Automatic to Manual
07-20-2015, 07:11 AM
#1
Automatic to Manual
Has anyone ever done a conversion from auto to stick? I've got a 2001 CL-S I'm doing this on soon and was wondering if anyone has any experience with it. This would also technically apply to the TL of the same year. Thanks for any input.
07-20-2015, 08:01 AM
#2
4th Gear
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As long as you realize it will be expensive and you will never recover the costs ... have a ball. Any time the words "convert" or "swap" are used in relation to cars ... it equates to lost $$.
07-20-2015, 08:20 AM
#3
Oh yeah I know, money isn't even an issue, I'm switching to an I4. Anyways the point isn't the money or anything else I'm doing with this thing, I was just wondering if anyone had done it before.
07-20-2015, 08:48 AM
#5
- K24 engines are torquy, deal well with pressure up to 30psi, and smaller, so with the CL's generous engine bay I can be less constrained
- High horsepower
I realize the J32a2 is revered by a lot (at least I've seen opinions akin to that), but if you have money to throw at a car you really enjoy, why not make it a unique piece of art?
anyways, hate the auto, want the manual, already doing custom work, not much more, want to know if anyone has done it, even with the stock 6speed. My biggest concern is maintaining the integrity of the interior, like putting an ebrake in and putting in the clutch pedal.
07-20-2015, 09:19 AM
#6
I Wanna Beer
If you want to go manual, why not buy a manual from the start, especially if you haven't purchased the vehicle yet? Unless you have great mechanical skills, plenty of time to do it, and a good amount of cash, you'll save yourself a ton of time, money, and headaches by just buying a manual from the start. Even if you already own the car, it's still cheaper to sell it and buy a manual than invest in swapping.
As others have said, search the forums. The question gets asked all the time. There are plenty of threads on how to do it.
As others have said, search the forums. The question gets asked all the time. There are plenty of threads on how to do it.
07-20-2015, 09:38 AM
#7
If you want to go manual, why not buy a manual from the start, especially if you haven't purchased the vehicle yet? Unless you have great mechanical skills, plenty of time to do it, and a good amount of cash, you'll save yourself a ton of time, money, and headaches by just buying a manual from the start. Even if you already own the car, it's still cheaper to sell it and buy a manual than invest in swapping.
As others have said, search the forums. The question gets asked all the time. There are plenty of threads on how to do it.
As others have said, search the forums. The question gets asked all the time. There are plenty of threads on how to do it.
Trending Topics
The following users liked this post:
mbelliveau (07-20-2015)
07-20-2015, 10:24 AM
#9
07-20-2015, 10:29 AM
#10
I Wanna Beer
Low mileage isn't always awesome. It means the car has sat a lot which means seals dry up and you have a far higher chance for leaks and internal engine issues. It would still need a 105k mile service to be done as it's far past the every 7 year requirement so add that expense in there too on top of the work to swap and find the parts.
07-20-2015, 11:24 AM
#11
He probably doesn't care about seals if he wants to throw a K24 in it.
OP, I'm not the type of person just to discount things because there are easier options to achieve other alternatives. If you were proposing a difficult way to swap in a K24, and there was a documented easier way, I'd certainly try to sway you toward that, though. However, as you've discovered, no one has done this. There's a reason for this.
I've driven many K24A-powered cars and many J-series powered cars. The torque described in a K24 is relative to other D/B/F/H/K-series engines with shorter strokes. At 99mm, the K24A really does feel like a tree stump-puller in comparison. With a 153mm rod and taller deck than the other Honda engines, it doesn't lose much in terms of rod/stroke ratio either. The only advantage I can see for the K20A over the K24A is the ability to compete in a sub 2000cc class. Aside from that, it's an amazing engine. When equipped with the correct head, a la K24A2.
Enter J-series. Even the lowly J30A1 has nearly 30 lb-ft more torque than the K24A2 at the same horsepower rating. Moving around the weight of the 2002 Accord coupe I have, the J30A1 feels capable, but inspiring. The transmission has a lot to do with the poor performance of that car.
The J30A1 is a square engine just like the K20A. It can naturally rev higher with its relatively short stroke. The J32A2 shares that same stroke only with 3mm larger pistons in every hole. With other contributing factors the J32A2 pushes out 60 hp more than the K24A2 or J30A1 and over 35 lb-ft of torque over the J30A1 (66 lb-ft total over the K24A2).
I say all of this to say that the K24A2 cannot be justified from a performance standpoint. If lighter weight is what you're after, you're in the wrong chassis. If engine bay room is your goal, I assure you there's plenty of room for a turbo with a manual transmission J-series. If uniqueness is desirable to you, the K24A would certainly do it. However, you're going to be the only one who appreciates it.
Going back to the torque argument, the J35A3 is a drop-in replacement to an automatic J32A2 and requires only a few sensor swaps for the manual engine. If you were to use your current J32A2 camshafts in that engine, you would recover much of the horsepower lost in that engine over the J32A2 while still retaining the torque advantage. You can get one of these engines for under $400 on car-part.com all day long. Add another few hundred in aftermarket headers and maintenance items and you'll be way more happy than a K24A2 could ever make you in this chassis.
If you do decide to go to a K24A2 still, you're going into uncharted waters in terms of mounting the engine up, finding compatible axles, merging harnesses and converting a tach signal.
OP, I'm not the type of person just to discount things because there are easier options to achieve other alternatives. If you were proposing a difficult way to swap in a K24, and there was a documented easier way, I'd certainly try to sway you toward that, though. However, as you've discovered, no one has done this. There's a reason for this.
I've driven many K24A-powered cars and many J-series powered cars. The torque described in a K24 is relative to other D/B/F/H/K-series engines with shorter strokes. At 99mm, the K24A really does feel like a tree stump-puller in comparison. With a 153mm rod and taller deck than the other Honda engines, it doesn't lose much in terms of rod/stroke ratio either. The only advantage I can see for the K20A over the K24A is the ability to compete in a sub 2000cc class. Aside from that, it's an amazing engine. When equipped with the correct head, a la K24A2.
Enter J-series. Even the lowly J30A1 has nearly 30 lb-ft more torque than the K24A2 at the same horsepower rating. Moving around the weight of the 2002 Accord coupe I have, the J30A1 feels capable, but inspiring. The transmission has a lot to do with the poor performance of that car.
The J30A1 is a square engine just like the K20A. It can naturally rev higher with its relatively short stroke. The J32A2 shares that same stroke only with 3mm larger pistons in every hole. With other contributing factors the J32A2 pushes out 60 hp more than the K24A2 or J30A1 and over 35 lb-ft of torque over the J30A1 (66 lb-ft total over the K24A2).
I say all of this to say that the K24A2 cannot be justified from a performance standpoint. If lighter weight is what you're after, you're in the wrong chassis. If engine bay room is your goal, I assure you there's plenty of room for a turbo with a manual transmission J-series. If uniqueness is desirable to you, the K24A would certainly do it. However, you're going to be the only one who appreciates it.
Going back to the torque argument, the J35A3 is a drop-in replacement to an automatic J32A2 and requires only a few sensor swaps for the manual engine. If you were to use your current J32A2 camshafts in that engine, you would recover much of the horsepower lost in that engine over the J32A2 while still retaining the torque advantage. You can get one of these engines for under $400 on car-part.com all day long. Add another few hundred in aftermarket headers and maintenance items and you'll be way more happy than a K24A2 could ever make you in this chassis.
If you do decide to go to a K24A2 still, you're going into uncharted waters in terms of mounting the engine up, finding compatible axles, merging harnesses and converting a tach signal.
The following 2 users liked this post by JarrettLauderdale:
mbelliveau (07-20-2015),
wackjum (07-24-2015)
07-20-2015, 11:34 AM
#12
He probably doesn't care about seals if he wants to throw a K24 in it.
OP, I'm not the type of person just to discount things because there are easier options to achieve other alternatives. If you were proposing a difficult way to swap in a K24, and there was a documented easier way, I'd certainly try to sway you toward that, though. However, as you've discovered, no one has done this. There's a reason for this.
I've driven many K24A-powered cars and many J-series powered cars. The torque described in a K24 is relative to other D/B/F/H/K-series engines with shorter strokes. At 99mm, the K24A really does feel like a tree stump-puller in comparison. With a 153mm rod and taller deck than the other Honda engines, it doesn't lose much in terms of rod/stroke ratio either. The only advantage I can see for the K20A over the K24A is the ability to compete in a sub 2000cc class. Aside from that, it's an amazing engine. When equipped with the correct head, a la K24A2.
Enter J-series. Even the lowly J30A1 has nearly 30 lb-ft more torque than the K24A2 at the same horsepower rating. Moving around the weight of the 2002 Accord coupe I have, the J30A1 feels capable, but inspiring. The transmission has a lot to do with the poor performance of that car.
The J30A1 is a square engine just like the K20A. It can naturally rev higher with its relatively short stroke. The J32A2 shares that same stroke only with 3mm larger pistons in every hole. With other contributing factors the J32A2 pushes out 60 hp more than the K24A2 or J30A1 and over 35 lb-ft of torque over the J30A1 (66 lb-ft total over the K24A2).
I say all of this to say that the K24A2 cannot be justified from a performance standpoint. If lighter weight is what you're after, you're in the wrong chassis. If engine bay room is your goal, I assure you there's plenty of room for a turbo with a manual transmission J-series. If uniqueness is desirable to you, the K24A would certainly do it. However, you're going to be the only one who appreciates it.
Going back to the torque argument, the J35A3 is a drop-in replacement to an automatic J32A2 and requires only a few sensor swaps for the manual engine. If you were to use your current J32A2 camshafts in that engine, you would recover much of the horsepower lost in that engine over the J32A2 while still retaining the torque advantage. You can get one of these engines for under $400 on car-part.com all day long. Add another few hundred in aftermarket headers and maintenance items and you'll be way more happy than a K24A2 could ever make you in this chassis.
If you do decide to go to a K24A2 still, you're going into uncharted waters in terms of mounting the engine up, finding compatible axles, merging harnesses and converting a tach signal.
OP, I'm not the type of person just to discount things because there are easier options to achieve other alternatives. If you were proposing a difficult way to swap in a K24, and there was a documented easier way, I'd certainly try to sway you toward that, though. However, as you've discovered, no one has done this. There's a reason for this.
I've driven many K24A-powered cars and many J-series powered cars. The torque described in a K24 is relative to other D/B/F/H/K-series engines with shorter strokes. At 99mm, the K24A really does feel like a tree stump-puller in comparison. With a 153mm rod and taller deck than the other Honda engines, it doesn't lose much in terms of rod/stroke ratio either. The only advantage I can see for the K20A over the K24A is the ability to compete in a sub 2000cc class. Aside from that, it's an amazing engine. When equipped with the correct head, a la K24A2.
Enter J-series. Even the lowly J30A1 has nearly 30 lb-ft more torque than the K24A2 at the same horsepower rating. Moving around the weight of the 2002 Accord coupe I have, the J30A1 feels capable, but inspiring. The transmission has a lot to do with the poor performance of that car.
The J30A1 is a square engine just like the K20A. It can naturally rev higher with its relatively short stroke. The J32A2 shares that same stroke only with 3mm larger pistons in every hole. With other contributing factors the J32A2 pushes out 60 hp more than the K24A2 or J30A1 and over 35 lb-ft of torque over the J30A1 (66 lb-ft total over the K24A2).
I say all of this to say that the K24A2 cannot be justified from a performance standpoint. If lighter weight is what you're after, you're in the wrong chassis. If engine bay room is your goal, I assure you there's plenty of room for a turbo with a manual transmission J-series. If uniqueness is desirable to you, the K24A would certainly do it. However, you're going to be the only one who appreciates it.
Going back to the torque argument, the J35A3 is a drop-in replacement to an automatic J32A2 and requires only a few sensor swaps for the manual engine. If you were to use your current J32A2 camshafts in that engine, you would recover much of the horsepower lost in that engine over the J32A2 while still retaining the torque advantage. You can get one of these engines for under $400 on car-part.com all day long. Add another few hundred in aftermarket headers and maintenance items and you'll be way more happy than a K24A2 could ever make you in this chassis.
If you do decide to go to a K24A2 still, you're going into uncharted waters in terms of mounting the engine up, finding compatible axles, merging harnesses and converting a tach signal.
07-20-2015, 11:48 AM
#13
He probably doesn't care about seals if he wants to throw a K24 in it.
OP, I'm not the type of person just to discount things because there are easier options to achieve other alternatives. If you were proposing a difficult way to swap in a K24, and there was a documented easier way, I'd certainly try to sway you toward that, though. However, as you've discovered, no one has done this. There's a reason for this.
I've driven many K24A-powered cars and many J-series powered cars. The torque described in a K24 is relative to other D/B/F/H/K-series engines with shorter strokes. At 99mm, the K24A really does feel like a tree stump-puller in comparison. With a 153mm rod and taller deck than the other Honda engines, it doesn't lose much in terms of rod/stroke ratio either. The only advantage I can see for the K20A over the K24A is the ability to compete in a sub 2000cc class. Aside from that, it's an amazing engine. When equipped with the correct head, a la K24A2.
Enter J-series. Even the lowly J30A1 has nearly 30 lb-ft more torque than the K24A2 at the same horsepower rating. Moving around the weight of the 2002 Accord coupe I have, the J30A1 feels capable, but inspiring. The transmission has a lot to do with the poor performance of that car.
The J30A1 is a square engine just like the K20A. It can naturally rev higher with its relatively short stroke. The J32A2 shares that same stroke only with 3mm larger pistons in every hole. With other contributing factors the J32A2 pushes out 60 hp more than the K24A2 or J30A1 and over 35 lb-ft of torque over the J30A1 (66 lb-ft total over the K24A2).
I say all of this to say that the K24A2 cannot be justified from a performance standpoint. If lighter weight is what you're after, you're in the wrong chassis. If engine bay room is your goal, I assure you there's plenty of room for a turbo with a manual transmission J-series. If uniqueness is desirable to you, the K24A would certainly do it. However, you're going to be the only one who appreciates it.
Going back to the torque argument, the J35A3 is a drop-in replacement to an automatic J32A2 and requires only a few sensor swaps for the manual engine. If you were to use your current J32A2 camshafts in that engine, you would recover much of the horsepower lost in that engine over the J32A2 while still retaining the torque advantage. You can get one of these engines for under $400 on car-part.com all day long. Add another few hundred in aftermarket headers and maintenance items and you'll be way more happy than a K24A2 could ever make you in this chassis.
If you do decide to go to a K24A2 still, you're going into uncharted waters in terms of mounting the engine up, finding compatible axles, merging harnesses and converting a tach signal.
OP, I'm not the type of person just to discount things because there are easier options to achieve other alternatives. If you were proposing a difficult way to swap in a K24, and there was a documented easier way, I'd certainly try to sway you toward that, though. However, as you've discovered, no one has done this. There's a reason for this.
I've driven many K24A-powered cars and many J-series powered cars. The torque described in a K24 is relative to other D/B/F/H/K-series engines with shorter strokes. At 99mm, the K24A really does feel like a tree stump-puller in comparison. With a 153mm rod and taller deck than the other Honda engines, it doesn't lose much in terms of rod/stroke ratio either. The only advantage I can see for the K20A over the K24A is the ability to compete in a sub 2000cc class. Aside from that, it's an amazing engine. When equipped with the correct head, a la K24A2.
Enter J-series. Even the lowly J30A1 has nearly 30 lb-ft more torque than the K24A2 at the same horsepower rating. Moving around the weight of the 2002 Accord coupe I have, the J30A1 feels capable, but inspiring. The transmission has a lot to do with the poor performance of that car.
The J30A1 is a square engine just like the K20A. It can naturally rev higher with its relatively short stroke. The J32A2 shares that same stroke only with 3mm larger pistons in every hole. With other contributing factors the J32A2 pushes out 60 hp more than the K24A2 or J30A1 and over 35 lb-ft of torque over the J30A1 (66 lb-ft total over the K24A2).
I say all of this to say that the K24A2 cannot be justified from a performance standpoint. If lighter weight is what you're after, you're in the wrong chassis. If engine bay room is your goal, I assure you there's plenty of room for a turbo with a manual transmission J-series. If uniqueness is desirable to you, the K24A would certainly do it. However, you're going to be the only one who appreciates it.
Going back to the torque argument, the J35A3 is a drop-in replacement to an automatic J32A2 and requires only a few sensor swaps for the manual engine. If you were to use your current J32A2 camshafts in that engine, you would recover much of the horsepower lost in that engine over the J32A2 while still retaining the torque advantage. You can get one of these engines for under $400 on car-part.com all day long. Add another few hundred in aftermarket headers and maintenance items and you'll be way more happy than a K24A2 could ever make you in this chassis.
If you do decide to go to a K24A2 still, you're going into uncharted waters in terms of mounting the engine up, finding compatible axles, merging harnesses and converting a tach signal.
You're obviously extremely knowledgeable on these engines, whereas I'm not. I'm just a guy with money who wants to bring his CL-S to life, and if you could give me your opinion on the engine I intend to get that'd be appreciated. It's from a company known as Kmod Performance, I'm not sure if you've heard of them before but it doesn't matter. These are the specs of the engine I intended to buy:
KMOD Stg.3 Crate Engine For Boost: 800whp
Designed for up to 800whp
-K20 VTEC Cylinder Head
-K24a Cyl. Block
- CNC Werx Cylinder Sleeves
- Stage.3 Cams
-RBC Intake
-K-Tuned TB Adapter
-K-Tuned fuel rail
-1100cc Fuel Injectors
-Supertech Springs & titanium retainers
-Cometic head gasket
-ARP head studs
-87.5mm 10.5:1 or 11.0:1 pistons & rings
-BC H-Beam connecting rods
-Honda timing chain & tensioner
-High Performance rod/main bearings
-KMOD K20a2 oil pump & pan **10,000 RPM Rev Limit**
**tuning required*
* Over 800whp
*Precision Torque Plate Honed Cylinders
*Precision CNC Bored cylinders
*Precision checked/set bearing clearances
*Piston to wall clearance set
*Hot-Tanked, Cleaned, & Painted
-Add Shipping Below
**NO CORE CHARGE**
Our price includes the K24 Block & K20 Head
Now the guy I'm discussing things with said that this all looks pretty good, but maybe he didn't take into account that the CL is a heavy car and this, that, and the other thing. If you could shed an opinion on it that would be appreciated, especially since it seems that you know you're stuff to the nth degree.
07-20-2015, 12:38 PM
#14
He probably doesn't care about seals if he wants to throw a K24 in it.
OP, I'm not the type of person just to discount things because there are easier options to achieve other alternatives. If you were proposing a difficult way to swap in a K24, and there was a documented easier way, I'd certainly try to sway you toward that, though. However, as you've discovered, no one has done this. There's a reason for this.
I've driven many K24A-powered cars and many J-series powered cars. The torque described in a K24 is relative to other D/B/F/H/K-series engines with shorter strokes. At 99mm, the K24A really does feel like a tree stump-puller in comparison. With a 153mm rod and taller deck than the other Honda engines, it doesn't lose much in terms of rod/stroke ratio either. The only advantage I can see for the K20A over the K24A is the ability to compete in a sub 2000cc class. Aside from that, it's an amazing engine. When equipped with the correct head, a la K24A2.
Enter J-series. Even the lowly J30A1 has nearly 30 lb-ft more torque than the K24A2 at the same horsepower rating. Moving around the weight of the 2002 Accord coupe I have, the J30A1 feels capable, but inspiring. The transmission has a lot to do with the poor performance of that car.
The J30A1 is a square engine just like the K20A. It can naturally rev higher with its relatively short stroke. The J32A2 shares that same stroke only with 3mm larger pistons in every hole. With other contributing factors the J32A2 pushes out 60 hp more than the K24A2 or J30A1 and over 35 lb-ft of torque over the J30A1 (66 lb-ft total over the K24A2).
I say all of this to say that the K24A2 cannot be justified from a performance standpoint. If lighter weight is what you're after, you're in the wrong chassis. If engine bay room is your goal, I assure you there's plenty of room for a turbo with a manual transmission J-series. If uniqueness is desirable to you, the K24A would certainly do it. However, you're going to be the only one who appreciates it.
Going back to the torque argument, the J35A3 is a drop-in replacement to an automatic J32A2 and requires only a few sensor swaps for the manual engine. If you were to use your current J32A2 camshafts in that engine, you would recover much of the horsepower lost in that engine over the J32A2 while still retaining the torque advantage. You can get one of these engines for under $400 on car-part.com all day long. Add another few hundred in aftermarket headers and maintenance items and you'll be way more happy than a K24A2 could ever make you in this chassis.
If you do decide to go to a K24A2 still, you're going into uncharted waters in terms of mounting the engine up, finding compatible axles, merging harnesses and converting a tach signal.
OP, I'm not the type of person just to discount things because there are easier options to achieve other alternatives. If you were proposing a difficult way to swap in a K24, and there was a documented easier way, I'd certainly try to sway you toward that, though. However, as you've discovered, no one has done this. There's a reason for this.
I've driven many K24A-powered cars and many J-series powered cars. The torque described in a K24 is relative to other D/B/F/H/K-series engines with shorter strokes. At 99mm, the K24A really does feel like a tree stump-puller in comparison. With a 153mm rod and taller deck than the other Honda engines, it doesn't lose much in terms of rod/stroke ratio either. The only advantage I can see for the K20A over the K24A is the ability to compete in a sub 2000cc class. Aside from that, it's an amazing engine. When equipped with the correct head, a la K24A2.
Enter J-series. Even the lowly J30A1 has nearly 30 lb-ft more torque than the K24A2 at the same horsepower rating. Moving around the weight of the 2002 Accord coupe I have, the J30A1 feels capable, but inspiring. The transmission has a lot to do with the poor performance of that car.
The J30A1 is a square engine just like the K20A. It can naturally rev higher with its relatively short stroke. The J32A2 shares that same stroke only with 3mm larger pistons in every hole. With other contributing factors the J32A2 pushes out 60 hp more than the K24A2 or J30A1 and over 35 lb-ft of torque over the J30A1 (66 lb-ft total over the K24A2).
I say all of this to say that the K24A2 cannot be justified from a performance standpoint. If lighter weight is what you're after, you're in the wrong chassis. If engine bay room is your goal, I assure you there's plenty of room for a turbo with a manual transmission J-series. If uniqueness is desirable to you, the K24A would certainly do it. However, you're going to be the only one who appreciates it.
Going back to the torque argument, the J35A3 is a drop-in replacement to an automatic J32A2 and requires only a few sensor swaps for the manual engine. If you were to use your current J32A2 camshafts in that engine, you would recover much of the horsepower lost in that engine over the J32A2 while still retaining the torque advantage. You can get one of these engines for under $400 on car-part.com all day long. Add another few hundred in aftermarket headers and maintenance items and you'll be way more happy than a K24A2 could ever make you in this chassis.
If you do decide to go to a K24A2 still, you're going into uncharted waters in terms of mounting the engine up, finding compatible axles, merging harnesses and converting a tach signal.
07-20-2015, 02:45 PM
#15
My overall opinion is that the J-series is still the answer. The J-series is very light for a V6 and weight savings is not a huge factor when going from the J-series V6 to the K-series engines. For all the money you'd spend paying those guys to give you a crate engine, you could easily build a J37 (or pay to have Paul "NVA-AV6" to do it) to make gobs of power and torque.
However, if I were to put myself in your shoes and heavily consider the K-series, I would still go about it differently. I would get a complete engine and manual transmission from a 2003-2005 Accord (K24A4) and get the fabrication, wiring, mounting and exhaust components done first. This way, you can isolate issues to the swap and get those out of the way before trying to tackle a serious upgrade and all of the headaches that will bring along. You'd much rather discover that the work is too much to overcome when you have a $1200 paperweight in your garage instead of a $9000 paperweight that came in a wrapper.
However, if I were to put myself in your shoes and heavily consider the K-series, I would still go about it differently. I would get a complete engine and manual transmission from a 2003-2005 Accord (K24A4) and get the fabrication, wiring, mounting and exhaust components done first. This way, you can isolate issues to the swap and get those out of the way before trying to tackle a serious upgrade and all of the headaches that will bring along. You'd much rather discover that the work is too much to overcome when you have a $1200 paperweight in your garage instead of a $9000 paperweight that came in a wrapper.
The following users liked this post:
mbelliveau (07-20-2015)
07-20-2015, 03:43 PM
#16
My overall opinion is that the J-series is still the answer. The J-series is very light for a V6 and weight savings is not a huge factor when going from the J-series V6 to the K-series engines. For all the money you'd spend paying those guys to give you a crate engine, you could easily build a J37 (or pay to have Paul "NVA-AV6" to do it) to make gobs of power and torque.
However, if I were to put myself in your shoes and heavily consider the K-series, I would still go about it differently. I would get a complete engine and manual transmission from a 2003-2005 Accord (K24A4) and get the fabrication, wiring, mounting and exhaust components done first. This way, you can isolate issues to the swap and get those out of the way before trying to tackle a serious upgrade and all of the headaches that will bring along. You'd much rather discover that the work is too much to overcome when you have a $1200 paperweight in your garage instead of a $9000 paperweight that came in a wrapper.
However, if I were to put myself in your shoes and heavily consider the K-series, I would still go about it differently. I would get a complete engine and manual transmission from a 2003-2005 Accord (K24A4) and get the fabrication, wiring, mounting and exhaust components done first. This way, you can isolate issues to the swap and get those out of the way before trying to tackle a serious upgrade and all of the headaches that will bring along. You'd much rather discover that the work is too much to overcome when you have a $1200 paperweight in your garage instead of a $9000 paperweight that came in a wrapper.
07-20-2015, 04:06 PM
#17
What I would do is almost certainly not what others would do. However, I'll answer your question.
The "J37" as I'm describing it is actually just nomenclature derived from the J-series community. Actual J37 engines are engines that came from the factory as a 3.7L J-series. What I'm referring to is a 3.2 or 3.5L J-series engine (J32A2, J35A3, etc...) bored and stroked to achieve 3.7L. You can build a 3.7L J-series short block for large amounts of boost with all new parts for around $3000 including the new bearings and machining services. It might be more advisable to retain the J32/J35 bore size to withstand boost, but I feel that discussion is for a different time. The point of my pricing argument is that the J-series is still the more economical option.
Paul is a guy over on the V6P site that has built many J-series engines for customers who have paid to have him do so. I'm not very familiar with the particulars, but apparently his pricing and turnaround time are pretty good. If you don't feel capable of building your own engine (you may lack all of the tools, knowledge or work environment), then he seems to be a great option. He's in Virginia somewhere, but can ship to you without a problem.
As for what I [seem to] know, it's not that I know much more than the next guy. Heck, there are probably one or two guys that regularly post on here that are reading this right now that know much more about J-series engines than I. But they're not responding because your initial posts were outlandish and ungrounded. It's the same reason that those who responded before me didn't feel like giving any more than the assembly line answer of, "It won't work. You're dumb." (Exaggerated, of course.) The way to remedy that is to read. Just stay on here for a while and read. Check out some other similar forums, too. I think what you'll find is that there are better ways of achieving your goals. If not, and at the end of the day you still want to swap a K24A into a 3.2CL, you'll still know quite a bit more about the chassis that you'll need in order to accomplish it. It's not that your idea was horrible-I think it would be cool to have a turbo K24A in an NSX-it just needs to be more refined and weighed against other options.
The "J37" as I'm describing it is actually just nomenclature derived from the J-series community. Actual J37 engines are engines that came from the factory as a 3.7L J-series. What I'm referring to is a 3.2 or 3.5L J-series engine (J32A2, J35A3, etc...) bored and stroked to achieve 3.7L. You can build a 3.7L J-series short block for large amounts of boost with all new parts for around $3000 including the new bearings and machining services. It might be more advisable to retain the J32/J35 bore size to withstand boost, but I feel that discussion is for a different time. The point of my pricing argument is that the J-series is still the more economical option.
Paul is a guy over on the V6P site that has built many J-series engines for customers who have paid to have him do so. I'm not very familiar with the particulars, but apparently his pricing and turnaround time are pretty good. If you don't feel capable of building your own engine (you may lack all of the tools, knowledge or work environment), then he seems to be a great option. He's in Virginia somewhere, but can ship to you without a problem.
As for what I [seem to] know, it's not that I know much more than the next guy. Heck, there are probably one or two guys that regularly post on here that are reading this right now that know much more about J-series engines than I. But they're not responding because your initial posts were outlandish and ungrounded. It's the same reason that those who responded before me didn't feel like giving any more than the assembly line answer of, "It won't work. You're dumb." (Exaggerated, of course.) The way to remedy that is to read. Just stay on here for a while and read. Check out some other similar forums, too. I think what you'll find is that there are better ways of achieving your goals. If not, and at the end of the day you still want to swap a K24A into a 3.2CL, you'll still know quite a bit more about the chassis that you'll need in order to accomplish it. It's not that your idea was horrible-I think it would be cool to have a turbo K24A in an NSX-it just needs to be more refined and weighed against other options.
The following 2 users liked this post by JarrettLauderdale:
Ahmed Nomaw (11-15-2015),
mbelliveau (07-20-2015)
07-20-2015, 04:11 PM
#18
What I would do is almost certainly not what others would do. However, I'll answer your question.
The "J37" as I'm describing it is actually just nomenclature derived from the J-series community. Actual J37 engines are engines that came from the factory as a 3.7L J-series. What I'm referring to is a 3.2 or 3.5L J-series engine (J32A2, J35A3, etc...) bored and stroked to achieve 3.7L. You can build a 3.7L J-series short block for large amounts of boost with all new parts for around $3000 including the new bearings and machining services. It might be more advisable to retain the J32/J35 bore size to withstand boost, but I feel that discussion is for a different time. The point of my pricing argument is that the J-series is still the more economical option.
Paul is a guy over on the V6P site that has built many J-series engines for customers who have paid to have him do so. I'm not very familiar with the particulars, but apparently his pricing and turnaround time are pretty good. If you don't feel capable of building your own engine (you may lack all of the tools, knowledge or work environment), then he seems to be a great option. He's in Virginia somewhere, but can ship to you without a problem.
As for what I [seem to] know, it's not that I know much more than the next guy. Heck, there are probably one or two guys that regularly post on here that are reading this right now that know much more about J-series engines than I. But they're not responding because your initial posts were outlandish and ungrounded. It's the same reason that those who responded before me didn't feel like giving any more than the assembly line answer of, "It won't work. You're dumb." (Exaggerated, of course.) The way to remedy that is to read. Just stay on here for a while and read. Check out some other similar forums, too. I think what you'll find is that there are better ways of achieving your goals. If not, and at the end of the day you still want to swap a K24A into a 3.2CL, you'll still know quite a bit more about the chassis that you'll need in order to accomplish it. It's not that your idea was horrible-I think it would be cool to have a turbo K24A in an NSX-it just needs to be more refined and weighed against other options.
The "J37" as I'm describing it is actually just nomenclature derived from the J-series community. Actual J37 engines are engines that came from the factory as a 3.7L J-series. What I'm referring to is a 3.2 or 3.5L J-series engine (J32A2, J35A3, etc...) bored and stroked to achieve 3.7L. You can build a 3.7L J-series short block for large amounts of boost with all new parts for around $3000 including the new bearings and machining services. It might be more advisable to retain the J32/J35 bore size to withstand boost, but I feel that discussion is for a different time. The point of my pricing argument is that the J-series is still the more economical option.
Paul is a guy over on the V6P site that has built many J-series engines for customers who have paid to have him do so. I'm not very familiar with the particulars, but apparently his pricing and turnaround time are pretty good. If you don't feel capable of building your own engine (you may lack all of the tools, knowledge or work environment), then he seems to be a great option. He's in Virginia somewhere, but can ship to you without a problem.
As for what I [seem to] know, it's not that I know much more than the next guy. Heck, there are probably one or two guys that regularly post on here that are reading this right now that know much more about J-series engines than I. But they're not responding because your initial posts were outlandish and ungrounded. It's the same reason that those who responded before me didn't feel like giving any more than the assembly line answer of, "It won't work. You're dumb." (Exaggerated, of course.) The way to remedy that is to read. Just stay on here for a while and read. Check out some other similar forums, too. I think what you'll find is that there are better ways of achieving your goals. If not, and at the end of the day you still want to swap a K24A into a 3.2CL, you'll still know quite a bit more about the chassis that you'll need in order to accomplish it. It's not that your idea was horrible-I think it would be cool to have a turbo K24A in an NSX-it just needs to be more refined and weighed against other options.
07-20-2015, 04:27 PM
#19
3.5 psi
iTrader: (1)
You could also pay TB Motorworx for the 3.7 Stroker Kits - TB Motorworx of San DiegoTB Motorworx of San Diego
If I had a choice is do a 3.7 with cams, tuned of course.
Or drop a J35a3 in with CLS cams and put in a M90 supercharger (custom made by Paul) with a top mount liquid to air intercooler.
If I had a choice is do a 3.7 with cams, tuned of course.
Or drop a J35a3 in with CLS cams and put in a M90 supercharger (custom made by Paul) with a top mount liquid to air intercooler.
The following users liked this post:
mbelliveau (07-20-2015)
07-20-2015, 04:44 PM
#20
You could also pay TB Motorworx for the 3.7 Stroker Kits - TB Motorworx of San DiegoTB Motorworx of San Diego
If I had a choice is do a 3.7 with cams, tuned of course.
Or drop a J35a3 in with CLS cams and put in a M90 supercharger (custom made by Paul) with a top mount liquid to air intercooler.
If I had a choice is do a 3.7 with cams, tuned of course.
Or drop a J35a3 in with CLS cams and put in a M90 supercharger (custom made by Paul) with a top mount liquid to air intercooler.
07-20-2015, 05:10 PM
#21
The following users liked this post:
mbelliveau (07-20-2015)
07-20-2015, 05:24 PM
#22
For a fwd 400whp probably is sufficient. Too much would probably make the tires spin for a while.. if I could make it into the 500whp range though... that'd be the sweet spot for my satisfaction. Any recommendations? Let's just say there's this 350Z I have a beef with.
07-20-2015, 07:42 PM
#23
Senior Moderator
There is a reason the Civic guys are dropping the J32/35s into the civics (hell they fit nicely into the FITs and miatas too). They dont weigh much more than the 4cyl and make a lot more hp/tq NA. If done right (boost) the J will make more power/tq reliably than the K24.
http://www.j32a.com/index.php?topic=2237
http://www.j32a.com/index.php?board=14.0
http://www.j32a.com/index.php?topic=2237
http://www.j32a.com/index.php?board=14.0
Last edited by fsttyms1; 07-20-2015 at 07:46 PM.
07-20-2015, 07:45 PM
#24
There is a reason the Civic guys are dropping the J32/35s into the civics (hell they fit nicely into the FITs and miatas too). They dont weigh much more than the 4cyl and make a lot more hp/tq NA. If done right (boost) the J will make more power/tq reliably than the K24.
Builds
Builds
07-20-2015, 07:54 PM
#26
07-20-2015, 08:15 PM
#28
07-21-2015, 10:02 AM
#29
What I would do is almost certainly not what others would do. However, I'll answer your question.
The "J37" as I'm describing it is actually just nomenclature derived from the J-series community. Actual J37 engines are engines that came from the factory as a 3.7L J-series. What I'm referring to is a 3.2 or 3.5L J-series engine (J32A2, J35A3, etc...) bored and stroked to achieve 3.7L. You can build a 3.7L J-series short block for large amounts of boost with all new parts for around $3000 including the new bearings and machining services. It might be more advisable to retain the J32/J35 bore size to withstand boost, but I feel that discussion is for a different time. The point of my pricing argument is that the J-series is still the more economical option.
Paul is a guy over on the V6P site that has built many J-series engines for customers who have paid to have him do so. I'm not very familiar with the particulars, but apparently his pricing and turnaround time are pretty good. If you don't feel capable of building your own engine (you may lack all of the tools, knowledge or work environment), then he seems to be a great option. He's in Virginia somewhere, but can ship to you without a problem.
As for what I [seem to] know, it's not that I know much more than the next guy. Heck, there are probably one or two guys that regularly post on here that are reading this right now that know much more about J-series engines than I. But they're not responding because your initial posts were outlandish and ungrounded. It's the same reason that those who responded before me didn't feel like giving any more than the assembly line answer of, "It won't work. You're dumb." (Exaggerated, of course.) The way to remedy that is to read. Just stay on here for a while and read. Check out some other similar forums, too. I think what you'll find is that there are better ways of achieving your goals. If not, and at the end of the day you still want to swap a K24A into a 3.2CL, you'll still know quite a bit more about the chassis that you'll need in order to accomplish it. It's not that your idea was horrible-I think it would be cool to have a turbo K24A in an NSX-it just needs to be more refined and weighed against other options.
The "J37" as I'm describing it is actually just nomenclature derived from the J-series community. Actual J37 engines are engines that came from the factory as a 3.7L J-series. What I'm referring to is a 3.2 or 3.5L J-series engine (J32A2, J35A3, etc...) bored and stroked to achieve 3.7L. You can build a 3.7L J-series short block for large amounts of boost with all new parts for around $3000 including the new bearings and machining services. It might be more advisable to retain the J32/J35 bore size to withstand boost, but I feel that discussion is for a different time. The point of my pricing argument is that the J-series is still the more economical option.
Paul is a guy over on the V6P site that has built many J-series engines for customers who have paid to have him do so. I'm not very familiar with the particulars, but apparently his pricing and turnaround time are pretty good. If you don't feel capable of building your own engine (you may lack all of the tools, knowledge or work environment), then he seems to be a great option. He's in Virginia somewhere, but can ship to you without a problem.
As for what I [seem to] know, it's not that I know much more than the next guy. Heck, there are probably one or two guys that regularly post on here that are reading this right now that know much more about J-series engines than I. But they're not responding because your initial posts were outlandish and ungrounded. It's the same reason that those who responded before me didn't feel like giving any more than the assembly line answer of, "It won't work. You're dumb." (Exaggerated, of course.) The way to remedy that is to read. Just stay on here for a while and read. Check out some other similar forums, too. I think what you'll find is that there are better ways of achieving your goals. If not, and at the end of the day you still want to swap a K24A into a 3.2CL, you'll still know quite a bit more about the chassis that you'll need in order to accomplish it. It's not that your idea was horrible-I think it would be cool to have a turbo K24A in an NSX-it just needs to be more refined and weighed against other options.
07-22-2015, 09:00 AM
#30
Here's a question for all you savvy engineers and enthusiasts: since I'm converting from AT to MT (bla bla bla expensive, not a huge concern) can I theoretically use any transmission on any engine (assuming it's fwd) as long as I get someone to make an adapter with the proper bolt pattern for the engine side to fit with the transmission side? Say for example if I was looking to buy an NSX transmission (just a hypothetical off the top of my head), could I get someone to make it work?
07-22-2015, 10:23 AM
#31
Without entering into the cost or practicality argument at all, not necessarily. But the NSX transmission is one of those that could. Not easily at all, though. I won't go into any of the differences because this is just silly talk.
As long as that transmission turns in the appropriate direction, has a differential that is far enough away from the mainshaft of the transmission that it clears the engine it's bolted to, it can physically fit in the engine bay and can be physically bolted to the block, sure.
I can't help but feeling that these questions of yours are because you think that this section of the Honda/Acura community doesn't quite have it figured out like the rest of the Honda folks do. Are your questions purely out of curiosity? If so, that's fine.
As long as that transmission turns in the appropriate direction, has a differential that is far enough away from the mainshaft of the transmission that it clears the engine it's bolted to, it can physically fit in the engine bay and can be physically bolted to the block, sure.
I can't help but feeling that these questions of yours are because you think that this section of the Honda/Acura community doesn't quite have it figured out like the rest of the Honda folks do. Are your questions purely out of curiosity? If so, that's fine.
The following users liked this post:
mbelliveau (07-22-2015)
07-22-2015, 10:29 AM
#32
3.5 psi
iTrader: (1)
I remember thinjim was selling an adaptor plate he had made to use a Chevy transmission for his rwd setup.
But again, why not use the CL6 trans? The J engines we've been talking about put down more power than the nsx engine. Some nsx guys are swapping to J engines now. I feel like you're trying too hard to be unique. Are you planning on dropping 30k on this car?
But again, why not use the CL6 trans? The J engines we've been talking about put down more power than the nsx engine. Some nsx guys are swapping to J engines now. I feel like you're trying too hard to be unique. Are you planning on dropping 30k on this car?
07-22-2015, 01:11 PM
#33
Without entering into the cost or practicality argument at all, not necessarily. But the NSX transmission is one of those that could. Not easily at all, though. I won't go into any of the differences because this is just silly talk.
As long as that transmission turns in the appropriate direction, has a differential that is far enough away from the mainshaft of the transmission that it clears the engine it's bolted to, it can physically fit in the engine bay and can be physically bolted to the block, sure.
I can't help but feeling that these questions of yours are because you think that this section of the Honda/Acura community doesn't quite have it figured out like the rest of the Honda folks do. Are your questions purely out of curiosity? If so, that's fine.
As long as that transmission turns in the appropriate direction, has a differential that is far enough away from the mainshaft of the transmission that it clears the engine it's bolted to, it can physically fit in the engine bay and can be physically bolted to the block, sure.
I can't help but feeling that these questions of yours are because you think that this section of the Honda/Acura community doesn't quite have it figured out like the rest of the Honda folks do. Are your questions purely out of curiosity? If so, that's fine.
07-22-2015, 01:12 PM
#34
I remember thinjim was selling an adaptor plate he had made to use a Chevy transmission for his rwd setup.
But again, why not use the CL6 trans? The J engines we've been talking about put down more power than the nsx engine. Some nsx guys are swapping to J engines now. I feel like you're trying too hard to be unique. Are you planning on dropping 30k on this car?
But again, why not use the CL6 trans? The J engines we've been talking about put down more power than the nsx engine. Some nsx guys are swapping to J engines now. I feel like you're trying too hard to be unique. Are you planning on dropping 30k on this car?
07-22-2015, 02:36 PM
#35
3.5 psi
iTrader: (1)
They are one of the best manuals from honda. You'll need an upgraded clutch obviously, but those are available. But it depends on your goal. Unless you're building a 1/4 mile dragster I would stick with the CL trans. Throw in a TB Motorworx final drive.
It's not brand loyalty, it's just that changing to some other brands transmission doesn't gain you anything. Unless or course you're going rwd like thinjim's drag car.
It's not brand loyalty, it's just that changing to some other brands transmission doesn't gain you anything. Unless or course you're going rwd like thinjim's drag car.
07-22-2015, 02:51 PM
#36
They are one of the best manuals from honda. You'll need an upgraded clutch obviously, but those are available. But it depends on your goal. Unless you're building a 1/4 mile dragster I would stick with the CL trans. Throw in a TB Motorworx final drive.
It's not brand loyalty, it's just that changing to some other brands transmission doesn't gain you anything. Unless or course you're going rwd like thinjim's drag car.
It's not brand loyalty, it's just that changing to some other brands transmission doesn't gain you anything. Unless or course you're going rwd like thinjim's drag car.
