Kennedy

iTrader: (2)

I thought I read Comptech blower was manufactured by PAXON not EATON...

It look like an EATON unit though. I can't find a PAXON manufacturer, and PAXTON brand specialize in cetrifugal based SC's.

ussi

iTrader: (1)

you're talking about porting of the head right...not the supercharger...??

Atrain

ussi,

Yes I mean porting the supercharger. I have a ported blower on my 4.6L T-Bird. Allen Superchargers takes an Eaton M90 and adds a "S" port to the housing. You get an Eaton M90S from it.

There are many companies that offer such services for the Eaton blowers. Magnum powers is one of them.

http://www.magnumpowers.com/


Kennedy,

The Comptech kit uses an Eaton M62 positive displacement supercharger which is a hybrid roots design (since the rotors are helical and not straight cut).

Paxton is Vortech and they only make centrifugal superchargers. Eaton is the NUMBER 1 choice for OEM automakers when they supercharge a factory vehicle. It is also used heavily for aftermarket supercharger kits.

A-Train

Atrain

http://www.magnumpowers.com/videos/mp_blwr.avi

I love Eaton blowers!

This is a Magnum Powers ported M112 on a 5.4L Ford Lightning pick-up.

Massive amounts of power and torque with 15-psi of boost.

This is my 1995 4.6L Eaton supercharged T-Bird. Very short video, but you can clearly hear the Eaton M90S yelling and screaming.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dB6cnmqNcV8#GU5U2spHI_4

A-Train

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

I tend to agree with you when you look at whats out there...but for some reason I seem to remember the guy from Comptech actually saying (after they had closed and we were hitting him up for replacement parts and pullies) that the unit was manufactured by Paxton. Not sure why he would say that......cause you right...when you look at it, it does appear to be an eaton. I wish their site was still live...just checked...it is still live....because they use a lot of generic terminology "eaton type" ect but never actually state the mfg of the unit. When I was talking with Comptech and hitting him up for replacement parts and rebuild/refresh kits....he said it would all be good for 80,000 miles under normal use circumstances...and it may need bearings and oil change and such...but that everything was more or less off the shelf parts that any turbo rebuilder would either have in stock or have access to...then he mentioned Paxton as the mfg that made the unit or housings or something like that...I cant remember now. You gotta remember...it wasnt Acura that supercharged this vehicle but Comptech....so it isnt an OEM supercharger really. But again....I tend to agree with you that it looks like a standard eaton unit to me.

Atrain

MichaelBenz,

Paxton/Vortech (same owner) make centrifugal type blowers ONLY. They do not make positive displacement superchargers...PERIOD.

http://www.paxtonauto.com/

Paxton's website clearly shows ONLY centrifugal superchargers.

Comptech used the Eaton M62 blower GEN-IV (that I didn't know until I read the article). GEN-IV is good, but the GEN-V is better.

A-Train

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

Ok...here was my first cold day run in the TL this year with the addition of the high boost pulley compounded with the fact I white-smoked a set of street tires before the run...making it absolutely attrocious! But nonetheless....here it is...click vid below....

Atrain

Most likely why Comptech is out of buisness, they seem to not know what they are telling their customers.

The Comptech Honda S2000 supercharger kit uses a CENTRIFUGAL Paxton supercharger. Centrifugal blowers are NOT P/D blowers. Paxton could never be Eaton and Eaton could never be a Paxton.

The 3.2L Honda/Acura kits are Eaton based using the M62.

I think that should be made a sticky!

A-Train

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

I am not arguing with you man...just saying thats what came out of the mouth of the owner of Comptech when I talked to him. I tend to agree with you.

Atrain

First of all...you never EVER go into the water box when on street tires.

You also never need to heat up the tires if they are not drag radials or slicks. I don't care what people tell you...there is just no way a street tire will hook harder if it is hot. Drag radials and slick are different, they have different compounds.

The fact that you got the front tires all wet but could only clean off one of them means you most likely brought water with you to the starting line.

Not only is that dangerous to you and the next guy...it leaves you with even less traction than before. Sticky tire gooo + your water = no traction.

Other than that...not a bad video. Couldn't see what you ran, but hey...nice burnout.



My 1995 4.6L T-Bird launching hard at Cecil County Dragway MD. This is with Drag Radials and 19-psi of tire pressure. The front tires are stock to allow less rolling resistance. The car went 12.802 @ 109.45 mph on that pass. 4,000 lbs. 4-speed automatic and IRS suspension.

A-Train

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

Yes....I drove around the water box...that was just a smash...and yes...they told me to just turn em over once to knock the rocks off em em and that was about it. That was MY mistake there overheating the tires.....I meant to just turn em but once I had gotten into it...it was too late. Being everything was so cold and I had just cranked on my summer tires...I was a bit suprised now easy they turned in comparison to my soft winter tires I had been driving on and fucked up. Again...my fault there entirely. But no....I drove around the water box there before I lit em up and straightened back out in the lane. Everybody with street tires drives around the water box.

ACTROS

iTrader: (7)

That's right Comptech uses an Eaton MP62 Generation 4 on our TL, the same unit they used on the 2G TL, also CL and Accord, only for our car they used a shorter drive snout!

http://www.magnusonproducts.com/mp62.htm

But when I talked to Nate he told me that the supercharger was made by Paxton, I couldn't believe it man, he was probably thinking of the S2K

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

I was wondering if I was crazy or what...I swore he told me that same thing too.

Atrain

MichaelBenz,

I apologize and stand corrected. You did the right thing then...going around the water box. Just a tad bit more tire roast than needed.

ACTROS,

Thank you...I was one step away from loosing my mind.

Now what you guys need to do is find out how to improve the flow on the unit. It is SO easy to get at too, right on top of the engine bay. Magnuson products (I don't like those guys, but there are authorized by Eaton) overs services.

Check with Jackson Racing as they use the M62 on the Focus kits. The right port job is worth 15 degree lower discharge temps and lots more air flow (not boost).

There is a science to the port job, don't just assume you can use a Dremel tool and make things happen.



A-Train

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

That is an understatement there.....what he is being polite about saying is....JUST A LOT MORE TIRE ROAST THAN NEEDED ON A STREET TIRE! I JUST MEANT TO KNOCK THE ROCKS OFF OF IT AND GOT CARRIED AWAY!

k6biv

Hello:

I just talked to Nate at Comptech 916 933-1080. They are still there and they still have HPB for Gen 3 TL's

Part # 355140

$89.00

Call Nate if you want one..

Tim

ACTROS

iTrader: (7)

Correct, the last time I talked to him, which wasn't so long ago, he told me he had like 37 of them left!

ACTROS

iTrader: (7)

Yep, looks like JR uses our blower type in their Focus SVT kit
http://www.supercharger.com/Shop/Vie...eIndexID=37672
Now how can we benefit from this?

Some interesting reading concerning turbo/super charging and intercooling from JR perspective:
http://www.supercharger.com/CustomerService/Faq.aspx

Jackson Racing has been in business for over 25 years doing high performance Honda/Acura tuning and we speak with some sort of authority on the subject of Turbo vs Supercharged Vs Intercooling. Having built turbo Hondas since 1976, the first turbo/intercooled CRX's in 1984, and having run the first turbo/intercooled Honda at the first Battle of the Imports in 1990, we do have experience with all of the above issues and can speak, without bias, having done so. And, having seen first hand the long term effects of turbochargers on daily driven high compression Honda/Acura engines, we have opted to supercharge the future.

For ease of installation, instant power, and low cost, nitrous is the only way to fly. However, that is if you only want to go drag racing. If you want everyday nitrous type power, you have to go to forced induction. That is where the turbo Vs supercharger debate comes in. For absolute peak power where driveability, turbo lag, emissions, and long engine life does not need to be taken into consideration, turbo is the only way to go. But, with all things in this life, there is no free ride. With a properly designed turbo charger system you have the ability to produce huge amounts of boost and horsepower easily. The problem with that amount of boost is that once the turbo spools, it goes to full boost. There is no linear delivery of boost.

Consequently, if the turbo spools at 3000 rpm, you have full boost at a valve speed that is very slow. So, the turbo has lots of time to create cylinder pressure on the rods and pistons because of the very long time that the valve is open. This, in turn, is what creates that huge rush of power when the turbo spools. This is also what causes so many turbo engine failures. Combine that with the fact that the compressor sits within 2" of a glowing 1300 degree cast iron oven, the charge air temperature is always very high. This has created the myth that anything with forced induction has to be intercooled. If you have checked the intake temperature of any of the late model O.E. manufactured intercooled turbos, at the intake manifold, not the outlet of the intercooler, you will find that the intake air temperature is near 200 degrees, even after the intercooler. As an example, a test by Sport Compact Car on a new model Turbo/intercooled German built car, they found the charge air temperature at the throttle plate to be 206 degrees after the intercooler. You see, the intercooler is a great thing as long as you have steady air flowing over it. If you are doing a lot of starts and stops, the effectiveness of the intercooler is diminished. Secondarily, once the air has been cooled, it has to be routed back to the intake manifold. That means that it has to come back into the hot engine compartment and the tubing re-heats the air. Not a lot mind you, but it still happens. Equally important, you have to fill all of that tubing with boost, then, when you shift and the bypass blows open, it empties the tubing, requiring the tubing to be refilled. This is the main cause of poor throttle response and the classic turbo lag in a intercooled turbo car. Now, keep in mind that this is all a mute point if you are at speed. But, then you have to stop. Once you stop, you have to cool the turbo. And heat, being the heart of the turbo, is also the enemy of the engine. To further the intercooler debate, let us consider the Ford supercharged/intercooled T-Bird and the GM (Buick-Pontiac) supercharged/non intercooled cars.

The Ford uses a 90 c.i. Eaton supercharger with as much as 14 psi and an intercooler. GM uses a 62 c.i Eaton supercharger with 8 psi and no intercooler. GM mounts their supercharger "Hot Rod" style, on top of the intake manifold as close to the intake valves as possible, with no intercooler. GM's approach, it appears, is to run less boost and thereby, less discharge temperature, and mount the supercharger as close to the intake valve as possible for maximum driveability. Ford's approach seems to be to go for the maximum effect with an intercooler. But, to push the charge air all the way out to the grill, through the intercooler, and back to the intake manifold, requires a larger supercharger and large quantity of boost. Thus, the 90 c.i. supercharger on the T-Bird and the 62 c.i. Supercharger on the GM models. In the final analysis, both engines have an identical horsepower reading. I am sure you are asking yourself "How can that be?" It is in the systems efficiency.

The GM system appears to be more efficient overall. Less load from the supercharger, intercooler, and all of the related plumbing equals better throttle response and an overall better driving package. Now, I am not saying that an air to water intercooler, mounted close to the engine would not be a great piece, it is just that in some engine compartments, it is not possible to package it. So, intercooling is fine if the system is not parasitic by design with plumbing running everywhere, and the net effect of the intercooler system in day to day driving, and that is what I am speaking of, is positive.

lookinco

MichaelBenz, since you have the stock boost pulley out, would you be able to measure it and tell me the diameter and the circumfrence of the pulley?

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

Yes I can check tonight....but as I remember...its approx 3.5".

Atrain

First of all...

The 1989-1995 T-Bird with the 3.8L OHV V-6 produced a pathetic 140 HP. The 3.8L T-Bird SC with the Eaton M90 supercharged V-6 (same engine as the N/A car) made 230 HP/330 TQ). 90 HP gain on a conservative tune is a good deal. Plus the SC was just about out of fuel pump so they used 36 lb./hr. injectors on those cars ('94/'95 years only). The 2003-2004 Cobra uses 38 lb./hr. injectors so that just goes to show you.

The reason there is 14-psi of boost is due to the engine only have 6 cylinders to fill. If it were a V-8, I bet you'd only see 8 psi or so. Again...boost is made when you flow air through a restriction.

The T-Bird SC uses an AIR-TO-AIR intercooler which is by far the most efficient set-up you can use with a supercharger or turbocharger.

If you look back at the GM cars that were supercharged back then, they made far less HP and way less torque than the SC did. The intercooler allowed a more aggressive tune vs the non-intercooled GM cars. 1 degree of spark timing is worth 4-5 HP & 8-10 lb.-ft. of torque on a blown application.

The GM cars used the M90 GEN-II blower and then the M90 GEN-III supercharger. Finally, all the late model Pontiac Grand Prix's GTP's (including the '06) use the GEN-V M90. There were only a couple of cars that used the M62, like the front drive Cobalt SS.

I don't know what you are driving at with the last post but be warned that no matter how you compress air...you heat it. This is thermodynamics law and you cannot get around it. The more boost you have, the hotter the air will be and the more power that is required to turn the supercharger.

What you want to do is spin the CRAP out of the supercharger, have little to no boost and lots of air flow. I'd say C*F*M, but this website restricts that word. I don't know why...CUBIC FEET PER MINUTE is a bad word?

Here is what I can tell you about my M90S set-up. The original 10-psi air charge temps after the intercooler (air-to-water) are at 160-170 degrees F. on a 100 degree day. When it is 30 degrees out, I can't get the ACT's over 90 degree F.

The guys who have ported the supercharger with Magnum powers MPIII have seen a reduction in ACT's to 125-135 degrees on a 100 degree Day. Plus the power and torque have gone up. No other changes other than spark timing and fuel were done.

The key is to reduce the vacuum at the inlet side of the supercharger and throttle body. If the vacuum is high, the blower is not going to deliver the best output. This can be measured during a dyno test and graphed next to boost pressure.

Trust me...I've been there and done that.





A-Train

ACTROS

iTrader: (7)

Hey Atrain good argument there, believe me I get it, I'm all for intercooling, low boost and high air flow too! The question is how can we achieve that on the TL. For now it's clear that the 5psi of boost is the most efficient range for our type of blower without changing anything! More boost will be a waste if we don't change it's efficiency!

That article came from JR website, I thought it was worth posting just for the hell of it!

Atrain

The reality is the Eaton M90 hybrid roots blower reaches 65% adiabatic efficiency around 12,000 blower rpm and 4-5 psi of boost. I'm sure the M62 is relative.

The problem occurs when the blower reaches 8-psi and higher blower rpms. At 10-psi it is around 50% adiabatic. 12-psi makes things even worse.

Twin screw superchargers don't work like that. The twin screw design is terrible at low boost levels. The truth is a twin screw is something like 40% adiabatic at
4-5 psi. The reason is how it compresses the air. Eaton superchargers do not compress air in their housings very well. The compression of the air charge occurs between the discharge outlet and the intake plenum or cylinder runners. Think of the hybrid roots Eaton has a paddle.

Twin screws uses augers that twist and compress air between each screw and channel the air from the rear of the case to the discharge. The air is compressed over and over when it does not need to be. This SUPER heats the air and at low boost levels...you have lots of unwanted heat and no air flow.

Things change when the boost goes up. For example the Whipplecharger Lysholm AX3200 reaches 65% adiabatic efficiency at 15-psi of boost. That is serious boost for a V-8 engine. Even higher boost levels don't dramatically effect the efficiency since the air is moving so quickly. There is a point of diminishing returns.

If you want to reach high boost levels (which could be bad for the stock TL engine internals), you need to switch to a twin screw EATON.

Yeap they make twin screws.





R350
R410
R530
R660
R900
R1050
R1320
R1650
R1900
R2300

The units are smaller put they pack a better punch.


"SOUTHFIELD, Mich.--Diversified industrial manufacturer Eaton Corporation today unveiled its newest generation of Roots-type supercharger design that will allow automakers to use smaller, more efficient compressors to create more engine boost. The company unveiled the new design, called Twin Vortices Series (TVS(TM)) at the Specialty Equipment Manufacturers Association (SEMA) tradeshow in Las Vegas.

"We think the TVS(TM) is a game changer that will allow our customers to make more horsepower without the traditional engineering tradeoffs," said Jeff Romig, vice president and general manager of Eaton's supercharger business. "The TVS design has remarkably improved efficiencies and broadens the performance range of the supercharger across an engine's entire performance range."

The new patented TVS(TM) design features four-lobe rotors and high-flow inlet and outlet ports that greatly enhance thermal efficiency, enabling greater volumetric capacity at higher revolutions per minute (RPM). Previous Eaton Roots-type designs featured only three-lobe rotor assemblies. The new TVS(TM) supercharger design is scalable and adaptable to virtually all engine designs.

The TVS(TM) supercharger design builds on Eaton's market leadership position of designing and manufacturing Roots-type superchargers for premiere automotive brands.

The first original equipment application of an Eaton supercharger debuted on the 1989 Ford Thunderbird Super Coupe. Since, Eaton superchargers have appeared on the Buick Park Avenue UltraTM, Buick RegalTM, Pontiac Grand PrixTM, Ford Mustang Cobra SVTTM and the Ford Lightening SVTTM. The current generation of Eaton supercharger is available on the MINI Cooper STM, Jaguar XKRTM, Range Rover SportTM, Cadillac STS-VTM, Cadillac XLR-VTM, Chevrolet Cobalt SSTM, Saturn Ion RedlineTM and the Mustang Shelby GT500TM.

Eaton has development programs underway with several automakers to incorporate the TVS(TM) into future vehicle programs and it is working with its aftermarket partners to make the TVS(TM) technology available to performance enthusiast in 2007.

Eaton Corporation is a diversified industrial manufacturer with 2005 sales of $11.1 billion. Eaton is a global leader in electrical systems and components for power quality, distribution and control; fluid power systems and services for industrial, mobile and aircraft equipment; intelligent truck drivetrain systems for safety and fuel economy; and automotive engine air management systems, powertrain solutions and specialty controls for performance, fuel economy and safety. Eaton has 60,000 employees and sells products to customers in more than 125 countries. For more information, visit www.eaton.com.

Contacts
Eaton Corporation
Jim Parks, 248-226-7191 office
248-890-5899 mobile
Email: jamesparks@eaton.com"



http://www.eatonperformance.com/supe...ideo-clip.html

I hope this helps,

A-Train

PS You still need an intercooler and perhaps forged pistons/ forged connecting rods.

ACTROS

iTrader: (7)

Hmm, twin screws

ACTROS

iTrader: (7)

The Magnuson/Eaton MP62, 4th Generation

Features:

Built in Bypass Valve
S-port Technology
5-10psi of Boost

Specs:

* Displacement: 1.035 Liters
* Max. Outlet Pressure: 2.0 Bar
* Max Speed Cont (inst.): 14,000 (16,000)
* Flow at Max. Speed @ 1.8 Bar: 810 cubic meters / hour

Feel free to correct or add!

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

What I have been noticing about the high boost pulley is this.....it keeps it at 4-5psi more often then not. When the stock size pulley was on it...it ran in vaccum for a while longer before it actually went into boost. With the new pulley....it just goes into boost faster and keeps it more near 5psi most of the time unless you kick it to wide open throttle....at which time it will pop up to 6.5 - 7psi...so basically.....its adding 2 - 2.5# of boost more or less. What I am finding is that where I was going WOT way more....I am "driving" the car more before that happens. It does seem to provide more power (still have to dyno it to find out specifics) or more torque anyway....and it definately seems more responsive. BUT....under normal driving conditions....like when you are just granny driving around....you dont notice anything at all. Highway....seems no real difference. Basically...the car seems to drive similarly to the way it did before under normal driving conditions...but when you step into it...it comes on a bit stronger, faster than it did before....if you can follow me. The base AFR readings on the wideband are 12.7 - 12.8 at idle just and normal cruise speeds just like before....at WOT...they tend to go to 11.0 - 13.5 range...depending on the day and heat under normal circumstances. It does not seem to be running noticably different or being problematic whatsoever...just changed the setup a bit to make the boost a little punchier and more readily available to some degree. Outside of that...the car acts very similarly it what it did before-hand other than the power. Oh...and it sounds a little different at idle too. I little deeper sound that appears to make your eyebrows raise a bit in wonderment like...hmm...sounds a little different. But it does seem to run fine from what I can see. Another thing I can remember noticing....that the shifts or the between shifts seem a bit smoother actually under the high boost pulley situation. Before....at WOT....between gears....at times you would kinda get a medium thwop "jet kinda" sound between gears and now it seems to more seemlessly switch between gears without that sound or lag so much. Kinda more seemlessly goes between gears without the "thwop" and pause so pronounced.

I know much of what is written above is kinda "seat of the pants" and written from a lamens point of view....but that is what I intended to do here. Give my intial impressions and what I have been noticing with this pulley installed and follow up with some dyno tests sometime to verify or debunk what I am feeling. Some of what I am describing...possibly you will be able to "break down" so to speak and know why I am sure. Personally....the more I am driving on this pulley (now it is WAY early in the game here) the more I think it seems like the pulley this supercharger should have had on it all along for the automatics anyway.

lookinco

If anyone knows the size of the stock pulley, please let me know. I am trying to figure out at what speed is the supercharger spinning with the stock pulley.

I know the HBP is 3" so with the engine redline at 6800 the supercharger is spinning at 15069RPM which is pretty close to the MAX as stated on the above post.

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

Oh yes...sorry man...the pulley is sitting out on the table like four feet from me...hang on. BRB with the specifics....ok...got it...sorry for the hold up...had to find a line gauge... (like you actually know how long it took me...lol)...

Yes...it measures 3" across the pulley from belt surface to belt surface.

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

Yes...I just noticed that too...they are damn near the same size. (I can notice small differences from far away...good attention to detail) and now that I look at it....the stock sized pully is just a shade over 3". My guess...the HBP is only like 1/4 inch smaller than the stock one.


OK...from outside edge to outside edge it measures aprox 3-5/16" across. Take off about 1/16 for the ouside lip to belt surface area on each side. So my guess is...the HBP is actually just under 3" at the belt surface area....would have to take it off to get a super accurate measurement...which I am sure one of you has already...so I will report only on the stock pulley on the supercharger. It measures from belt surface to belt surface 3-3/16 inch. And I believe the HBP probably measures a bit under 3" from surface to surface area. Prob more like 2-7/8 inch or something. At any rate...there isnt a HUGE difference in size...which would explain the same belt working on both and the minimal boost gain. It doesnt pop you up to 9# of boost or anything. More like 6.5# - 7# when it was 4.5# + 5# - so basically...a 2# boost give or take.

lookinco

Would you be able to measure the circumfrence of the pulley (the inside part where the belt touches) with a measuring tape? I know I can calculate it from the diameter, but I guess mearusing is more accurate.

Sorry if it's too much trouble. Just trying to get the most accurate info so i could do some better calculations.

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

Yes.....I need to get ahold of one of those tailor cloth measuring tapes though. I think I have one....will check. That actually would be easier to measure given it will yield and accurance measurement. Measuring it across is a bit trickier as there is a lip involved and you are doing a line up eye thing.

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

Ok...found the cloth tape (in the sewing kit...lol) - The OEM supercharger pulley measures exactly 10-3/8" around at the belt surface contact area.

Atrain

Use a vernier caliper to measure the OD.

10-3/8" OD? The largest diameter blower pulley that I have ever seen was 4.5" OD. We called it a Frisbee.

A-Train

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

He asked for a measurement around the outside edge....not the measurement across...hense...having to use a cloth tape measure. If I had a caliper here...I would use it to get the mesurement across...but I dont.

lookinco

Thanks MichaelBenz, that's exactly what I need!

MichaelBenz

iTrader: (2)

Let us know the results of your math when you get it done....interested to know what you get.

ACTROS

iTrader: (7)

Mike thanks for your update on the pulley performance! Good to hear that everything's fine! Now get on the Dyno and impress us with numbers, haha!

Running too rich is a bitch, a lot of fuel is being wasted instead of making power! But the pulley should lean out the fuel a bit, well hopefully! I oped up my exhaust quite a bit, with E-shift cats and j-pipe, so now I have a low boost so I hope HBP will bring it up to 5psi-sweat zone. I'll see about that later this week when I get on the Dyno, I will let you guys know about my findings.

You are saying that the driveability has actually improved, but has surging become more of an issue though?

ACTROS

iTrader: (7)

Lookinco what are you findings?

lookinco

ACTROS, did you have a custom J-pipe made? Did you notice any improvement with the J pipe? What size pipe did you use for your J pipe and exhaust?

ACTROS

iTrader: (7)

The stock J-pipe is very restrictive for our application, for one thing it's all crushed up where it counts. It was primarily optimized for noise and ground clearance! Plus in NA form there isn't enough exhaust flow to warrant a more free flowing and larger pipe design! Nitrotiger lost power when E-shift tried their j-pipe on his car but he was NA back then although he was running their cats.

My pipe is still in a prototype stage but the initial test was amazing! A huge increase, especially in low end torque- low rpm 25 lbs more and about 10 in hp too and the various tq and hp increase continues across the whole rpm range. I'm running a Comptech exhaust with the third cat in tact, they didn't recommend removing it. The size of the pipe is 2.5 I believe, but I'll make sure!

The only obstacle I faced on the Dyno that day was that my car was running rich as hell, low tens across the whole rpm range. Imagine what kind of gains I would have gotten was my car running leaner! The car dumped a lot of fuel, all to waste, the probable reason being that I had IAT sensor relocated into the custom AEM intake. The ECU was probably freaking out faced with intake and exhaust changes! I didn't let it relearn!

I'm going in again, and this time we will hopefully work out all the issues at hand! I'll keep you posted on the progress!