Weapon R Intake
#1
Weapon R Intake
Just wondering, has anyone tried (or even notice) this intake?
http://www.sromagazine.com/shop/2007...f14bad8d2d4736
http://www.sromagazine.com/shop/2007...f14bad8d2d4736
#4
Flow better but more dirt? Isn't that the case with getting an intake for ANY car, whether turbo or not? How do you know how much power it will or won't give? Factory turboed mazda's gain 20hp from an intake alone, what makes the RDX different? Even you said factory cars run rich, an intake will lean out the mixture some, which in itself increases output.
#5
i doubt the rdx will make 20hp on intake alone. realistically, 10-12 maybe. on evo's some ppl actually lost power by adding intake alone. every car's ECU will act differently to increase flow. that's what I was saying about getting a full turboback along with the intake to maximize extra power to be had in increasing total flow. you are not going to feel any difference with 10hp alone. better to spend that $ on a tune/reflash.
#6
Originally Posted by sfrederiksen
Flow better but more dirt? Isn't that the case with getting an intake for ANY car, whether turbo or not? How do you know how much power it will or won't give? Factory turboed mazda's gain 20hp from an intake alone, what makes the RDX different? Even you said factory cars run rich, an intake will lean out the mixture some, which in itself increases output.
Just wanna let you know adding an intake won't lean out the mixture as the ECU will dump even more fuel to account for more Oxygen.
#7
Originally Posted by datnvan
i doubt the rdx will make 20hp on intake alone. realistically, 10-12 maybe. on evo's some ppl actually lost power by adding intake alone. every car's ECU will act differently to increase flow. that's what I was saying about getting a full turboback along with the intake to maximize extra power to be had in increasing total flow. you are not going to feel any difference with 10hp alone. better to spend that $ on a tune/reflash.
Trending Topics
#8
That's your opinion, I expect
mau: According to cp-e, they designed the MAF sensor plug on the intake to trick the ECU to thinking it's running on a stock box, so that you have gains without running the engine anymore richer than it is.
http://www.cp-e.com/2101.html?open=0
Go there, read the explanation on the mass air sensor for the mazdaspeed 3, then click on teh dyno graph link on the top right. They had a gain of 16hp, to the wheels..
mau: According to cp-e, they designed the MAF sensor plug on the intake to trick the ECU to thinking it's running on a stock box, so that you have gains without running the engine anymore richer than it is.
http://www.cp-e.com/2101.html?open=0
Go there, read the explanation on the mass air sensor for the mazdaspeed 3, then click on teh dyno graph link on the top right. They had a gain of 16hp, to the wheels..
#11
Originally Posted by MMike1981
god i wish we had a catback n downpipe.
Also agree with DatnVan. I believe DatnVan had a modified EVO. I had a 07 GTI with APR Stage II and intake didn't do a whole lot. When I read the CP-E thread, I was actually amazed that they claim 20 HP on the intake. I just didn't remember if it was 20 to the crank or wheels.
#13
Originally Posted by sfrederiksen
an intake will lean out the mixture some, which in itself increases output.
Intakes that are sized differently from stock around the mass air flow sensor can make the car run richer or leaner in all driving conditions.
As the intake performs such a critical role in the determination of the air fuel ratio, any aftermarket intake should be tested in conjunction with the available exhausts (which tend to lean out the mixture) and in particular with the reflash we offer that:
- leans the fuel a little at mid to high load
- advances the ignition
- Advances the cam angle
- and increases the boost.
We have tested the reflash with the Church Automotive exhaust system. It runs a safe air fuel ratio.
No company to date, has an intake for us to test.
#14
My personal take on this is:
More airflow into the engine "generally" makes a little more power, but if it is simply dragging more "warm" air into the engine, it may actually make the engine run less efficiently.
So I would definitely also upgrade the existing intercooler unit to a more efficient one (if one exists in the market, I doubt it). plus slap on a higher throughput cat-back exhaust system.
But if you guys are really serious on improving the engine power performance with these kind of mods, you might as well go the full shabang, and select those pieces carefully to make sure they are compatible with each other (not having one produce the power increase and the other to decrease it). That's why they have dynos to assist in tuning the engines.
Getting aftermarket mods is the easy part, but getting all the different mods to "jive" harmoniously together to generate a tangible increase in performance is another thing.
More airflow into the engine "generally" makes a little more power, but if it is simply dragging more "warm" air into the engine, it may actually make the engine run less efficiently.
So I would definitely also upgrade the existing intercooler unit to a more efficient one (if one exists in the market, I doubt it). plus slap on a higher throughput cat-back exhaust system.
But if you guys are really serious on improving the engine power performance with these kind of mods, you might as well go the full shabang, and select those pieces carefully to make sure they are compatible with each other (not having one produce the power increase and the other to decrease it). That's why they have dynos to assist in tuning the engines.
Getting aftermarket mods is the easy part, but getting all the different mods to "jive" harmoniously together to generate a tangible increase in performance is another thing.
#15
Originally Posted by hondata
A correctly designed intake should actually increase the flow of air into the engine. Engines like the RDX, that use a mass air flow sensor will see the additional air and automatically add the correct fuel to maintain the air fuel ratio. If the intake does not increase the airflow, then it is a waste of money.
Intakes that are sized differently from stock around the mass air flow sensor can make the car run richer or leaner in all driving conditions.
As the intake performs such a critical role in the determination of the air fuel ratio, any aftermarket intake should be tested in conjunction with the available exhausts (which tend to lean out the mixture) and in particular with the reflash we offer that:
- leans the fuel a little at mid to high load
- advances the ignition
- Advances the cam angle
- and increases the boost.
We have tested the reflash with the Church Automotive exhaust system. It runs a safe air fuel ratio.
No company to date, has an intake for us to test.
Intakes that are sized differently from stock around the mass air flow sensor can make the car run richer or leaner in all driving conditions.
As the intake performs such a critical role in the determination of the air fuel ratio, any aftermarket intake should be tested in conjunction with the available exhausts (which tend to lean out the mixture) and in particular with the reflash we offer that:
- leans the fuel a little at mid to high load
- advances the ignition
- Advances the cam angle
- and increases the boost.
We have tested the reflash with the Church Automotive exhaust system. It runs a safe air fuel ratio.
No company to date, has an intake for us to test.
that's what I've been saying the whole time. high quality intake, turboback exhaust (downpipe, test pipe (or free flow cat), and catback) and a reflash/tune will give you safe, reliable, substantial gains in power. if you want to go a bit further, a larger O2 turbo outlet, larger/solid intake/intercooler piping, and larger front mount intercooler (if one exists or can be fabbed). a larger, more free flowing I/C will throw off your A/F ratio so best to get it before your tune.
the good thing about turbo cars is the modding steps are pretty much all the same.
#16
Originally Posted by datnvan
that's what I've been saying the whole time. high quality intake, turboback exhaust (downpipe, test pipe (or free flow cat), and catback) and a reflash/tune will give you safe, reliable, substantial gains in power. if you want to go a bit further, a larger O2 turbo outlet, larger/solid intake/intercooler piping, and larger front mount intercooler (if one exists or can be fabbed). a larger, more free flowing I/C will throw off your A/F ratio so best to get it before your tune.
the good thing about turbo cars is the modding steps are pretty much all the same.
the good thing about turbo cars is the modding steps are pretty much all the same.
Has anyone data logged how quick the OEM IC heat soaks?
#21
Originally Posted by SinCity
Please do. Like OP said, nothing on the Chruch site.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tQCk2ShJ4Ss
#27
Originally Posted by hondata
A correctly designed intake should actually increase the flow of air into the engine. Engines like the RDX, that use a mass air flow sensor will see the additional air and automatically add the correct fuel to maintain the air fuel ratio. If the intake does not increase the airflow, then it is a waste of money.
Intakes that are sized differently from stock around the mass air flow sensor can make the car run richer or leaner in all driving conditions.
NOT...!!!!
Modern day, for at least the past 4-5 years for most marques, engine control systems continuously re-calibrate, "retune" the MAF/IAT signals based on the output signal of the upstream oxygen sensor during idle or during "cruise" with light engine loading.
As the intake performs such a critical role in the determination of the air fuel ratio, any aftermarket intake should be tested in conjunction with the available exhausts (which tend to lean out the mixture) and in particular with the reflash we offer that:
- leans the fuel a little at mid to high load
- advances the ignition
- Advances the cam angle
- and increases the boost.
We have tested the reflash with the Church Automotive exhaust system. It runs a safe air fuel ratio.
No company to date, has an intake for us to test.
Intakes that are sized differently from stock around the mass air flow sensor can make the car run richer or leaner in all driving conditions.
NOT...!!!!
Modern day, for at least the past 4-5 years for most marques, engine control systems continuously re-calibrate, "retune" the MAF/IAT signals based on the output signal of the upstream oxygen sensor during idle or during "cruise" with light engine loading.
As the intake performs such a critical role in the determination of the air fuel ratio, any aftermarket intake should be tested in conjunction with the available exhausts (which tend to lean out the mixture) and in particular with the reflash we offer that:
- leans the fuel a little at mid to high load
- advances the ignition
- Advances the cam angle
- and increases the boost.
We have tested the reflash with the Church Automotive exhaust system. It runs a safe air fuel ratio.
No company to date, has an intake for us to test.
#28
Wrong.
The Hondata post just before this is several weeks old.
Hondata recently posted dyno runs with and without the CP-E intake, with and without the reflash.
I agree that the CP-E intake seems very pricie, given that this CIA is priced at about 50% less than the CP-E.
But I haven't seen any data (i.e. third party dyno runs) to show that this system is comparable.
If CP-E was even close to this pricing, I'd go with the CP-E intake.
The Hondata post just before this is several weeks old.
Hondata recently posted dyno runs with and without the CP-E intake, with and without the reflash.
I agree that the CP-E intake seems very pricie, given that this CIA is priced at about 50% less than the CP-E.
But I haven't seen any data (i.e. third party dyno runs) to show that this system is comparable.
If CP-E was even close to this pricing, I'd go with the CP-E intake.
#29
Originally Posted by john50
Wrong.
The Hondata post just before this is several weeks old.
Hondata recently posted dyno runs with and without the CP-E intake, with and without the reflash.
Yes, but regarding those posted dyno runs Hondata willingly admitted that each time after changing the configuration and prior to each dyno run the engine ECU's previously "learned" parameters were reset, out of necessaty I might add.
So all the dyno runs were done with the factory default parameters loaded into the engine ECU and with no "drive cycles" for which the ECU was to have "learned" any new parameter adjustments needed for the new configuration
I agree that the CP-E intake seems very pricie, given that this CIA is priced at about 50% less than the CP-E.
But I haven't seen any data (i.e. third party dyno runs) to show that this system is comparable.
If CP-E was even close to this pricing, I'd go with the CP-E intake.
The Hondata post just before this is several weeks old.
Hondata recently posted dyno runs with and without the CP-E intake, with and without the reflash.
Yes, but regarding those posted dyno runs Hondata willingly admitted that each time after changing the configuration and prior to each dyno run the engine ECU's previously "learned" parameters were reset, out of necessaty I might add.
So all the dyno runs were done with the factory default parameters loaded into the engine ECU and with no "drive cycles" for which the ECU was to have "learned" any new parameter adjustments needed for the new configuration
I agree that the CP-E intake seems very pricie, given that this CIA is priced at about 50% less than the CP-E.
But I haven't seen any data (i.e. third party dyno runs) to show that this system is comparable.
If CP-E was even close to this pricing, I'd go with the CP-E intake.
#30
Originally Posted by wwest
Bottom line is that the dyno runs were perfectly valid for the comparitive dyno run testing, purposes Hondata stated, but potentially completely invalid for subsequent on the road use.
If you insist upon hiding behind the 'potential' safety blanket, rational logic dictates you cannot deny the reverse would be true - subsequent road use will prove better. Prove it wrong.
Oh.
#31
Not only that, but you take phrases out of context and attempt to drive wedges the size of California redwoods into the perceived faults using your Porsche-driven(?) world-view. It isn't working here, WildWest. Different strokes, you know? I mean, who was it brought up a Miller-cycle engine in this forum? Not to mention more brainstorms from other eras.
What is eating your soul to the point you have to make such displays here? Let it out, be specific, because I'm sure someone here can either help you or knows of someone who could help you.
What is eating your soul to the point you have to make such displays here? Let it out, be specific, because I'm sure someone here can either help you or knows of someone who could help you.
#32
Originally Posted by BleuM&M
Potentially. Remove that word from all your remarks and admit your true thoughts. Now you feel better. Or maybe not so much. Make the rest of us feel better and cite your logic and sources. You haven't and can't because they don't exist except in your misinformed opinions. That's OK, because the world needs Naysayers too.
If you insist upon hiding behind the 'potential' safety blanket, rational logic dictates you cannot deny the reverse would be true - subsequent road use will prove better. Prove it wrong.
Oh.
If you insist upon hiding behind the 'potential' safety blanket, rational logic dictates you cannot deny the reverse would be true - subsequent road use will prove better. Prove it wrong.
Oh.
And by the way most manufactuer's spell out what constitutes a full drive cycle and the reasons for same within their vehicle shop/repair manuals. Toyota, Scion, and Lexus manuals, all models/years are available to review for a fee at techinfo.toyota.com.
RATIONAL thoughts do not need to be proven, right or wrong.
#33
Originally Posted by DanRDX
Will do.... Do you have one...I am sure I am not the only on that is trying to avoid spending $300 for a CPE intake
#34
10 hp is a lot for an intake on a naturally aspirated car. 10 hp on a turbo is possible I guess. What you really want to do for a turbo car is get a new exhaust, as mentioned above. You could get 2x the hp gain from turbo car then a N/A car. Exhaust is the way to go!
#36
Originally Posted by CaSHMeRe
so, did anyone get this intake yet ? i would love to see user opinions ...
Has anyone else tried that.
#37
Originally Posted by DanRDX
If you are referring to the weapon r secret weapon intake, mine is coming next week sometime. I ordered it from JC Whitney b/c they offer free shipping. I wish I had access to a Dyno...On another note if you remove the resonator box, the tube before the air filter box you get to hear more tubro swooshing as well...the car feels like it has a little more pep, but could be mind over matter.
Has anyone else tried that.
Has anyone else tried that.
#38
Originally Posted by CaSHMeRe
what air filter did you go with ?
#39
Originally Posted by datnvan
i doubt the rdx will make 20hp on intake alone. realistically, 10-12 maybe. on evo's some ppl actually lost power by adding intake alone. every car's ECU will act differently to increase flow. that's what I was saying about getting a full turboback along with the intake to maximize extra power to be had in increasing total flow. you are not going to feel any difference with 10hp alone. better to spend that $ on a tune/reflash.
#40
Originally Posted by DanRDX
I got the weapon R intake on Tuesday. But my car was rear-ended on Sunday night. Everything is ok, car is sitting at the body shop waiting to be repaired. So have not installed the intake as yet...stay tuned
That sux....sorry to hear that Dan.