interesting x-1/9 engine swap engine

It's my understanding the 4-speed's CV joints and axles might be weaker than those on the 5-speed. I believe internally they are about the same in this regard. But I've only owned 5-speed models so hopefully one of our trans experts can confirm this better.

As for their overall ability to hold up, I recall experienced racers on this forum suggesting the stock trans is good to about 150 HP if not abused. However keep in mind it is the torque level that is critical, not HP. And off hand I don't recall any mention of specific levels of torque handling for either the 4 or 5 speed units.
 
With an alternative intake and injection system the B series Honda engines could likely be installed with only changes to the mounts and not effect the rest of the car.

Call me old fashioned, but a B series Honda engine placing the exhaust manifold directly behind the gas tank with only a sheet of 24ga steel to separate the two seems like a bad idea.
 
Call me old fashioned, but a B series Honda engine placing the exhaust manifold directly behind the gas tank with only a sheet of 24ga steel to separate the two seems like a bad idea.
it was my thought as well. but never had any heat issues. the air space there doesnt conduct heat to the firewall and therefore not to the tank. I did add an aftermarket heat shield. the biggest issue IMO is that making a turbo manifold for it either need to move the tank up front, or fabricate one to mount the turbo sidewinder style or on top of the head.

Odie
 
also adding, that even if you bought a fuel cel for the frunk, and did the work to route it, it would still be less work and cost as a K swap. reminding you that IMO the K swap is the BEST swap, just not the only one, nor cost effective or as easy.

Odie
 
also adding, that even if you bought a fuel cel for the frunk, and did the work to route it, it would still be less work and cost as a K swap. reminding you that IMO the K swap is the BEST swap, just not the only one, nor cost effective or as easy.

Odie
I agree; you can get a aftermarket tank that fits nicely in the frunk for around $30. Easy to install and has the added benefit of shifting weight to the front of the car. Then there would be plenty of room for a turbo on the B if desired.

On a side note, not particular to a Honda "B", I've always thought it would not be difficult to completely remove the 'rearward' firewall section. I'm referring the the single sheet metal layer that goes behind the fuel tank and spare tire well, toward the front of the engine bay. Not the layer that goes in front of them toward the passenger compartment. By leaving that forward layer you still have a firewall, which can get added insulation (on both sides) if needed. That would open up a LOT of room in the engine bay for various swaps. And allow the drivetrain to sit a little more forward for better weight distribution.
 
Last edited:
it was my thought as well. but never had any heat issues. the air space there doesnt conduct heat to the firewall and therefore not to the tank. I did add an aftermarket heat shield. the biggest issue IMO is that making a turbo manifold for it either need to move the tank up front, or fabricate one to mount the turbo sidewinder style or on top of the head.

Odie

I know it's been done. And the B series is still an excellent engine. You probably did your swap before this happened, but now the economy K20 engines (such as K20A3) are cheaper than a good B16 and make the same power and I think a little more torque. I'm going to guess, however, that the B series fits better within the X engine bay with less or no cutting. The K requires quite a bit of cutting.
 
I agree; you can get a aftermarket tank that fits nicely in the frunk for around $30. Easy to install and has the added benefit of shifting weight to the front of the car. Then there would be plenty of room for a turbo on the B if desired.

There is a downside (other than considerably cutting into frunk space) to moving the fuel tank to the front. Yes, a full tank of fuel is a considerable weight added to the front axle. But as you burn off that fuel, you are altering the weight distribution. Driving a car on a race track with a fuel tank mounted up front, a driver can feel the subtle changes in the way the car handles as the tank empties out. But I wonder how differently a road car car might handle with or without 80lb of fuel in the front.

When I first saw where FIAT installed the tank on these cars, I thought it seemed insane. But as I thought of it, I realized the wisdom of their decision; placing the variable mass (the tank) in the middle of the car right behind the second largest mass in the car (the driver) minimizes the effect of the variable mass of the fuel.
 
I know it's been done. And the B series is still an excellent engine. You probably did your swap before this happened, but now the economy K20 engines (such as K20A3) are cheaper than a good B16 and make the same power and I think a little more torque. I'm going to guess, however, that the B series fits better within the X engine bay with less or no cutting. The K requires quite a bit of cutting.
I've never given serious consideration to a complete powertrain swap for any of my X's (yet). But the idea does intrigue me so I've looked on Craig's List a couple times just to see what was available locally in terms of a donor car (I'd prefer to get a complete running/driving car so I know the condition and get everything I need). I have to admit that the once extremely common "B" series engines are not as common any more. You used to see tons of them available for nothing. Now they seem to be getting a little scarcer. However I also do not see a lot of "K" equipped Hondas for cheap either. Looks like the really affordable donor Honda candidates now have the "D" (I think that's what it's referred to) engines. My understanding is those are not particularly desirable, but I don't know anything about Honda stuff.

Availability aside, to me the biggest advantage of using the B engine over the K is its size. For what I've seen it makes for a MUCH easier swap with a LOT less molesting of the X's chassis. Granted the K can ultimately make more power, so your particular goals would come into play. But for me the B can make plenty for these little cars - especially if a turbo is added.
 
I know it's been done. And the B series is still an excellent engine. You probably did your swap before this happened, but now the economy K20 engines (such as K20A3) are cheaper than a good B16 and make the same power and I think a little more torque. I'm going to guess, however, that the B series fits better within the X engine bay with less or no cutting. The K requires quite a bit of cutting.
I have 2000 into the engine and trans (and complete donor car) $700 in shafts (driveshaft shop custom) 600 wiring harness (rywire military spec) 200 for shifter and cables. About 200 in metal and mounts. 3700. How much is the k-swap kit? Yes you can find a k engine and trans cheaper. But by the time you are done the swap will be quite a bit higher. Space is tight for either actually. Mine appears to have more space as i dont have the firewall between the engine and trunk for easier access to everything. The k will be better as i stated, but if cost is an issue the b or even an h (i know of someone with that as well) will be less expensive. To be totally honestl i could have the drivetrain mounted ready to wire and plumb in an easy weekend.

I still like the rotary swaps the best.

Odie
 
I've never given serious consideration to a complete powertrain swap for any of my X's (yet). But the idea does intrigue me so I've looked on Craig's List a couple times just to see what was available locally in terms of a donor car (I'd prefer to get a complete running/driving car so I know the condition and get everything I need). I have to admit that the once extremely common "B" series engines are not as common any more. You used to see tons of them available for nothing. Now they seem to be getting a little scarcer. However I also do not see a lot of "K" equipped Hondas for cheap either. Looks like the really affordable donor Honda candidates now have the "D" (I think that's what it's referred to) engines. My understanding is those are not particularly desirable, but I don't know anything about Honda stuff.

Yeah, forget the D series. It's simply not worth the effort (although it can be turbocharged with pretty good results...) The B series have actually become more expensive and are now rather old, thus hard to find with decent mileage. (The same is fast becoming true of K20 engines, and the "headifold" engines should b probably be avoided.)

It's not hard to find an "engine donor quality" 2002-2011 Civic SI. From 2002-2006, they had the lower power economy type K20A3. From 2007-2011, they had the K20Z3, nearly as good as the K20A2 and K20Z1 from the RSX. 2007-2011 cars also have factory LSD, which is nice. For $3000 or less, you can have a complete car. A3 dropouts go for $1000-1500 and Z3 dropouts go for $1500-2000. No, those aren't junkyard prices, but they're not terrible for what you get.

I might catch some flack here, but practically anything would be an upgrade over the stock powertrain. The question is whether the swap is worth the effort.

Some other engine options that would fit well and may not be expensive would be Mini R56 turbo, Abarth/500T, Chevrolet EcoTec, Ford Ecoboost, MazdaSpeed 3. All of those would be big fun in an 1800ln mid engine car.
 
I have 2000 into the engine and trans (and complete donor car) $700 in shafts (driveshaft shop custom) 600 wiring harness (rywire military spec) 200 for shifter and cables. About 200 in metal and mounts. 3700. How much is the k-swap kit? Yes you can find a k engine and trans cheaper. But by the time you are done the swap will be quite a bit higher.

That's not exactly fair, though. You're comparing a full DIY project with a kit-based project. The kit makes the swap vastly easier, but if you can B swap an X without a kit, you can K swap an X without a kit.

I still like the rotary swaps the best.

Awesome engine. Wonderful fun. Unholy expensive these days. The parts to execute a rebuild have become rare and expensive. Mazda stopped producing rotor housings. New plates, rotors, and eccentric shafts haven't been available for years. A good running 12A will cost as much as a whole K dropout these days, and for a whopping 100HP. It breaks my heart because I would love to own another Rx-7. But the engine has become too expensive to play with.
 
Some other engine options that would fit well and may not be expensive would be Mini R56 turbo, Abarth/500T, Chevrolet EcoTec, Ford Ecoboost, MazdaSpeed 3. All of those would be big fun in an 1800ln mid engine car.

Abarth has been done, see TonyK's threads. That is a very complex build due to the holistic approach to vehicle management on newer cars. I wouldn't touch anything with such an integrated system
 
I might catch some flack here, but practically anything would be an upgrade over the stock powertrain. The question is whether the swap is worth the effort.
Ya, this subject has been argued many times here. Personally I completely agree with your comment. Another option I am exploring is a conservative turbo setup on the X's 1500 engine. My intent at the time I started it was for the money and effort it would add enough power to make the X more liveable, without the major job and expense of a swap or even a performance NA SOHC build. So far I'm into it for a lot less than imagined. We'll see what happens.

"find an "engine donor quality" 2002-2011 Civic SI", "For $3000 or less, you can have a complete car.", "A3 dropouts go for $1000-1500 and Z3 dropouts go for $1500-2000."
When I looked into the prices of donor cars a couple years ago there were several great choices with "B" engines for around $1000-1200 (asking prices) locally. That is a complete car with just about all of the components you need. More on cost....

"That's not exactly fair, though. You're comparing a full DIY project with a kit-based project. The kit makes the swap vastly easier, but if you can B swap an X without a kit, you can K swap an X without a kit."
That's not fair either. First, the B swap is much easier to do because it requires almost no cutting of the X compared to the K. Second, the B can fit with a simpler install "kit" (DIY or otherwise), which would make that less expensive either way. Third, one might be able to do the B swap but not the K swap considering the level of modifications needed to do the K vs the B.

At the time I saw the B cars for around $1000, I also priced the whole swap project based on what everyone was reporting on the forum. IF you kept it basic (no turbo, no custom wire harness or ECU, etc) and did it with all of the stock components found on the complete donor car, then the only real expense would be the axles. That's assuming a DIY as you say. The total estimated budget for EVERYTHING on a B swap was far less than any donor K car (including the $3000 you mentioned). Realizing that isn't an extremely high performance swap, it is still several time greater than any X engine. I posted a detailed rundown of this somewhere here.

Following @lookforjoe comment, the Chevy EcoTec has also been done. The one I haven't seen yet is the Mazda/Ford drivetrain we discussed previously.
 
That's not exactly fair, though. You're comparing a full DIY project with a kit-based project. The kit makes the swap vastly easier, but if you can B swap an X without a kit, you can K swap an X without a kit.



Awesome engine. Wonderful fun. Unholy expensive these days. The parts to execute a rebuild have become rare and expensive. Mazda stopped producing rotor housings. New plates, rotors, and eccentric shafts haven't been available for years. A good running 12A will cost as much as a whole K dropout these days, and for a whopping 100HP. It breaks my heart because I would love to own another Rx-7. But the engine has become too expensive to play with.
The reason why is because a kit would be probaly under $500. If i were to "kit" it. It would be trans mount on trans, trans mount to frame and passenger mount to frame. Even if you did a diy for the k, it would be way more involved, this is why a kit was made because diy wouldnt be easy. Both me and walter, who did the original b swap, have never done such projects before and never even welded before this.

Here are the mounts i made for it. I dont have a pic for the one that goes from the trans to the mount pictured. It basically extended the mount up. Actually i have walters pic. Mine is similar

This is also the link to his build.

Walts b16 build

Odie
 

Attachments

  • Passenger_side-1024x681.jpg
    Passenger_side-1024x681.jpg
    130.3 KB · Views: 73
  • Drivers_2-681x1024.jpg
    Drivers_2-681x1024.jpg
    150.9 KB · Views: 71
  • Screenshot_20201118-173327_Dolphin.jpg
    Screenshot_20201118-173327_Dolphin.jpg
    290 KB · Views: 80
The reason why is because a kit would be probaly under $500. If i were to "kit" it. It would be trans mount on trans, trans mount to frame and passenger mount to frame. Even if you did a diy for the k, it would be way more involved, this is why a kit was made because diy wouldnt be easy. Both me and walter, who did the original b swap, have never done such projects before and never even welded before this.

Here are the mounts i made for it. I dont have a pic for the one that goes from the trans to the mount pictured. It basically extended the mount up. Actually i have walters pic. Mine is similar

This is also the link to his build.

Walts b16 build

Odie
If you were a shop that does this sort of thing professionally I'm sure you could make those mounts even more compact, easier to install, and involve virtually no significant modifications to the chassis. Possibly even make it a "bolt-in" deal. A kit for the B would definitely be much less expensive to produce. ;)
 
Abarth has been done, see TonyK's threads. That is a very complex build due to the holistic approach to vehicle management on newer cars. I wouldn't touch anything with such an integrated system

Yeah, I was still working at Bayless when Matt sold the Abarth engine to TonyK. SEM might be the cleanest way to do that swap, but there is a lot to control with the way the valvetrain works. It's a neat engine, but, as you said, a bit sophisticated for most DIYers.

I also neglected the 1ZZ and 2ZZ engines as well as a host of V6 engines such as the J series, Toyota 2GR-FE, Nissan Altima (whatever that code is,) etc.
Go back a couple of decades and you have the Yamaha SHO V6, which is still a crowd pleaser all these years later. It makes 220HP, which a K20A2 does in stock form, but makes a LOT more torque and revs nearly as happily as the K. Plus 220 is just where it starts with factory everything.

Then there's the 4AGE. It's an old engine and makes old engine power, but it works very well and can be modified extensively. It also responds well to turbocharging.

I think the Sonic's 1.4T engine would package well into an X also.

There really are tons of options. Many of these engines would not be worth paying a shop to swap in, but the DIYer has the bull by the horns.
 
Ya, this subject has been argued many times here. Personally I completely agree with your comment. Another option I am exploring is a conservative turbo setup on the X's 1500 engine. My intent at the time I started it was for the money and effort it would add enough power to make the X more liveable, without the major job and expense of a swap or even a performance NA SOHC build. So far I'm into it for a lot less than imagined. We'll see what happens.

I have built several VW turbo setups using OE parts. The OE parts in the case of VW are much easier to get than OE FIAT turbo parts, but the results are satisfying for very little money. Fortunately for old VW and FIAT owners, the stock NA engines from the 80s were hampered by low CRs--so there's enough headroom for some boost. But yes, if you find the manifold and turbocharger from an Uno, the rest is pretty easy and a lot cheaper than 100 NA HP.

That's not fair either. First, the B swap is much easier to do because it requires almost no cutting of the X compared to the K. Second, the B can fit with a simpler install "kit" (DIY or otherwise), which would make that less expensive either way. Third, one might be able to do the B swap but not the K swap considering the level of modifications needed to do the K vs the B.

The B swap is certainly easier. But I was trying to make the price comparison an apples to apples one by removing the cost of a kit and making both a DIY. Yes, certainly the K swap is more work. But the REAL work in an engine swap is all the little details like wiring, plumbing, axles, and shift linkage. The cutting and getting the engine into place seems like the big part, but it's actually easy.

At the time I saw the B cars for around $1000, I also priced the whole swap project based on what everyone was reporting on the forum. IF you kept it basic (no turbo, no custom wire harness or ECU, etc) and did it with all of the stock components found on the complete donor car, then the only real expense would be the axles. That's assuming a DIY as you say. The total estimated budget for EVERYTHING on a B swap was far less than any donor K car (including the $3000 you mentioned). Realizing that isn't an extremely high performance swap, it is still several time greater than any X engine.

B donors are definitely climbing. But you're right that they can still be had for cheap. And yes, a 160HP B16 is way way more than you're ever going to squeeze out of an NA Lampredi single cam, with Honda reliability and a durable transmission--a very durable transmission.

I'm with you on what to do with a single cam. Paying $1000 for a head to make a 25HP gain over stock seems like a bad idea if you're willing to invest some blood, sweat and tears putting together a mild turbo setup. A basic turbo setup would zoom right past that 100HP for less money. I just wonder what the transmission could take.
 
Lots of good discussion on this thread. One thing that's not mentioned enough is the weight of the potential drivetrain of various options. It seems to me that the weight of the potential swap drivetrain is a primary consideration.
Adding more weight in the rear isn't a great idea.
The stock X already has too much weight in the rear. Adding a more powerful drivetrain, and more weight, could easily mean that you're just going to be going faster when the ass end of the car passes you as you enter the corner.
Moving the gas tank to the frunk can help mitigate the additional weight in the rear, and make the install easier, but then you loose the ability to carry more stuff up there. And as mentioned above changing fuel levels in the frunk does affect handing (just as the additional weight in the rear does). When you're racing, driving at 10/10s, you can feel the difference as the fuel burns off. But, unless you're driving on the edge, you probably won't notice any difference.
 
Touching anything that hasn't been done already- you are opening up a real can of worms when it comes to everything beyond the physical plonking the drivetrain in the bay - I would also look at aftermarket support for mods on whatever drivetrain you are considering. For me, the Honda support (regardless of X-related stuff) makes it a no-brainer. Getting any conversion running well & fine tuned without that level of aftermarket backup will be a nightmare, unless you already have experience with MS, for example, and the ability to fabricate / mod harnesses, add sensors etc., to make a standalone work and then tune.

Whilst all those are not necessarily enough to deter, the time factor for a build is another serious consideration for DIY - even with available kits and availability of parts, it can easily be a 2 + year conversion. If you are doing it from scratch, figuring out drivetrain placement, getting custom axles (that may not be right 1st time around), etc., I would expect that time frame could easily double or go well beyond.

This is all to say, keeping the time the car is off the road & unusable to a minimum is a major consideration, was for me anyway.
 
I have built several VW turbo setups using OE parts. The OE parts in the case of VW are much easier to get than OE FIAT turbo parts, but the results are satisfying for very little money. Fortunately for old VW and FIAT owners, the stock NA engines from the 80s were hampered by low CRs--so there's enough headroom for some boost. But yes, if you find the manifold and turbocharger from an Uno, the rest is pretty easy and a lot cheaper than 100 NA HP.



The B swap is certainly easier. But I was trying to make the price comparison an apples to apples one by removing the cost of a kit and making both a DIY. Yes, certainly the K swap is more work. But the REAL work in an engine swap is all the little details like wiring, plumbing, axles, and shift linkage. The cutting and getting the engine into place seems like the big part, but it's actually easy.



B donors are definitely climbing. But you're right that they can still be had for cheap. And yes, a 160HP B16 is way way more than you're ever going to squeeze out of an NA Lampredi single cam, with Honda reliability and a durable transmission--a very durable transmission.

I'm with you on what to do with a single cam. Paying $1000 for a head to make a 25HP gain over stock seems like a bad idea if you're willing to invest some blood, sweat and tears putting together a mild turbo setup. A basic turbo setup would zoom right past that 100HP for less money. I just wonder what the transmission could take.
Love your thinking on the 4AGE. that engine is a beauty for sure. It actually was my second choice! the reason why I leaned towards honda was trying to keep the spirit of the X's high RPM. and the buzz bee sound.
the V6 SHO. yeah that would be fun for sure!!! probably alot more fitment issues. but the grin factor may override that!
I also did a dodge 2.2 turbo swap in one. crazy fun but they are getting pretty hard to locate so I didnt go that route. plus the 80's lag was pretty scary at times. once the boost ramped up it would always break loose.

the interesting part about current engines is even some of the "low horsepower" by todays standards are well above what the fiat engine could hit reliably. The downside is many newer engines are so integrated that getting them to run in a different vehicle is tricky (like the abarth 500 engine)
and you are 100 percent correct about the swaps, putting the engine in in the easy part. that was why I said a weekedn for gettign the engine/trans in ;) wiring for me wasnt bad as the rywire was standalone. but the cooling tripped my up for over 2 years with overheating and air pockets until I finally figured out how it would work. The little things are that little, but dang there are many in the swaps!
I love seeing how many different swaps there are, one of my fav oddballs is the 3 cyl Cat engine. slow as snot, but if I remember correctly over 70 MPG.


Odie
 
Back
Top