest in sports cars. I agree with the statement that has been made that max piston acceleration is what limits rev capability.
I searched out this site, which has a believeable derivation of piston acceleration. Using his spreadsheet, the F22C has the same piston acceleration at 9000 rpm as the F20C has at 9230 rpm. (I assumed the same conrod length, not a major factor.) Since 9230 rpm is not a big deal for the F20C, probably 9000 rpm is not a big deal for the F22C.
By the way, that acceleration is 5320 g.
Denis
I searched out this site, which has a believeable derivation of piston acceleration. Using his spreadsheet, the F22C has the same piston acceleration at 9000 rpm as the F20C has at 9230 rpm. (I assumed the same conrod length, not a major factor.) Since 9230 rpm is not a big deal for the F20C, probably 9000 rpm is not a big deal for the F22C.
By the way, that acceleration is 5320 g.
Denis