2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992) 1986-1992 Discussion including performance modifications and technical support sections.

N/A'd TII block HP possibilities?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 9, 2006 | 07:33 PM
  #1  
Thread Starter
Rotary Freak
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,739
Likes: 0
From: Boulder, CO
N/A'd TII block HP possibilities?

I've been thinking about converting my TII motor to N/A for gas mileage and reliability reasons(for a little while).... so I've just been curious about what kind of HP I might be able to get out of it.

the setup would be as follows...

S5 TII block - stock port, stock S5 TII intake manifolds
haltech E8
header/ open exahust
open intake(probably make it a cold air or something... I dunno)
and I guess thats all that would make a difference for power....

how much do you guys think I could push out of it?
from what I've been reading, it seems like the IT race cars can get up to around 170whp or so with stock ports, but thats with 6port blocks, and I think stock computers as well... so I'm not really sure what the differences would be between that and a 4port motor and standalone..../
Reply
Old Sep 9, 2006 | 07:56 PM
  #2  
RotaryEvolution's Avatar
Sharp Claws
Tenured Member 15 Years
iTrader: (30)
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 5,107
Likes: 50
From: Central Florida
160-170 probably due to the ability to fine tune it.

the ports on the n/a's are actually larger than TIIs with more duration so if you ask me they have more potential for n/a power.

TIIs with no turbo are even less fun to drive than n/a's and n/a's are borderline to me. turbos have ruined me!

Last edited by RotaryEvolution; Sep 9, 2006 at 07:59 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 9, 2006 | 08:33 PM
  #3  
Dokta's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
From: Hartford, CT
Actually the turbo moter gets better gas mileage than the N/A. The factory says its only 1 mpg, but after my TII swap I was averaging 18.6 mpg compared to 15.9 mpg average with the N/A motor. Using the turbo increases the thermodynamic efficiency of the engine.

You're talking about putting aftermarket parts and getting more power out of the engine? So are you looking for fuel efficiency or power?

I drive a 93 civic Si for fuel efficiency. I average 42.2 mpg on the highway and 38.2 mpg around town. So getting a responsible car might be a solution to your problem also. I don't understand why anyone would get a car that they wanted to be fast, then detune it. Why remove the turbo, then try to get more power out of the car? It seems counterintuitive.

Just my opinion, but the N/A motor in the second gen is no fun. Don't get me wrong, the car is fun. The suspension and the rest of the car is great... but the only problem I had with the car was the weak little 160 hp engine. The turbo engine really reminds you that you are sitting in a sports car.
Reply
Old Sep 9, 2006 | 08:35 PM
  #4  
KeloidJonesJr.'s Avatar
strictly business
Tenured Member 05 Years
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 6,187
Likes: 0
From: chamber of farts
DON'T DO IT!!! lol
Reply
Old Sep 9, 2006 | 09:49 PM
  #5  
R_PROWESS's Avatar
F[x]3S ENG.
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,679
Likes: 18
From: Rochester, IN
i might be crazy but i think i noticed better gas mileage when i went turbo..
Reply
Old Sep 10, 2006 | 12:18 AM
  #6  
NOPR's Avatar
Rotary Apprentice
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,181
Likes: 0
From: USA
with portwork and standalone, you can see 190+rwhp on a nice exhaust, stock intake manifolds, and cone filter.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Jeff20B
1st Generation Specific (1979-1985)
73
Sep 16, 2018 07:16 PM
stickmantijuana
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
13
Jan 9, 2018 11:19 AM
befarrer
Old School and Other Rotary
2
Oct 5, 2015 03:30 AM
dillrx7
Single Turbo RX-7's
3
Sep 7, 2015 09:38 AM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:15 PM.