J32,J35,J36, it doesn't matter they all end up with the same piston height in the block so the final compression of the piston will be the same.

 

So the rod length changes??

 

Yes, the rods are shorter the longer the overall stroke so that the pin to dome distance is the same for all J pistons, you just have to match the rods with the crank based on stroke.

 

I wonder if it would be beneficial since Bert is going with aftermarket rods and pistons anyway to use the J32 rod length as long as it doesn't push the pin too high?

The issue I have is even if a shorter rod is used to bring the piston to the same place at TDC, the compression is still going to be higher.

 

decisions decisions. The shorter rods for the J35/37 crank will bump the compression to somewhere between 9.5-10:1 with the already built 9:1 pistons for the J32 crank

I know pauter has the rod specs for the J32 but they want an oem rod to be sure so we are sending them one today. Plus they said that they are not busy right now so a new set of j32 rods should only take 2-3 weeks. They bhave the 35/37 rods on the shelf now. So I should have several days to decide if I want to use the 35/37 crank

Using the 35/37 crank is certainly enticing to say the least but for now i think Im going to stay with the J32 crank unless you guys can convince me that it is nothing but a beneficial mod to do.

 

I would hate to be the one making this decision. On one hand, extra displacement is always a good thing. Better spool means better drivability and more low end. This is the exact reason I went with a 4.2L over the 3.8L. I can make all the power I want with the 3.8L but the drivability is so much better with the extra displacement.

You can always send the pistons back maybe. If you end up getting some for the longer stroke, a skirt coating is not a bad idea since you will be side loading them more. If possible, keep the J32 rod length and compensate with the piston to reduce side loading.

Edit: Just saw that Paul recommended the skirt coating lol.

 

Do it!

For the same cost you can UP your displacement, so it's a no brainer to me. I do remember paul saying he put in oil squirters from the same j35 block to keep cylinder temps down and reduce detonation...might want to look into that either way.

 

Hi, I have been a lurker and finally joined the site. When I was doing research on J stuff (on several forums) - most of the informative posts I remember reading seemed to be yours... So I figured I would ask;

How much timing at 13PSI and peak torque you were running? And what fuel?

Its good to hear these motors can take 10 all day... Wondering at what psi my 5 speed auto will fail?

I'm running the AEM standalone and would love to know how much timing people are getting away with on these motors. I ran out of warm weather and only tuned to 6 psi... I had to come up with a controller to run the auto trans so that wasted most of the summer lol.

Thanks in advance.

 

How much peak torque are putting to your 5 speed auto (5AT)?

Have you seen this thread yet ?
Racing ATF (click here)

 

The thing is boost level is irrelevant when determining what the internals and trans will hold as I think Inaccurate was eluding to. 5 psi from an intercooled turbo will make more power than 5 psi from a non intercooled roots blower. The turbo comes in earlier in the rpm range increasing torque even more. Torque is what determines when the trans will let go.

Read up on racing atf and pressure switches. With these two things taken care of the trans will take anything you can throw at it.

 

I am up to speed on issues like boost from a turbo vs boost from a blower etc... I was merely asking to get some point of a reference since it seems there are so few people pushing these cars.

The pressure switches arent even hooked up on my car. I picked up my trans from a junkyard, rebuilt it, and ran type f in it since then.

I want to go 10's on a Honda 5at and figured it would take more then 2 switches and a fluid change to get me there. Granted the car is lighter so that will make things easier on the trans, but I think the stock ECU (poor info from bad switches, horrible oem fluid, soft programming from Honda, etc.) is what gives the trans a bad name... So I just made my own controller...

Since Im still new to the site and reading to catch up, can I ask who has pushed the 5at the hardest? How much torque at the wheels, full weight car, and on slicks? What did it run at the track?

 

I'm sure Bert will be here shortly but I believe he was pushing over 400hp and right around 400lbs at the wheels nearly full weight.

I don't know what your car weighs but I'm guessing 1000lbs less than a tl. 400hp should get you close to the 10s and at that weight the trans won't break a sweat.

I fully agree that the electronics and the fluid are what gave the 5at its bad rep. People have never had problems with breaking them, they just didn't have the clutch holding capacity needed.

I might be wrong but I think the only unknown is what it will do on tire. We know it can take full power as it does in the higher gears but who knows what the final drive will do when you lay down a 1.5 60'.

 

I wish I could pull off a 1.5! haha. With an hx35 at 5.5 psi and 24.5x8-15 slicks on a poorly prepped track - I was running 11.8 @ 115 with high 1.8 60's. The next week (last week the track was open) I switched to a Borgwarner S372 (way too big, had it and wanted to try it) along with 24.5x9-13 slicks with a sticky track. I could only get 2.3 ish psi at the line (didnt see 5.5 till 6k in 1st) and the car went 11.6 @ 117 with 1.81 60'.

4th gear goes in very soft. How is everyone elses 4th? I'm going to do an ignition cut to try to make it easier on the trans.

Here is on the HX35
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oGpvqZJFhY

You can see the flaring between shifts and 4th being soft...

Here is on the S372
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhOPU...eature=related

Sorry again, not trying to threadjack.

To get back on topic, can anyone confirm if J32a2 rods are stronger than the J35s?

Also, If anyone has a aftermarket rod/piston in a the longer 3.5 stroke how high are you revving?

 

Building boost off the line must be sweet. Hopefully we can rectify this issue with the new standalone from JandR

Mhassett, so your experiencing the dreaded 2nd gear issue too. After reading your post and eliminating several factors, I guess it seems that the cause is the rpms climbing too fast or we are experiencing some wheel spin in the upper rpm range of 2nd gear. The ecu gets puzzled and protects itself by not shifting. SS mode cured this problem for me but its very annoying.

Taken from your post on the tranny thread

"If you floored it from a dead stop (street tires) it would spin through 1st shift into second correctly pull through second and bounce off the rev limiter. As soon as you back off the throttle say halfway it would then shift into third. As soon as third hits you could go back to full throttle and it would shift fine into 4th. Everytime."

My car is EXACTLY the same way

The snappy shifts of the auto are really nice but when using ss mode they are clearly not as quick. The only good thing about ss mode is that you can bring the rpms higher then in auto mode which is great for the 3-4 shift. Im guessing with the aem ecu you can set your shift points so that doesnt really matter to you.

my last dyno had me around 410whp and 335wtq at 10psi. I normally see high 11psi on the street so the numbers were a little higher and the trans is holding up fine. My car is at full weight (3900lbs probably) and on street tires

 

The AEM standalone for the J-series cannot control a transmission. Wish it could. For now Im stuck using my box.

Again, dont take it wrong, but I am relieved to hear that someone is having the same problem as I did. A few people (like 2 or 3) have done a J series automatic swap in a civic/integra etc. Yet nobody else has ran them at the track nor will they admit to having/not having the hang issue.

SS mode on my car still wouldn't NOT let me shift out of 2nd at full throttle. Maybe its just something in the older ECU that was stopping me (tried an 02 type-s and 01 base). Glad you atleast have SS mode working to let you enjoy the car.

You made 410/335 - what kind of dyno was that on? I think those are great numbers and don't think people realize how much power the auto soaks up. Are you using the FIC? I tried it and couldnt get timing to work... got mad and sprung for the standalone, and love it!

Also, if you are on a piggyback - When I briefly tried the FIC, I noticed that the LTFT's were quickly building a large negative percent. Its a bunch of crap how you have to intercept and modify the o2 signal to prevent this.

Do you remember how much timing you were running at peak torque and 10-11 psi? And what gas?

Good to hear your trans is holding up - have you ran slicks yet? Mine is holding up with them but the car is light so that might be getting me by for now.

This is what I built to run the trans.

 

the 2nd gen ECU automatically shifts into 2nd from first gear. the SS mode was unable to control this. only the 99 tl could control the 1-2 shift

 

Here is the post of Bert's dyno pull (click here).

Here is a post (click here) that shows Bert's timing. I do not recall what his boost (psi) level was when he logged this timing data.

 

This was on a dynojet. I do agree the auto eats a lot of power. Hard to put a number on it but at least 20%

Yes Im using the FIC. The timing map is basically blank and all values are left at zero. The stock ecu pulls timing under boost

The ltft's will get to -20 after a few days of daily driving (40 miles/day). I think the major reason for this was b.c of the crushed fuel pressure regulator. So much extra fuel was being dumped into the motor the ecu had to do its best to try and correct it.

When I was datalogging, I was typically seeing around 14-15° under wot on 93 pump with a decent shot of pure meth (500ml/min)

on the 3rd gen if you put the shifter into "L" you will need manually shift into ss or D if you want to come out of 1st gear

 

Hey Bert, when the fuel trim goes into the negative after lots of easy driving does it still hit the same af under spool and wot? I know some lock on to the last LT value which would mean a lean condition under power.

 

Yeah, thats exactly it (I think). As tps rises and the ECU goes into open loop it will use both stft and ltft fuel modifiers to calculate injector duty cycle.

Thats also bad because the FIC would be confused also. The FIC reads the ECU duty cycle, looks at its table (map vs rpm) that you tuned, then applies that percent and drives the injectors. So if the stft and ltft's are modifying the ECU's duty out by that percent, that percent is passed to the FIC and ultimately the injectors.

The stock ecu really shouldnt pull timing under boost. Timing is calculated from a lookup table of MAP vs RPM with modifiers for ECT and IAT. As the MAP value goes past .5 psi you go off the table - and the value in that last column is whats used. The only way I could see it pulling timing is from the IAT's rising OR knock retard. I'm not good with illustrations but...

Its a fuel table from a Hondata s300 B16 map, but timing is set up the same way. Red line would be actual conditions, Blue is the ECU doing what it can with the data Honda gave it. Car floored from an idle, turbo spools around 4500...

Why crush the fuel pressure regulator and jack up the rail pressure when you can make precise fuel changes with the FIC?

Does the oem regulator not function as a 1:1 when boost referenced? I'm pretty sure the Civic ones do. I'm running an aeromotive one that does, so base is 45 and at 5 psi of boost rail pressure increases to 50 so the injectors "see" 45 psi across them.

What injectors are you running? 450's? 550's? Your target a/f at 10psi?

I guess I am kind of picky about the fuel trims. I think even 10 percent is pushing it. I've noticed on some car's I have dyno tuned that a 10 percent change can mean going from 13:1 a/f to 14:1 a/f.

Obviously though, your car is running great and making great numbers so its working. I'm just throwing out info to discuss.

 

Yes it does. Like I said before, ltft's would go to -20 after a few days. Only way to bring them back to zero was to reset the battery. I went 2-3 months without resetting the battery and the a/f was always within range (10.8-12.0)

Here is my map table (always the same)



here is one of my fuel tables. this would bring the a/f into the high 11's but that was with meth also



As you can see the only adjustments were coming from the fuel map. Not the best way but it worked. A crushed fpr is obviously what caused the huge negative values with the fuel trims. You can see how much longer the injectors needed to be open for with those double digit percentage increases in the fuel map. The stock fuel system was getting maxed out and couldnt handle the job anymore. If i took the meth away I would easily see a full point increase in a/f

Honestly Im not sure about this one. Rodney needs to answer this one.

I believe the reason to crush the fpr is so there will always be adequate pressure under any condition. Better rich then lean. The fic is a good tool but not a great tool.

Not sure

Rdx injectors 440cc. Target a/f has always been 11.0-12.0

It was running great until I lost compression in cylinder 6. Possibly a cracked ringland. We are doing a rebuild with 9:1 wiesco pistons, pauter rods, bosch inline and fpr, walbro with custom fuel rails for a return setup and ofcourse the new standalone ecu

 

RDX injectors are 410CC.

I am in the process of testing and writing up the procedures for wiring and setting the FIC for closed loop fuel adjustment, I have been sucessfully running it now for about 3 months.

 

I know this is a bit off topic but that car should have 550cc injectors minimum if it's going to be run without a large shot of methanol as a supplemental fuel. 410cc would be roughly 380hp at the flywheel safely.

 

^^ great accomplishment..

I know you have been testing vigerously to ensure its productivity. keep us posted. looking forward for the write up...

 

my last post was directed at nva-av6 prior post.

@ IHC: i believe most(not all) of the fi guys are running meth.( as far as turbo i think hi speed and libert both are) I recall libert was not sure if the fic could pull back enough fuel for that large of an injector for a proper idle. 410 was thought tho be the "max" and still allow for a smooth idle. Not 100% sure but hopefully some one else can give there input. also, i think at his last dyno of 400+ I believe the injectors were at 74%.. so they really werent near max capacity..

 

The question becomes do you want meth to become a necessity or do you want it as a luxury. Using it as a supplemental fuel if something fails and the meth does not spray you're breaking something. I run it this way but many people do not like it.

Just plugged the injector size/hp numbers into two different calculators and both state a minimum of 530cc for 400hp at the crank. That's with a .6 bsfc and 43lbs of static fuel pressure.

Just tried it with a lower .55 bsfc since it's "lightly" turbocharged with a super high compresion ratio and with a 90% dc you could stretch out 400 crank hp.

Now with a combo of the meth plus the crushed FPR and a higher than 80% dc 400whp is possible but you're really into the danger zone.

 

The turbo kit still crushes the FPR like the S.C? Why not get a aero fuel regulator and bypass that stock pump?

 

Awesome news man. Looking forward to it!

 

Agreed. Aftermarket regulators are cheap but I've never looked into returnless system before.

I didn't think the turbo kit came with the crushed regulator. Bert would have to answer where it came from.

 

http://www.rceng.com/technical.aspx

^^ heres a site I used in the past.

I just tried it with the "specs" you listed and got a recommended 430cc. Either way thats still more that the rdx 410cc. Women lie, men lie, numbers dont..lol. this is indeed something to be looked into with a more concentrated focus.

I agree as having the meth as a luxury rather than a necessity. Hoping that the meth is always funtioning properly will be a great worry. having it fail during a run and cause hell would not be something to be comfortable with.

I also dont like the idea of just running a crushed fpr. With all things being adressed we should also be in search of a external fpr. No reason to overlook this.

 

I completely agree, fpr should be aftermarket and not crushed. We used to do that back in '95. One of the many problems was that fuel pressure has a pretty good variance and there were a few mechanical failures of the stock Bosch regulators.

I used that site too. What bsfc did you use? If you used a .5 that might be why it showed only 430cc. But again, I might be a little off with the TL's 11:1 compression. I'm sure it has a lower figure than your typical 8:1 25psi turbo motor at .65bsfc. .5 might be fairly accurate.

 

The reason for your huge negative fuel trims is most likely because you didn't rescale the injectors in the NA part of the table. Your car (when not in boost) was basically like taking a stock Tl and putting 410cc injectors in without rescaling them. I see you pulled 15% on the map sensor table which probably helped a little. To back up my theory, my FIC tune had -39% where all your NA "0's" are. Just so happens to be equal to the negative 40% your ecu is trimming to make the car run good when not in boost. I only saw my trims start to go negative when driving the car in boost. I put the injectors in before the turbo to get the car running right with them. With -39 in the NA portion before I put the turbo on, my trims were never above +/- 5. Granted I am using DSM 450's because they are so cheap. But figure since you are have the crushed FPR that probably makes your injectors flow similar to mine...




From looking at your tune, and you saying you run meth, it looks like it is a larger jet and the controller must be progressive? It just seems that if the pump ever failed or lost flow you could have issues. The 2 red arrows show you have the fueling (3500 rpm) at 4.5 psi all the way up to 12 then even less above 12. Progressive meth would smooth out the map I suppose. Your values about 12 psi go to 0, that could be bad also because any little spike over 12 and the FIC will interpolate the values of the "0's" and lean out fast. From 4900 - 5950 if you go from 12 psi to 13.5 psi you lean out by 20%. Just was speculating why the car couldve gone from running fine to breaking a ringland? Maybe it was a spike in that range or maybe the pump output was slowing.

Again, maybe the engine was just getting weak from being run near its limits as far as power... Just constructive feedback...

 

LMAO I was thinking the same thing haha. Crush fpr's on cars, using booster pumps with FMU's ...

Are the 3g J32's FRM blocks? I believe the 2g TL-S are while the J35 blocks were standard iron sleeves? If Wiseco does offer FRM compatible pistons (I think they do) how much more expensive are they?

 

J30's are FRM, J32's are iron sleeves IIRC.

 

Yeehaw! Great work as usual!

 

There's something coming out soon in that area too. Keep checking the J&R site.

 

Pauls had one out for a while now. I will let him talk about it but he basically bypasses the stock pump with a stainless braided N1 line and an aero regulator.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by handsom-hustla
I also dont like the idea of just running a crushed fpr. With all things being adressed we should also be in search of a external fpr. No reason to overlook this.

There's something coming out soon in that area too. Keep checking the J&R site.

@ KNTL ^^ nice. it seems like j & r is going to cover every aspect. Great news to hear and looks like some solid products are coming in..

Pauls had one out for a while now. I will let him talk about it but he basically bypasses the stock pump with a stainless braided N1 line and an aero regulator.

@acktl05 ^^ I am currently running that setup with the b&m regulator. with fi applications it adjusts fuel pressure levels according to the amount of boost.
My only problem with my set up is when I first get into my car I have to turn the key on. let the system cycle through for roughly 30 -45 sec and then turn the key over to start the car. Hoping to solve/adjust the problem soon.

 

I agree that there are many holes in your FIC map. Why would you leave the tables above 12 psi at zero? You know that the FIC interpolates between cells and so even at 12 psi if you started to spike a little your fueling would have gone lean and lead to you cracking a piston. Also on your map you can tell that you rely a lot on the ecu doing the tweaking of the map. The fueling should look very linear increasing with either boost or RPM. You just have HUGE modified area's that "work" per say but are not correct. Also can you post your o2 tables. Even though you make the changes on your map table you must also compensate for the changes in the o2 table or the ECU will continue to just fight you. The FIC is a great tool if in the right hands. Spend some time reading over on the AEM forum for the FIC and you could learn a lot of the ways to "trick" the stock ecu properly.

Other than that I commend you. You are pushing the limit of the car and I hope to join this community soon with a 3.5L build of my own.

 

Hi guy's, I'm a rookie in ACURAZINE. After reading all the comments, mi biggest concern is the tranny! Hondas are know to suffer in the third gear drum (AT Tranny). I already rebuilt my gearbox at 93K, and the transmission was in excellent condition excluding the third gear drum, was shot. Imagine a 500hp TL, better make the tranny out of some hefty stuff! I am still interested in learning more about that a 10psi turbo project!