Why A B16b Rather Than B18c In The EK9?

Greetings All,

First, I'd like to say, I've searched this, and many other forums, including the web in general, and have done so extensively, but have come up short in what I'm actually looking to find out, and so with that, I must, in all due respect, enlist the advice of you fine gentlemen here for what I hope to be the answers to what I believe, are my unique questions.

The Thread title is pretty self explanatory...

I'd like to hear anyone's best guess, and even better, to hear from those whom may actually have it on good authority, as to why the Honda engineers chose to go with a de-stroked B18c, rather than just placing the (already manufactured) "Holy Grail" of Honda technology, straight way into the EK9 CTR?

My reason(s) for asking this, is because I just recently purchased a B16b, and am in the process of having it swapped in to my under 907.kg/2000 lb, 1986 Civic Si, but am having a bit of buyer's remorse, due to all of the rave reviews coming from those who'd choose an ITR over a CTR. I'm wondering if I should've just went with the B18c, and left it at that, but it's been said that the B18c may be a bit too much in my light chassis, and the B16b would theoretically be a better match. What do you guys think?

B18c

Depends on the B18c could be the uk/jdm/sir

the B18c4 (sir) is great for boost if you where to go down that route

the type r versions (the JDM being the best imo) are a great engine like the ctr B16b and to me feel similar but a bit more torque down low

K20 r

I always thought the b16b was designed to fit in to a Motorsport class

B16b is a tougher engine than b18c due to the shorter stroke there is less load on bottom end bearings,*

I would choose a b18c though if I was buying one or the other, just because of the extra torque

yeah think if i had the engine out and was looking for another engine i would go b18 just makes it easier to drive and bit more low down, but still the b16b with bit of work can be just as fast dude

higher revs

Most likely as the Dc2 is a heavier car and to have a different engine than the ek9 for different racing classes and sales reasons

Here here,

Ok, for those of you who'd care to give their opinion on which engine they prefer, let me say this... I've already read more than my fair share of individual's preferences, so please do NOT add to this thread with yours. I am asking a specific question as to why did Honda choose to put a de-stroked B18c into the EK9, rather than just putting in the B18c itself?

rinnaye said:

Here here,

Ok, for those of you who'd care to give their opinion on which engine they prefer, let me say this... I've already read more than my fair share of individual's preferences, so please do NOT add to this thread with yours. I am asking a specific question as to why did Honda choose to put a de-stroked B18c into the EK9, rather than just putting in the B18c itself?

Click to expand...

No one would buy the integra if the civic was just as powerfull out of the box.

B16b the "legendary"

fljoshua129 said:

No one would buy the integra if the civic was just as powerfull out of the box.

Click to expand...

That's one reason. The flagship type r-dc2- was hondas main performance car. It would look silly if the civic was faster.

Another reason was to compete in the 1600cc racing class in Japan.

rinnaye said:

Here here,

Ok, for those of you who'd care to give their opinion on which engine they prefer, let me say this... I've already read more than my fair share of individual's preferences, so please do NOT add to this thread with yours. I am asking a specific question as to why did Honda choose to put a de-stroked B18c into the EK9, rather than just putting in the B18c itself?

Click to expand...

high revs buddy

Also, the ek9 was released later than the dc2. They oviously wanted to distinguish the two cars, if they both had exactly the same engine there would be little noticable difference between them, besides how they look inside and out.

So given the B18c is the obvious stock for stock monster between the two engines, it stands to reason, I "should" get more WOW factor out of the B18c, over the B16b, right? Or do I stand corrected, in that the B18c would be much too torquey for my light weight chassis, thus it rendering my Civic a non-traction beast. Am I better off with the less torquey B16b in my under 907kg/2000lb. Civic?

Your opinions...

As said the teg would look silly if they put a b18 in the ek9, plus the 1600cc class they aimed the race base model at.

You're talking about about 15lbft, hardly a torque monster.

Here's something I made up to compare the two. Have a fiddle with the settings and see how the two engines compare.

B16B vs B18C

rinnaye said:

so given the b18c is the obvious stock for stock monster between the two engines, it stands to reason, i "should" get more wow factor out of the b18c, over the b16b, right? Or do i stand corrected, in that the b18c would be much too torquey for my light weight chassis, thus it rendering my civic a non-traction beast. Am i better off with the less torquey b16b in my under 907kg/2000lb. Civic?

Your opinions...

Click to expand...

k20!

I personally would take the b16b to be had in a lighter chassis as it helps to make the car more drive able and won't suffer torque steer.

sarkel said:

I personally would take the b16b to be had in a lighter chassis as it helps to make the car more drive able and won't suffer torque steer.

Click to expand...

Great, non-trollish, fact based reply. Just what I'm after.

Thanks,

But what about straight line performance, especially let's say on a freeway, let's say from like 60mph/96.5kph to 80mph/128.7kph?

fyi: My primary focus is to inquire about straight line performance, be it 0-60, and/or 1/4 mile times. Not so much interested in auto-x, or track/lap racing.