pofi

Hello guys!
I am interested in installing intake and headers on my 2003 cls (auto) ... I was wondering if any of you had this info since i have never seen it anywhere:

0-60 with i/h/e (or just i or h, or i/h ) <- any info is appreciated!
HP (at crank if possible) with i/h/e (or any other combination of those)

Thanks for any information!
pofi

moomaster_99

0-60....low 6s, at least faster than the g35 and 330...which are rated at low 6 high 5s. And mine is about 227 whp...which translates lets assume 25% drivetrain loss....is close to 300 crank hp.

Nashua_Night_Hawk

Read this.... http://www.geocities.com/gamesmgr/chod/acura/

pofi

thanks...
Yeah, i read the acura-cl faq, and the only info it had was about CAI
(Xephyr performance's CAI Gives the CLS a 6% gain in acceleration (0-60 from 6.7 to 6.3 seconds))
and i figured if CAI can give it a 0-60 boost by .4 seconds, i wondered what headers (which increases the HP by a lot more) would do to the 0-60 time... It seems like it would put it very close to 6?
Does anyone have actual 0-60 times instead of estimates?

Nashua_Night_Hawk

Stock CLS 5-Auto should average 15s. Best Stock CL-S run 14.6s. I ran 14.6s with CAI and sparkplugs.

CLS with Headers, CAI, Exh. ran 14.2s at 99 MPH.
Best Auto with Bolts ran 14.0s at 101 MPH

14.6s in 1/4 means it should do 0-60 in 6.1-6.2s.... happy motoring....

pofi

so what does 14.2 (or 14.0)s in 1/4 mean for the 0-60?
thanks again for info!

pofi

Nashua_Night_Hawk

br>Here's the relationship between 0-60 and 1/4
mile times. This was <b>*NOT* </b>a calculated table. We are dealing with
the real world, here. I went through many magazines and pulled out the
0-60 and 1/4 mile times from road tests. I plotted the times on graph paper,
and the result is a "real life" graph of 0-60 vs 1/4 mile. You can see
that a car with a 0-60 time of 8.0 seconds is predicted to run close to
16 seconds flat. A 12.25 second car, like mine, is predicted to have a
0-60 of 4.0 seconds, although my computer program predicts 3.842. But the
computer knows that I have good slicks (I told it). The "real world curve"
doesn't know about my slicks. Darned close prediction, anyway! <b>: </b>)
<p><img SRC="http://home.earthlink.net/~tmahon281/comp0-60.gif" height=422 width=299>
<br><b>Note that each light line is worth .33 seconds
as you go from left to right, but each light line is only worh .25 seconds
when you go up or down!</b>

Refrence: http://home.earthlink.net/~tmahon281/tech.html

So for my best run:

@ 14.61s, 0-60 would be @ 6.0s.
@ 14.20s, 0-60 would be @ 5.7s.
@ 14.00s, 0-60 would be @ 5.5s.

rondog

iTrader: (1)

Fartman - bartman -moonmaster - cocksmoker
how retarded is he again?

AztecRol

iTrader: (2)

Well at least you got the cocksmoker part right!!!!!

Red Rider

I've had several below 6 second runs, although i used a stopwatch. 3 best were 5.78 5.81 and 5.86. I know it's not exact but close and consistent.

Pull_T

25%!?!?!

That's real high. I'd say 20% max.

Though if I use that math, I get 390 hp WoooHooo....

EricL

My 0..60s are around 5.7sec (60-degrees F), but I also have the light wheels and tires. That 1/4-mile to 60 to 1/4-mile graph is probably usefull when used with new cars and the times are spec'd at +/- .3 second.

That graph gets a bit confused when looking at some SUVs, older muscle cars, and cars with very high HP with terrible CD (and frontal area), and with very, very light cars (less than 2000lbs) with small engines...


As a note, the CLS 0..60 and 1/4 mile times will change dramatically with temperatures from 40F to 100F...

pofi

yeah, i would imagine that after you install headers, they affect the higher portion of the RPM a lot more than the lower portion, and for the 1/4 mile, you get to use that higher portion over 3 gears or so, but for the 0-60 you only get to use it once (and some for 2nd gear)... so it would seem like the 1/4 would improve a lot more than the 0-60, so the 0-60 times would lie on the high side of 5s even though the graph and 1/4 times predict that it would run a 5.5 .... maybe? sorry if that was confusing...

EricL

Not confusing at all.

It’s just my opinion, my I felt like I got more immediate acceleration benefits from the very light wheels and sticky tires than I did from the headers and CAI.

Although, the combinations are synergistic and one of the members with a similar setup runs 14.3 (SSRs/Toyos/CAI/Headers) at 60-70 degrees F in the 1/4 mile and I am pretty sure he was getting 0..60s in the 5.6-5.8 range...

The longer the car sits in the 5k- to 7k-rpm range, the more the headers really help (2nd gear == very satisfying) (3rd gear == excellent) (3rd gear up hills == make my day)...

(My torque converter will actually unlock up hills in 3rd gear to get on to the improved torque peak @ 6+K).

Stuff like the pulleys, lighter wheels, other lightening seems to work over the who rpm range...

REDLINER_RENAMED

I was reading through your estimation of the benefits of the lighter pullies, wheel weight, and gearing to get some methodical calculation of HP from lighter pullies.

Would the same reverse analysis hold true for lighter wheels such that you could calculate the HP gains from using lighter wheels.

Perhaps lighter wheels may be one of the CL's best modifications.

Just a thought.

moomaster_99

To tell you the truth...I don't think our trannys are very efficient....either that or the engine is pretty overrated....which may be true.

moomaster_99

So, how did my name pop up in there shitdog? I just took a quote....