help2

By shreck (69.192.195.206) on Monday, October 03, 2005 - 04:44 pm:

help

By Justin (24.85.53.81) on Wednesday, February 23, 2005 - 02:26 pm:

Too many variations

By -Andrew Smit- (Cvcc_Wagon) (24.86.60.4) on Wednesday, February 23, 2005 - 12:39 pm:

still a little off i think. all canadain civic/crx's were carb. either the EV1 (1.3l, carb possibly non-CVCC in canada, CVCC in the states) or the EW2 (1.5l, carb, non-CVCC ) in the states they had the EV1, EW1 (1.5l, carb, CVCC) EW3 & EW4 (both 1.5l, FI, non-CVCC) the EW2 was the canadian non-CVCC version of the EW1 like the EL and EK. all block/head combos will bolt together, even the 1.3 block.

By Justin (24.85.53.81) on Wednesday, February 23, 2005 - 10:09 am:

Paul, you are right I meant to say it was the same series (1500cc)'84-87' the early ones were carbed and the later's injected..

By paul (24.81.133.253) on Wednesday, February 23, 2005 - 12:30 am:

Kurt there's always anthony's ew2 but it's in aus.
BTW I think Justin was mistaken I thought the I had an ew4 injected ew2 was carb could be wrong

By Kyle Thomson (24.83.29.123) on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 11:50 pm:

The bolt spacing is fine, its the bolt hole diam. that is wrong on the civic flywheel, they need to be enlarged to work. That and the crank is slightly to large to fit into the recessed part of the flywheel, so that has to be enlarged as well. I had them machine from the mounting surface-straight up, which allows it to bolt up, and takes off a lot of the weight. It cost about $80can but that didn't include rebalancing it

By Kurt (205.250.75.226) on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 10:40 pm:

Its not Perry, unless he goes by another name. The motor in question is a '79 so I don't think that will be an issue. Its the 82-83 Eks that have that larger bolt spacing on the flywheels is it not? I was under the impression that the Civic fly wheels would bolt onto the 76-81 EKs and ELs but its been some time since I read up about this.

I'm not racing the car. That might scratch it Like most, just looking for some more power without having to start welding things. I have not seriously considered a m/c quad carb set up. I think I have enough carburator on there for now! I was in contact with a guy some time ago that had a 'Mosselman' kit for his Accord motor with the manifold and all but never did see a photo of it. I just figured carbs were just as good so I never followed up on it

Is distributor recurving worth while?? I was going to have it done but never followed through with it.

I think I missed out on the EK cam gears

Hey Bryan, any idea what it would cost me to have an EL head 'dialed in??' Say with some porting, bigger valves and all the other good stuff you and Don mentioned?

Its good to see you still around Errol. You still got that Honda City set up kicking around? That would be nice to have!

- Kurt

By errol (152.163.100.199) on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 07:08 am:

Kurt, The person sellin this motor wouldn't be named Perry would he?
Anyhow, Ask about the mounting flange of the crank-flywheel. If it's the later (mid 80's--) it will have the bigger bolts/pattern than the 'little' civic pattern and the 'good' trans won't work because the flat Accord flywheel won't fit in the bellhousing.. Boy, wouldn't that piss ya off, get all this and it won't work with ANY tranny you have.. (been there) If this is the case, You could have the crank flange 'machined down' and drilled and tapped to fit the smaller flywheels but A shop down here said 300.00us That doesn't include the balancing.

And what ya going to use it for? Race or just tryin to beat on kids?

You may be better off 'freshenin up' what you have and looking into getting (I think it was last months Honda Tuning) a look at how they used a motorcycle throttle-body set up and actually got it to work.
Since you have most all of the desirable parts anyhow, it couldn't be that hard to have adaptors and fuel rail to the side draft manifold made.
Have you ever looked into the Megasquirt fuel injection?? Pretty intresting thought of havin a fuel injection setup for a 1g civic!
Also, have your distributor recurved and take apart the advance plates, re-lube them ( or just order new if you loose the little ball bearings) and use a 80-81 civ advance can (from the ol graphs i had, the advance was all in around 3000rpms)
(I'm not sure if Bryan is still makin those EK cam gears) You can get a Non V-tech adjustable gear on Ebay and use a lower 1g integra crank gear and look around for a round tooth belt that is the same length (or a slight bit shorter according to Mugen) to take up the 'decking' of the head.

Just something to think about.

By Bryan (66.32.245.200) on Monday, February 21, 2005 - 05:56 am:

Larger valves do help on some honda heads because the seat angles are too sharp leading into the ports. I have picked up a good bit of power doing this to otherwise stock engines. I am able to get 4-5 angles on the intake seat.

Don......your head could probably benifit from the eb3 valves.

Adrian is right, the head is where you need to spend your money. Also, ordinary machine shops don't do the type of job that you need for performance. There is power to be made by a correct valve job and valve guides. If the shop does the bore and hone correctly, and gets the deck straight, then you can build a pretty good bottom end with very little expense. Have the rods checked and resized by a "competent" machist. If you don't want to ship the whole engine to me, then at least let me do the rods for you.......you know they will be right that way.

By Jarcaf (Jarcaf) (207.55.238.216) on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 11:01 pm:

Sorry, I assumed standard measurements...oops
My engine is bored 1mm over which brings it to just under 1800cc, and I don't think there's really any substantial difference.
The best part of that setup has to be the EL head, and you're already on your way with that. I'd say at this point, just get an EK block and use it meshed w/ your EL head. You can probably skip the bigger valves if you want to save money and just do some pocket porting and port-matching to the manifolds. Shave the head a bit with a hefty cam you could get some cool hp. Stiff springs are for high rpm's and for a street-mobile I think it would be unecessary.

By Kurt (205.250.75.226) on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 10:44 pm:

Thanks for the responses Don and Adrian.

If I go with it I would definitley want to open it especially to put in new gaskets and seals. A/T Engineering has been gone for some time so I imagine even with low hours the rebild was 10-15 years ago. How it was stored is the other question.

.3 is just the figure I had, .3 is small now that I think about it. I thought about building my own too. New oversized pistons and the bearings routinely come up on Ebay so that would come cheap. The head I can see being the expensive part by the time you have it put on a 'flow bench,' machined, ported, bigger valves (custom I assume), etc. I think its Bryan Maloof that does this work is it not?

By Adrian (Evocivic) (203.42.97.141) on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 10:02 pm:

I wouldn't exactly call 0.3mm off the head shaved . I'd call it skimmed just enough to get it flat.
Machining a block is cheap (all you really need to do is bore and hone the bores and flatten the deck). There is money in the head if it's had work done to it and bigger valves put in.
The parts (pistons, bearings, valves, guides, springs, cam, gaskets etc.) are where most of the money is.

By Don (63.135.203.97) on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 10:01 pm:

I dont know too much about the big motors.
Bigger valve may or may not improve performance, did they rework the head? Cleaning up the ridges below the valve seats seems to give a big improvement on most heads. Its a used engine so you have to treat it as such I would take it apart for inpection just to make sure its ok. The cost is a gasket set and a little time. Its a used engine if the guy isn't trying to ask too much it may be ok but its probably not going to be a night and day difference either way. If its not cheap then I would run what you have and start doing your own EK that way there are no unknowns. It might cost a little more but how much is a hunk of cast iron that cost $$ that turns out to be a dud? I have had a few AT parts over the years and they seem to be shoddy at times.

By Kurt (205.250.75.226) on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 09:35 pm:

Thanks everyone.

Don or Bryan any suggestions?

Ya overbored .3 mm is what I was told and the head was shaved another .3mm. Its the shippping that concerns me and never getting to hear it run or even see it in person.

I would rebuild a motor but its the machining to the had and block that would be $$ plus the parts...where ever they are

By Adrian (Evocivic) (203.42.97.141) on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 06:49 pm:

It'll be either 0.030" (30 thou or 0.76mm) or 0.3mm (strange size!).

0.3" is 7.6mm!

By Jarcaf (Jarcaf) (66.241.92.211) on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 06:42 pm:

Well, are those pistons .30" over or are they .030" over. That makes a difference.

By -Andrew Smit- (Cvcc_Wagon) (154.20.95.104) on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 05:06 pm:

"3. Now I admittedly know very little about building motors but it seems like this would cost a few $$ to build one of these nowadays?

4. So I can more displacement and bigger valves as a + but what the hell are 'silicon bronze valve guides' and stiffer springs?

5. Or...am I better off saving my money and having my own flywheel shaved down and find a lower geared transmission out of an 80 Civic to keep me happy? "


3. Yes, i did basically a stock rebuild with some machining and it cosy plenty. to do this to a stock EL/EK it would take quite a bit of sourcing to get all those parts. although you are already ahead of the game with the AT Engineering intake.

4. the silicon bronze valve guides will be more durable and allow you to go to higher rpm's safely. the stiffer springs also allow higher rpm's by eliminating overlap. basically the stock springs will not close the valve fast enough to clear the piston at high revs. a fellow on another honda site (84-87 stuff) accidentally downshifted in his beater civic (he has 2 civics)
and reved it to 9k+, pretty well all the valves were bent, needless to say he swapped the moror after that...

5. if you go that route let me know if you have a lead on a tranny (well 2 trannies i guess). that's what i'm thinking of doing next. i already have my flywheel lightened to 14.5lb.

By 79EK1 (79ek1) (63.195.80.15) on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 04:50 pm:

Hey Kurt,

Basically, I have the same engine you describe, in pieces. Unfortunately, I can't tell you what the horsepower is, because I've never had my car on a dyno.

With the 0.030" over EK1 block and a stock 94mm stroke, the displacement is 1785cc, a ~12% increase in displacement over a 1600cc. According to Hot Rod, that should be good for roughly a 12% increase in power. If the CR has been raised because of the pistons, or smaller head chamber volume, then you'll get a few percent more.

The silicon-bronze valves guides are supposed to transfer heat better and cause less wear on the valve stems. The stiffer valve springs control valve float at higher revs with more radical cams.

An A/T catalog I have rated this combo as high as 110 HP with a dual 40DCOE setup. Jackson racing rated the A/T engine around 100HP when comparing it to their (Jackson Racing) turbo kit. I can scan those parts of the catalogs, if you're interested.

I'm guessing the cost of building one today is going to run over $2000 USD, depending on the labor rates and cost of parts. If you can get a good used one a lot cheaper, then it sounds like a deal.


Dan

By Jarcaf (Jarcaf) (207.55.238.216) on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 04:11 pm:

Are those really .30" over pistons?! W/ my calculator, that means you've got a 2114cc engine! I didn't know I could take out my block that far. Just using some of those specs w/ the only semireliable desktop dyno, you're theoretically getting 138hp @5500 and 152ftlb @4000. I'd say get it. That big of a displacement is outstanding.

By Kurt (205.250.75.226) on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 02:29 pm:

Looking at a modified EK motor for my car but am curious as to whether its worth it or not. I am not ready to go the VTEC route.

As most know I am currently running an EL (non CVCC) with reground cam, header and dual side drafts. Other then the bolt ons its basically stock internals and unknown mileage.

For the upgrade I am considering a modified EK built by AT Engineering with: At Engineering pistons and rods, .30 over pistons with chromoly rings, EL head with silicon bronze valve guides, 2mm oversize valves, stiffer springs and upgraded retainers and port matched to a header and stock intake. Cam specs are a .420 lift at 296 degrees. Engine is mated to a lightened fly wheel.
Motor has approx 5000 miles on it.

Obviously I would use my AT Engineering intake to run the dual carbs and ditch the stock intake thats on it now.

Now here is the questions for the experts:

1. I know its a tough question but just how much more power can be had over my current set up when compared to this one? I want to be able to actually feel the difference not like those kids adding thicker wires and cold air intkes to their cars .

2. Anyone care to guess at HP numbers for the increase (or am I sounding like one of those kids now )

3. Now I admittedly know very little about building motors but it seems like this would cost a few $$ to build one of these nowadays?

4. So I can more displacement and bigger valves as a + but what the hell are 'silicon bronze valve guides' and stiffer springs?

5. Or...am I better off saving my money and having my own flywheel shaved down and find a lower geared transmission out of an 80 Civic to keep me happy?

Decisions, Decisions....

Thanks!

- Kurt