JTso

iTrader: (2)

I was not arguing but simply disagreed with your statement about SRI provides better low end torque. I also disagreed with your statement about all CAI will lose low end torque and mid range. However, I do agree that certain intake design does cause low end loss due to piping dia and length. That's the reason I provided an example on how high air volume at lower rpm can have negative effect on the low end by citing the Honda intake manifold design, which demonstrates the effect. This additonal info was not meant to confuse people.

AEM didn't make a CAI for the TSX doesn't mean anything. What is your point?

If you still believe a SRI has better performance than a CAI for the TSX under the same condition, you might want to verify the result on a dyno with the same car, hood closed and engine fully warmed up. The simple fact that SRI sucks in hot underhood heat which causes the ECU to retard ignition timing can not be ignored. Isn't it the same reason why you are working on the electronics to address the problem? Didn't I provide you with the sensor and wiring diagram info?

Bigtimebooch

Fun post. It's easy to spot the engineer(s) in here....

I don't think he's saying one is better than the other. They both have advantages and disadvantages, however small they may be.

However, a dyno run comparing the two would probably be indistinguishable. We are talking about mods that (when compared to stock) maybe add a few hp here and there. Now compare both mods and we are down to tenths of a hp. You might as well try to weigh yourself down to the nearest gram every hour and then tell me your weight. In other words, the difference between the two is probably well within the uncertainty of the dyno.

gtg710w

good reading, yeah I always thought that those intakes were way overpriced. it's not like they put more than 10 hours into research anyway.

oh btw the reason why they use trumpet like inlet is to reduce loss coefficient. a straight pipe without trumpet (also known as rounding of inlet edge) has about loss coefficient 20 times greater than than of rounded one, this is due to separated flow near open end of pipe. Hence straight pipe is less efficient.

feuss2

iTrader: (1)

You did provide me all the info, and I thank you very much for doing so. I know exactly what to do to address that issue, however, I've gotten the Hondata reflash in the mean time, which does some timing advancements anyway. Whether or not that completely balances out the effects is probably difficult to say. I would be reluctant to trick the ECU into advancing the timing too far for the actual conditions... If anyone wants to see the circuit I was about to test, let me know. It may be appropriate for a car with SRI with no reflash.

aaronng

I have my own opinions too, but I don't think I'll get into this one since I am moving house at the moment.

feuss2

iTrader: (1)

If you have any info to share, that would be great!

vidgamer

How would one add a trumpet to our intake? The stock intake is between the radiator, light, and battery, but I bet if you chop one up you could make something fit.

Or, if you take out the resonator, put one there. It seems to me you could make a budget CAI using the same methodology that feuss2 used for the short ram.

Personally, I'm a bit paranoid about the hydrolock issue, so I'm still using the stock inlet. It's not exactly as cold as air from the fender, I wouldn't think. Anyway, that stock tube gets pretty narrow! I'm sure this isn't ideal...

feuss2

iTrader: (1)

blackthorn

once your car get's moving does air not flow through the engine bay and negate any gains of a "cai" and the ambient temperature is really the main factor in temperature "gains" of horsepower with minimal influence from the surrounding engine temperatures as many "short ram" intake systems have an isolation box to prevent most of the heat from being transfered

just a thought

feuss2

iTrader: (1)

I forgot to mention, the heatshield gasket was in during the dyno run!

Benz_05_TSX

iTrader: (1)

^ hahaha...wow//

CarbonGray Earl

Are you sure about your dynos? I refuse to believe that with a K & N and the gasket make 90+ more hp, nor do I believe a TSX makes 270+ hp at the wheels. Even the CT supercharger doesn't make that at dyno.

JTso

iTrader: (2)

The chart seems strangely unusual. Not to mention the VTEC and upper rpm limit are the same as stock when it's supposed to have the Hondata reflesh. More background info is needed (mods) as well as the type of dyno used and the rest of the dyno info (torque, correction method, a/f ratio. etc.).

jlukja

I also find 270HP at 7K a bit unusual out of a TSX.

feuss2

iTrader: (1)

1.... 2.... 3.... people that don't know a joke when they see one!!!

SeanS627

that was a easy fake to spot

feuss2

iTrader: (1)

was it that the curve is a multiple of the other???

SeanS627

the bends were almost identical, there was no dyno info on the sheet, no base or peak numbers listed, the HP/RPM intervals listed seem to be odd numbers for my memory and i've never seen a dyno printout not advertise the dyno your on

junktionfet

I was playing around with the intake on my TSX the other day. This time I left the stock resonators on, but I decided to give JTso's "stock airbox mod" a try. However, out of curiosity I did a science experiment while it was still completely stock:

This is similar to the same tests I've done on previous turbocharged cars. I drilled a small hole (which I later plugged) in the lid of the airbox and mounted a small barbed fitting. I attached a length of vacuum line to it and ran it inside the car to my vacuum guage. The fitting in the airbox lid was situated so it was not directly in the air stream. Placing it in the air stream could skew the readings because the pressure drop across the fitting would be more prominent. I took the car for a test drive and I never saw the vacuum guage so much as budge, even at maximum RPM.

This proves that the stock airbox, resonators, and air filter aren't "restrictive" at all--or if they are, the restriction they impose would make a nearly immeasurable effect on power. So, aftermarket intake systems for the TSX must simply aid the velocity/"ram" and temperature of the air charge, and that's it. That is probably enough to account for the small boost in power they can provide.

Anyway I took the trusty Dremel tool and shaved many of the ribs in the top and bottom of the airbox, concentrating mainly on those near the airbox inlet at the bottom, the cross brace in the lid, and the ribs near the flared intake port in the lid.

I can't say I feel any difference in power (and I'd be silly to believe I would), but I am confident that the engine is undoubtedly having a little easier time breathing.

Honestly, this has inspired me to build a two-stage intake system using some kind of general purpose electronic butterfly valve. In low RPM mode, the system would be "stock length", but at 4500 RPM or so (high RPM mode), the butterfly valve would actuate and give me a much shorter length.

The assembly would live behind the bumper where the gigantic resonator currently resides. The "low RPM mode" intake point would pretty much be where the stock one is--behind the headlight/in front of the battery. The "high RPM mode" intake point would be about where most "CAI" intakes live--right there in that cavity behind the bumper.

The point would be to maximize torque at low RPM and provide extra water protection whilst driving normally. Only at higher RPM would the shorter length be of any benefit, and I'd never drive hard like that in heavy rain anyway.

aaronng

One of our AUDM Accord Euro owners on our forums has a Defi Vacuum Gauge installed on his car. You can see the vacuum of the intake manifold. What was the scale range of the gauge that you used?

BTW, I have a dyno of my stock 190hp Accord Euro with the enclosed SRI (got 160.3hp), but our dynos here are not comparable to yours in the States/Canada as ours read lower. During the dyno day, a stock Integra Type R (with the same 197hp engine as the RSX-S) pulled 162hp. That's much lower than the dynos in the States, so my reading can't be compared.

JTso

iTrader: (2)

I believe this is the design you are trying to do. Honda has already done it. You might be able to source the parts off a 4th gen Prelude Si/vtec, or other Honda cars with similar design. The design below has two intake tubes. Best of both worlds.



The intake tube design is also used in conjuction of the intake manifold design. Basically, longer path, lower air flow for torque, and shorter path, increased air flow for higher output.

junktionfet

My gauge reads 0 to 30 inches of Mercury. It is fluid-damped gauge with a thick rubber collar for protection from being dropped.

junktionfet

Wow, that's fantastic! I wonder how well it works.

JTso

iTrader: (2)

I did an experiment to test the effectiveness of the stock twin tube by removing everything below the airbox and left the stock intake tube and airbox with a K&N filter untouched. The intake sound was relatively quiet prior to vtec, then it got louder when vtec engaged. Off-the-line torque was also noticeably lower. The test lasted about 30mins and I promptly reinstalled everything back on. The design seems to work relatively well for the stock engine.

If you are looking for a way to engage the valve base on rpm, try the MSD rpm switch.

rmjames007

Does anyone have the model information of the Round K&n Filter that was used in this mod? Thanks

rmjames007

anyone........?

aaronng

Hmm, that's odd. The Defi's gauge reads the same range (the gauge is electronically run through a control box, which accepts an electrical signal from the pressure transducer mounted at the intake manifold.