I keep seeing g2 "GS-Rs" for sale when they are plainly LSs with a b16a swap which kinda pisses me off. Now I see a 1992 GS-R with a "vtec swap" and I figure it's probably a b16a.

So, the rumor is that the b17a is stronger and underrated compared to the JDM b16a, even though they both claim 160 hp. Does anybody have a dyno comparison or solid evidence that the b17a is stronger? Thnx

Ben

 

Well, any swap vehicle is going to have the value of the original car anyway. So if a G2 LS is worth 5000 and a G2 GSR is worth 6000, the LS car with a swap is still only worth 5000 in the eyes of the insurance company, and anyone giving you a loan to buy it. This is important because if you pay more, your basically driving around with that much money uninsured.

What I'm trying to say here is that they don't compare. If you want a LS, shop for LS cars and consider one with a vtec motor swapped in a bonus, but don't pay more than what the LS is worth as a plain LS. If you want a GSR, then don't accept anything less than a GSR. Carfaqs.com is your friend here. At the very least you can check to see that the vin matches up to the trim level for free. In the end though, it's your money. Risk it the way you want.

 

So you don't have a dyno then.

 

Hehe, yeah I know about the value of the cars. In fact, some consider the b16a a downgrade to the b18a so it's not going to up the value much if at all. The good thing is that the engine probably has less miles. But anyway, for the GS-R, if it was a real GS-R and they swapped out the b17 for a b16 then that would certainly lower the value. The question I have is if it'll be slower too.

 

Ah, I see were your going. As a general rule, the smaller the displacement the less useable power and torque the engine will produce. Now I know this isn't always true with a Honda, but I'd still think the 1.6 would make less torque, and would have a narrower powerband that the 1.7 I'm just guessing though.
Despite the lower miles, the car will still be valued by lenders and insurance companies based of the miles on the chassis. They don't care if it has a brand new motor with 100 or 1000 miles on it. To them it's still a car with 70,000 80,000 or a 100,000 miles on it.

 

There were a total of maybe 3000 B17A equipped cars sold in this country, and we are the only country that got the motor. So there just isn't a large supply of them out there.

The increase in displacement from B16 to B17 is relatively minor and the B17 has a 9.7:1 CR while the B16 runs either 10.2:1 or 10.4:1 depending on trim. Built up a B17 will put down a littl emore than a B16, essentially because of the displacement. Take a dyno of a built B18C and a similarly modified B16A and the B17 will be somewhere in the middle.

 

For example:

GREEN line = B16A, ITR cams, mild porting on head, ITR manifold, CTR pistons, etc.



BLUE line = B17A, ??? (supposedly stock) cams, CTR pistons and ITR manifold, etc.

 

so you dont think a 92-93 GSR existed then?
the B17 is a badass engine...and an equally badass tranny.

 

I'll assume that wasn't directed at me, seeing as I had and sold a '92 GSR.

 

Yeah I know the 92-93 GS-R had the B17a stock, but if someone says it has a "new v-tech [sic] engine" then it's probably a b16a since, like MrFatBooty said, a decent B17a is scarce and the B16a is definitely not. That and the fact that the selling price is like $4000. So I've heard that the B17a is stronger than the B16a, and from the impression I get, it's not a small difference. Hence how people bash the B16 constantly and worship the g2 GS-R. I'm not contesting this at all, but if the GS-R I saw has a B16 instead of the B17, is it going to be as slow as an LS?