pros and cons of b16 and b20vtec
07-Feb-2011, 08:14 PM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 394
Not to be rude, but nobody here is going to necessarily spoon feed you the information. Do a little research because this information is readily available via Google search. Researching will give you more appreciation on your choice and some knowledge on how engines work.
07-Feb-2011, 09:40 PM
#3
That and the topics covered a million times. Look up the specs on wiki and make your choice.
In this case first you need to decide what the car will be used for. Then I would suggest the b16 if you plan to boost it, not that the b20 can't handle boost, just the b16 can handle more with less work put into it. If your gonna stay NA, then I'd to the B20v, this all depends of course on what's the condition of the 2 motors.
In this case first you need to decide what the car will be used for. Then I would suggest the b16 if you plan to boost it, not that the b20 can't handle boost, just the b16 can handle more with less work put into it. If your gonna stay NA, then I'd to the B20v, this all depends of course on what's the condition of the 2 motors.
09-Feb-2011, 12:19 AM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Pickering
Posts: 234
09-Feb-2011, 04:57 PM
#5
I suggest locking this thread.
I made a b20vtec, but like Dusty said, I did put a lot into mine, and it is boosted.
I'd rate the motors the same... but the low compression of a b20 sucks.
NOTE: you don't need VTEC if you're making a 'race/fast car', build the engine instead. VTEC is simply a gimmick. * Insert Troll Here *
Instead of searching the threads, search youtube first. Sure it's rice and not race, but it's a better place to start (IMO) so you know what you want. For the 'work' that goes into a b20 boosted, lookup my threads started... A LOT of coin wasted there.
-B
I made a b20vtec, but like Dusty said, I did put a lot into mine, and it is boosted.
I'd rate the motors the same... but the low compression of a b20 sucks.
NOTE: you don't need VTEC if you're making a 'race/fast car', build the engine instead. VTEC is simply a gimmick. * Insert Troll Here *
Instead of searching the threads, search youtube first. Sure it's rice and not race, but it's a better place to start (IMO) so you know what you want. For the 'work' that goes into a b20 boosted, lookup my threads started... A LOT of coin wasted there.
-B
10-Feb-2011, 11:39 AM
#6
Inactive
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Where my car is.
Posts: 5,460
Sorry Brian, I gotta speak up here...lol. No offense. 
Vtec is not a gimmick. Though I agree, it is over-rated at times.
For those who wish to know:
Basically, if you understand what it does, it is effective and does what it was designed to do quite well and is worth it if you can afford it.
Fixed timing, single-lobe cam shafts have a peak efficiency rpm range where they allow for optimal flow at a specific rpm. The peak efficiency rpm will be where the peak torque is produced and also when the best volumetric efficiency is taking place. After that, volumetric efficiency starts to drop and so does the torque being produced.
Generally, at lower rpm's, higher intake velocity is favoured for better cylinder filling at slower piston speeds. This is achived with less lift (the distance the valve opens) and shorter-duration (how long the valve is open for). This becomes a problem the higher the engine revs because it begins to restrict the flow of air at higher piston speeds, it can't keep up with the volume flow rate. Thus, more lift and duration is required for proper volumetric efficiency/cylinder filling at higher engine speeds.
This is where VTEC comes in. VTEC stands for variable valve timing/lift, electronic control. The cam shafts in a b-series VTEC engine actually have 3 different cam lobes per valve set (2 different profile economy lobes and 1 larger 'vtec' lobe). Under operation below the vtec engagement rpm (for a b16a2 it's at 5600rpm), the engine runs on it's 'economy' cam lobes. That is, two of the 3 cam lobes per valve set. The reason these two lobes have slightly different profiles (lift and duration) is to promote swirling or turbulence of the air as it enters the cylinder which increases fuel atomization which makes for a better more complete burn which increases efficiency. These lower duration, lower lift cam profiles provide higher intake velocity and better volumetric efficiency (cylinder filling) for better torque production in the lower to mid rpm range of operation. At 5600rpm, the vtec solenoid, activated by the ecu, redirects oil through a passage which shifts pins in the cam followers to lock with the center cam follower and are forced to follow the larger single 3rd cam lobe, the vtec cam lobe. This increases valve duration and lift which allows for more air to enter the cylinders at higher piston speeds, effectively continuing to keep the volumetric efficiency higher, thus continuing to produce a steady, flat torque curve through out most of the rpm range. See attached dyno sheet of a stock B16A2 and note how flat the torque is and how steadily the hp climbs over the entire rpm range.
The basics are this: If you want more power, the engine needs to flow more air. There is a direct corelation with regards to how much power an engine must flow to produce a specific amount of power. It doesn't matter what the displacement is. To produce 160hp, both a 3.2L V6 and a 1.6L 4cylinder must flow the same amount of air. The 3.2L engine can do so very easily at a lower rpm because of it's larger displacement, where as to get the 1.6L to flow the same amount of air, it must be revved higher and be made to flow efficiently at those higher rpms.
If you simply put a larger, single-lobe profile cam in an engine, sure it's going to flow great in the higher rpm range and make good hp and torque up there. But in the lower rpm range, intake velocity would be very slow and volumetric efficiency would suffer greatly, thus, it wouldn't make any torque down low. Think of it this way: For the B16 to produce 160hp, it requires the profile of the larger vtec cam lobe to flow enough air efficiently up to the rpm where it produces that power (up near 8000rpm). If you ran the engine with that cam profile all the time, it would probably idle rough due to the excessive overlap in the timing and would produce next to no torque below 5000rpm. I know the b16 doesn't make much torque as it is, but trust me, it would be REALLY weak! lol. Fuel economy would suffer and the car would be miserable to drive at lower engine speeds. This is why VTEC is a great system that works. It provides a flat torque curve through out most of the rpm range making it very drive-able and efficient (the fuel economy of the b16 is extremely good. Still better than many modern engines of the same size), as well as producing good top-end power for when you want to "drop the hammer".
That being said, non-vtec engines can still produce wide, efficienct torque bands, but not to the extend that the vtec system can provide on an engine with the same displacement. Of course, add a turbo and any engine can become hardy torque-producing mosters, but at a cost of fuel economy. Adding a vtec head to a larger 2.0L (b20) is a great, cost-effective way to make a torquey engine with good hp numbers that won't fall on it's face in the higher rpm range.
Stock b20 vs stock b16, the b20 is WAY cheaper and will provide about the same or better performance over the b16. The b16 is just not worth it for roughly the same performance at 3-4 times the cost of a b20. The b20 isn't as efficient, but because of it's larger displacement and torque, it's a strong motor for a light weight car. Fuel mileage will suffer, but if you drive it normally, it should still be respectable.
When it comes to boost, vtec is still a good thing to have. It will complement the setup by helping to maintain a wider torque band and produce more hp up top when compared to a non-vtec setup.
Sorry for the novel of a post....lol. Didn't intend for it to get this long...
...And oh yeah, if you shout "VTEC!!!" when it engages, you'll go faster!
Vtec is not a gimmick. Though I agree, it is over-rated at times.
For those who wish to know:
Basically, if you understand what it does, it is effective and does what it was designed to do quite well and is worth it if you can afford it.
Fixed timing, single-lobe cam shafts have a peak efficiency rpm range where they allow for optimal flow at a specific rpm. The peak efficiency rpm will be where the peak torque is produced and also when the best volumetric efficiency is taking place. After that, volumetric efficiency starts to drop and so does the torque being produced.
Generally, at lower rpm's, higher intake velocity is favoured for better cylinder filling at slower piston speeds. This is achived with less lift (the distance the valve opens) and shorter-duration (how long the valve is open for). This becomes a problem the higher the engine revs because it begins to restrict the flow of air at higher piston speeds, it can't keep up with the volume flow rate. Thus, more lift and duration is required for proper volumetric efficiency/cylinder filling at higher engine speeds.
This is where VTEC comes in. VTEC stands for variable valve timing/lift, electronic control. The cam shafts in a b-series VTEC engine actually have 3 different cam lobes per valve set (2 different profile economy lobes and 1 larger 'vtec' lobe). Under operation below the vtec engagement rpm (for a b16a2 it's at 5600rpm), the engine runs on it's 'economy' cam lobes. That is, two of the 3 cam lobes per valve set. The reason these two lobes have slightly different profiles (lift and duration) is to promote swirling or turbulence of the air as it enters the cylinder which increases fuel atomization which makes for a better more complete burn which increases efficiency. These lower duration, lower lift cam profiles provide higher intake velocity and better volumetric efficiency (cylinder filling) for better torque production in the lower to mid rpm range of operation. At 5600rpm, the vtec solenoid, activated by the ecu, redirects oil through a passage which shifts pins in the cam followers to lock with the center cam follower and are forced to follow the larger single 3rd cam lobe, the vtec cam lobe. This increases valve duration and lift which allows for more air to enter the cylinders at higher piston speeds, effectively continuing to keep the volumetric efficiency higher, thus continuing to produce a steady, flat torque curve through out most of the rpm range. See attached dyno sheet of a stock B16A2 and note how flat the torque is and how steadily the hp climbs over the entire rpm range.
The basics are this: If you want more power, the engine needs to flow more air. There is a direct corelation with regards to how much power an engine must flow to produce a specific amount of power. It doesn't matter what the displacement is. To produce 160hp, both a 3.2L V6 and a 1.6L 4cylinder must flow the same amount of air. The 3.2L engine can do so very easily at a lower rpm because of it's larger displacement, where as to get the 1.6L to flow the same amount of air, it must be revved higher and be made to flow efficiently at those higher rpms.
If you simply put a larger, single-lobe profile cam in an engine, sure it's going to flow great in the higher rpm range and make good hp and torque up there. But in the lower rpm range, intake velocity would be very slow and volumetric efficiency would suffer greatly, thus, it wouldn't make any torque down low. Think of it this way: For the B16 to produce 160hp, it requires the profile of the larger vtec cam lobe to flow enough air efficiently up to the rpm where it produces that power (up near 8000rpm). If you ran the engine with that cam profile all the time, it would probably idle rough due to the excessive overlap in the timing and would produce next to no torque below 5000rpm. I know the b16 doesn't make much torque as it is, but trust me, it would be REALLY weak! lol. Fuel economy would suffer and the car would be miserable to drive at lower engine speeds. This is why VTEC is a great system that works. It provides a flat torque curve through out most of the rpm range making it very drive-able and efficient (the fuel economy of the b16 is extremely good. Still better than many modern engines of the same size), as well as producing good top-end power for when you want to "drop the hammer".
That being said, non-vtec engines can still produce wide, efficienct torque bands, but not to the extend that the vtec system can provide on an engine with the same displacement. Of course, add a turbo and any engine can become hardy torque-producing mosters, but at a cost of fuel economy. Adding a vtec head to a larger 2.0L (b20) is a great, cost-effective way to make a torquey engine with good hp numbers that won't fall on it's face in the higher rpm range.
Stock b20 vs stock b16, the b20 is WAY cheaper and will provide about the same or better performance over the b16. The b16 is just not worth it for roughly the same performance at 3-4 times the cost of a b20. The b20 isn't as efficient, but because of it's larger displacement and torque, it's a strong motor for a light weight car. Fuel mileage will suffer, but if you drive it normally, it should still be respectable.
When it comes to boost, vtec is still a good thing to have. It will complement the setup by helping to maintain a wider torque band and produce more hp up top when compared to a non-vtec setup.
Sorry for the novel of a post....lol. Didn't intend for it to get this long...
...And oh yeah, if you shout "VTEC!!!" when it engages, you'll go faster!
Last edited by MPR; 10-Feb-2011 at 11:41 AM.
10-Feb-2011, 06:07 PM
#8
Inactive
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Where my car is.
Posts: 5,460
It's not a gimmick, imo. To me a gimmick means something that doesn't do what it's supposed to do. VTEC does exactly what it's supposed to do. However, as I agreed before, people do tend to over-rate it at times. Just because you have VTEC doesn't mean it's always faster...lol.
Just another way to look t it:
The fact that you can compare the B16A2 1.6L with VTEC, performance wise, to a B20 2.0L, an engine that is 20% larger and doesn't have VTEC. That right there points out what VTEC is for and why. You can have a 1.6L that performs like a 2.0L but is much more efficient. The b16 doesn't make as much torque, but it makes up for it with more hp and higher rpm's. For the same performance, yeah it's cheaper to go with the b20. But for the same performance and much better fuel economy, the b16 rules. VTEC is not a gimmick.
Take two identical cars, say EG hatches, and put a stock b20 in one and a stock b16 in the other, both running the same transmission. Run them in the 1/4 mile and it would be a VERY close race. Depending on gearing, I'd probably put my money on the b16 to be honest.
iVTEC is superior but also big $$$$$$$$
The price of b-series engines has been coming down in the last few years by quite a bit. Part of the reason the vtec engines are still more moeny is because they can make more power more easily and with less modifications than the non-vtec engines.
Either way, in the end, you gotta pay to play...
Fast - Cheap - Reliable. Pick 2.
10-Feb-2011, 08:43 PM
#9
Would you rather :
A) B16 with VTEC Built as far as it could go (minus stroking)
or
B) a NON VTEC B20 built to the nines? (Minus Stroking)
Answer should be B), unless you pick A because you want a gimmicky car to get groceries. Thus, VTEC IS a gimmick. I will troll this to death Mike lol.
A) B16 with VTEC Built as far as it could go (minus stroking)
or
B) a NON VTEC B20 built to the nines? (Minus Stroking)
Answer should be B), unless you pick A because you want a gimmicky car to get groceries. Thus, VTEC IS a gimmick. I will troll this to death Mike lol.
11-Feb-2011, 12:19 AM
#10
After having a built b16 and have built and tuned dozens of b20vtecs from mild to wild, i would personally prefer a b20vtec over a b16. I'd probably take a stock b20vtec over a built b16 b/c b16s produce weak torque levels.
Heres my old b16 mild-ish (built head, stock block and off the shelf bolt-ons) with minimal tuning. Notice how flat the torque curve is basically flat from 2500rpms to 8000rpms with a little jump at 6k where vtec was set.
B16 Dynosheet
Heres a mild build b20vtec (equivalent to my b16 build, same CR but with stock GSR or ITR cams if I remember correctly and a stock GSR intake manifold both engines make peak power at the same RPM).
Notice how much more torque the B20vtec produces at all times, it doesn't go below 125wtq and is 130+wtq from 5000rpms and up with the torque peaking at 140wtq at 5700rpms and again from 7000-7600rpms . This one has a lumpier torque curve b/c it was using a cheap hytech (chi-tech) replica header.
B20vtec dynosheet
I can't do an overlay of these 2 dynosheets but next time i'm at the shop with nothing to do, i'll overlay a stock b16 VS a stock b20vtec, this way you can really see the difference in power curves.
The torque is what makes n/a hondas feel fast and is what gives it good throttle response with good acceleration throughout the RPM range. Having more torque also allows one to keep the RPMs lower while cruising around thus helping reduce fuel consumption, also, not having to press the gas pedal down as far to accelerate will also help reduce fuel consumption. The more efficient an engine is the more fuel efficient it will be.
The KEY with b20vtecs is either build them to how you wanna use them and/or be realistic with what you're going to do to a stock one. Meaning, don't rev a stock b20vtec to 8500+rpms b/c the bottom end can't handle it in stock form. Tuning is also VERY important with b20vtecs b/c each one varies so much to the next one so running a buddies ECU or random basemap isn't the best idea in my opinion.
I think Honda listened to the modding community and saw the sucess of b20vtecs and took it a few steps further and built the k20a. The k20 I-VTEC engines are incredible in my opinion. It allows for peak torque at ANY given rpm with its cam phasing (adjustable cam angle on the intake cam) to maximize the ideal amount of valve overlap throughout the RPMs. Thats what makes the k20s light years beyond the b, d, f and h-series engines and why KPRO or FlashPRO is crucial on any k-series equipped car b/c it allows the user to control the intake cam angle by RPM and load.
Heres my old b16 mild-ish (built head, stock block and off the shelf bolt-ons) with minimal tuning. Notice how flat the torque curve is basically flat from 2500rpms to 8000rpms with a little jump at 6k where vtec was set.
B16 Dynosheet
Heres a mild build b20vtec (equivalent to my b16 build, same CR but with stock GSR or ITR cams if I remember correctly and a stock GSR intake manifold both engines make peak power at the same RPM).
Notice how much more torque the B20vtec produces at all times, it doesn't go below 125wtq and is 130+wtq from 5000rpms and up with the torque peaking at 140wtq at 5700rpms and again from 7000-7600rpms . This one has a lumpier torque curve b/c it was using a cheap hytech (chi-tech) replica header.
B20vtec dynosheet
I can't do an overlay of these 2 dynosheets but next time i'm at the shop with nothing to do, i'll overlay a stock b16 VS a stock b20vtec, this way you can really see the difference in power curves.
The torque is what makes n/a hondas feel fast and is what gives it good throttle response with good acceleration throughout the RPM range. Having more torque also allows one to keep the RPMs lower while cruising around thus helping reduce fuel consumption, also, not having to press the gas pedal down as far to accelerate will also help reduce fuel consumption. The more efficient an engine is the more fuel efficient it will be.
The KEY with b20vtecs is either build them to how you wanna use them and/or be realistic with what you're going to do to a stock one. Meaning, don't rev a stock b20vtec to 8500+rpms b/c the bottom end can't handle it in stock form. Tuning is also VERY important with b20vtecs b/c each one varies so much to the next one so running a buddies ECU or random basemap isn't the best idea in my opinion.
I think Honda listened to the modding community and saw the sucess of b20vtecs and took it a few steps further and built the k20a. The k20 I-VTEC engines are incredible in my opinion. It allows for peak torque at ANY given rpm with its cam phasing (adjustable cam angle on the intake cam) to maximize the ideal amount of valve overlap throughout the RPMs. Thats what makes the k20s light years beyond the b, d, f and h-series engines and why KPRO or FlashPRO is crucial on any k-series equipped car b/c it allows the user to control the intake cam angle by RPM and load.
11-Feb-2011, 03:05 AM
#11
Inactive
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Where my car is.
Posts: 5,460
Just to be clear, I was never saying a b16vtec > b20vtec. What I was comparing was the b16 vtec to the b20 non-vtec. Of course larger displacement plus the added efficiency of a vtec system = more torque through out the rpm range and more power up top. That is much better than the same thing with no vtec. Thus vtec, as a system, is worth the money and is not a gimmick.
See, a b20 built to the nines should have a VTEC head added. Thus the VTEC system itself is what I'm talking about and is what makes the difference. Not the engine specifically. That's why I said if you take a stock non-vtec b20 vs a stock b16 vtec and put them in the same car, the performance will be very close.
NA motors built for big numbers with single cam lobe profiles (no vtec) suffer greatly in the lower rpm range because of the excessive overlap, lift and duration. So yeah, for the street I'd rather have a built B16 with vtec vs a built b20 without vtec because the engine with vtec will have a decent lower-rpm cam lobe profile, as well as a killer high-end cam lobe and overall higher efficiency through out the rpm range. The b20 non-vtec would probably prevail on the track in a straight line, but would not be nearly as drivable on the street.
Obviously b20vtec > b16vtec. Not arguing that. What I'm saying is the VTEC system itself is not a gimmick. I would never build an LS or B20 engine, even just leaving it stock, without swapping for a vtec head.
When the options are for the same money to do a b20vtec or a b16vtec, the choice is obvious. No disagreement there.
Would you rather :
A) B16 with VTEC Built as far as it could go (minus stroking)
or
B) a NON VTEC B20 built to the nines? (Minus Stroking)
Answer should be B), unless you pick A because you want a gimmicky car to get groceries. Thus, VTEC IS a gimmick. I will troll this to death Mike lol.
A) B16 with VTEC Built as far as it could go (minus stroking)
or
B) a NON VTEC B20 built to the nines? (Minus Stroking)
Answer should be B), unless you pick A because you want a gimmicky car to get groceries. Thus, VTEC IS a gimmick. I will troll this to death Mike lol.
NA motors built for big numbers with single cam lobe profiles (no vtec) suffer greatly in the lower rpm range because of the excessive overlap, lift and duration. So yeah, for the street I'd rather have a built B16 with vtec vs a built b20 without vtec because the engine with vtec will have a decent lower-rpm cam lobe profile, as well as a killer high-end cam lobe and overall higher efficiency through out the rpm range. The b20 non-vtec would probably prevail on the track in a straight line, but would not be nearly as drivable on the street.
Obviously b20vtec > b16vtec. Not arguing that. What I'm saying is the VTEC system itself is not a gimmick. I would never build an LS or B20 engine, even just leaving it stock, without swapping for a vtec head.
When the options are for the same money to do a b20vtec or a b16vtec, the choice is obvious. No disagreement there.
Last edited by MPR; 11-Feb-2011 at 03:25 AM.
11-Feb-2011, 07:59 AM
#12
Inactive
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 4,641
imo b20v > b16 unless you wanna go wild boost, but if street driven daily, b20v will make you very happy. Just make sure it was put together right.
11-Feb-2011, 12:15 PM
#13
Inactive
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Where my car is.
Posts: 5,460
And yes b20vtec > b16.
27-Feb-2012, 04:46 AM
#14
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: brantford
Posts: 11
im learning a lot from this discussion, and am considering the b20 swap into my 97 si. would there be any difference between buying a b20b(96-98) motor and buying b20z(99-01) if youre going to but b16vtec head on anyway? and what would be a cheap compatible transmission ?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
imported_gohondago
Honda Civic Performance - JDM Discussion
2
24-May-2003 12:41 PM
Sadatay
Honda Civic Performance - JDM Discussion
14
02-Oct-2002 10:44 PM
