evo XI?
Feb 18, 2008, 02:35 PM
#32
Evolving Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i didn't forget anything. i know a guy that boosted (jackson racing SC) a stock K20 to 7psi, all stock internals, just exhaust, header and k-pro as supporting mods and he was putting 270 to the wheels. the EVO's motor needs to be built like a tank and boosted to 20psi+ to get the same power. not only that, his power was lag free, and the powerband was a lot broader than the EVO. i dunno if you guys have noticed, but honda builds some of the best engines on the planet.
If the 4G63 came with 11.0:1 compression ratio, then it wouldn't need 20+ psi to make 270HP either but it doesn't does it? The K20's high compression negates the need to have the higher boost pressures. Up the psi on that K20 and you better kiss it goodbye. 4G63 on the other hand, has been proven to handle power above 270 to the wheels on stock internals so I don't really see his point at all.
Besides, his ranting about K20 with the above mods at 270 HP to wheels doesn't impress me as much as AMS's 4B11T. With intake, exhaust, mechanical boost controller, front mount intercooler, piping (all bolt on items mind you) that 4B11T is already making 327 WHP. That's still with plenty of room to go.
Sounds like buyer's remorse if you ask me. Maybe he wanted a 2008 Mugen Civic Si with the K20 in it. Yeah, it only costs 2 grand less than an EVO X but hey, its got the K20 in it.
Last edited by XRS; Feb 18, 2008 at 02:39 PM.
Feb 27, 2008, 10:54 AM
#33
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Riverside NJ
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you can def get more HP from the K engines but you gotta remember you pretty much have to rebuild the whole engine to get to 400 HP the 4G63 you dont remember that
Feb 27, 2008, 12:44 PM
#34
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aren't there 4G63 motors well into the 4 digit HP numbers? I don't follow the Honda aftermarket but I find it hard to believe there are many Acura RSX models running around with 1000 FWP+
Feb 28, 2008, 10:07 AM
#35
Evolving Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Somehow, I seem to be skeptical of this claim. Dynos of 1000HP evos are more common. Besides that, these numbers are taken at the wheel with the AWD drivetrain loss. At the crank, it's def making more power than a K engine with similar HP output to only the front wheels. I ain't bashing the K series but, all I gotta say is for a motor that is relatively unchanged since the early 90's, being able to produce or exceed the HP levels of a far more modern engine holds its own merit.
Mar 8, 2008, 08:48 AM
#36
Newbie
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Russia Moscow
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mar 18, 2008, 04:40 PM
#43
2.5 engine is nice for DD. It has a lot more torque down low, good for stoplight launch. The only way to have a decent launch with a 2.0T is to rev 5500+rpm to explode off the line, not always the best option downtown.
If displacement were not good why so many strokers kits sold?
When we talk about 700+hp high reving engine, the 2.0 is better, but Who will build a 600+hp here?
If displacement were not good why so many strokers kits sold?
When we talk about 700+hp high reving engine, the 2.0 is better, but Who will build a 600+hp here?
Mar 21, 2008, 12:06 AM
#44
Evolved Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dallas / Fort Worth
Posts: 671
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was going to say something about leaving the stoplight launching and donut burning to camaros and firebirds.. but nevermind..
Last edited by Evo_Someday; Mar 22, 2008 at 12:58 PM.
