Actually, your kind offer is a couple of months too late. He'd be interested in an extra intake manifold, though, if you have one.

We purchased a brand new head to do all the experimenting on so no S2000's were sacrificed in the process. Basically, at the end of the R&D, the head will most probably be a throw away.

Let me know ASAP about the intake manifold, though.

Thanks!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by S2kRob
[B]Actually, your kind offer is a couple of months too late.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by dabassi
[B]maybe to take the turn at the end of the 1/4 really fast?

 

Hmmm... I wonder if this is the same person that I am thinking of. Does he live in the So Cal area???

[QUOTE]Originally posted by S2kRob
[B].There is an esteemed member of this board (read - he knows his s--t) that is currently working on developing the F20C head.

 

Its Ultimate Lurker...

Was there ever a timetable set for that headwork to be finished?

 

I got 412hp on the spoon S2000 in GT3 (The Playstation 2 game)

It always amazes me when people compare Turbo cars to the S2000 or they say "we can add part X to the Mitutu and it will outrun the S2000".

I wish there was a universal rule- if you want to compare cars, take into account differences in aspiration. I can say for sure the F20C is not tapped out at 240hp...you can easily search the forums archive and pull up old Dynos showing much better results on Supercharged S2000 and even NA S2000s with mods.

And yes, the WRX is a good buy. I saw one and ran with it around Knoxville Tennessee and they definitely are fast. If I wanted another fast small boxy car, I might consider the WRX. Right now I really want a larger fast, angular car...so I'm looking for the next NSX.

-B

 

I always get a kick out of comments like the WRX discussion. There is only one turbo car sold in the U.S. in the last 10 years that I'm aware of that could make truly monstrous hp with minimal changes - that's the Toyota Supra Turbo, which can exceed 425-450 wheel hp on the stock turbos (vs 290-300 hp stock). All you really need are a downpipe, exhaust and some electronics.

I'm no WRXpert, but like the last gen Mitsu Eclipse turbo, to make a WRX fast you have to replace the turbo. And then its also a good idea to eliminate one or more of the catalytic converters. And the stock fuel system seems to be a limitation. And finally many folks are now going to aftermarket engine management like the Electromotive TecII. So, if you have to do all that to a turbo engine, you can do that to any engine, including an F20C, for a similar price. The only thing limiting the F20C is the compression ratio, which doesn't limit max hp, only max torque (think about it). Ever wonder why an Integra GSR, when subjected to a mere 7 psi from a T3/T4 turbo picks up 100 hp? Good NA engines usually have such excellent flow that they respond wonderfully to boost.

Regarding the F20C, I am working on a cylinder head with a local expert and have just finished all the baseline tests (many long hours as I am participating directly in as much of the project as possible). Those that contributed to the project get first crack at all the data (and have been receiving regular updates), but articles will be published in the near future. What I can tell you is that, barring any intake manifold restrictions, even a stock F20C cylinder head can support far more NA hp than what the car already makes. Thus, someone who wanted to install upgraded cams on a completely stock head would almost certainly see noticeable increases in power. Furthermore, given the flaws/idiosyncracies in the head, there looks to be room for improvement, so that even if you stayed with stock cams, you could see gains with headwork. With both, plus some fueling changes (which I will experiment with as soon as I get a VAFC harness - hint, hint), significant gains should be possible, even within the constrictions of the stock rev limiter (9200 rpm).

Allow me to express the same points in some different ways (some of which I have used before).

1. The stock F20C cylinder head equals, exceeds, or completely blows away highly modified cylinder heads from the ubiquitous and well understood B-series VTEC engines. Some of these engines/heads are producing 270-280+ hp at the crank from 2.0 liters.

2. Rule of thumb/theoretical calculations based upon airflow through the F20C head suggest that it is capable of sustaining touring car outputs with minimal/no changes.

3. History has already shown that 2.0 liters, normally aspirated, can produce 320 hp at 8500 rpm on sub 100 octane gasoline. With additional revs, much more power is available.

Simply put, even in stock form the F20C head is a touring car piece in production guise. Its really quite good, and what's scary is that it can almost certainly be made better (won't say why, you'll have to wait, but testing indicates it). Its been rumored/claimed in the past, but I have no doubt now that Honda's touring car experience went directly into this head.

As Rob stated, there are a couple key elements in making this motor sing. Cylinder head/intake manifold, cams, engine management, compression. IMO, all but compression are of equal importance. On pump gas we can only tolerate about 12:1, so there are only small gains to be had there (1-2%). We're taking care of the head/manifold right now. Engine management may be doable with just a VAFC for now. What we need are some big cams. The stock cams, and Spoon cams, are relatively low lift (well under 12mm lift), with unknown durations. With this engine, and based upon the flow numbers we've seen, the head will benefit from lifts of up to 13 mm. And given the engine size and rpms we're running, durations (@ 1mm of lift) need to be in the 270 degree range or more on the intake side. I'm really hoping Toda takes care of business on this end of the spectrum.

UL