Back from the Dyno ("mystery mod")
Thread Starter
Instructor
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
From: palm beach, fl
Back from the Dyno ("mystery mod")
Well,
Where do I begin....
Ok, first off, the mod on the 3.5L produced only 3-4 HP and 3-4 lbft of torque...very disappointing....this particular car had not been dyno'd before and was down on power overall (239 max peak vs 244-252 AVG) so I will be spending some time going over the recorded data (ECU parameters) to see whats up with this car. This may have skewed the gains if the car has a problem...we'll see.
Now for what most of you care about....
SFLA Type-S, the 3.2 CL-S with H/I/E produced 230.5HP @6700RPM ( no juice ) and 192lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM with a CF of 1.01 SAE and 90F/30.22HG/SL/88% RH
SFLA Type-S w/"mystery mod":
produced 240.1HP @6600RPM ( no juice )
and 203.5lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM.
Most impressive was from 3000-5000RPM, the torque was up 11-17lbft over baseline.
And for those who have to know:
The NOS shot on this car produced (w/mod installed): 282.2HP @ 6200RPM and 248.1lbft of torque (peak) @5000 RPM. This indicates a NOS jet of ~ 45-50HP shot. Bottle pressure @ test was 950 PSI (a bit low).
Note: both cars run on Amoco 93 octane
RAdams will post the Dyno's as soon as he comes to get them from me this afternoon.
J32A1 test runs begin Friday-Monday and I hope to report on Tuesday, 9/4 to the forum.
Where do I begin....
Ok, first off, the mod on the 3.5L produced only 3-4 HP and 3-4 lbft of torque...very disappointing....this particular car had not been dyno'd before and was down on power overall (239 max peak vs 244-252 AVG) so I will be spending some time going over the recorded data (ECU parameters) to see whats up with this car. This may have skewed the gains if the car has a problem...we'll see.
Now for what most of you care about....
SFLA Type-S, the 3.2 CL-S with H/I/E produced 230.5HP @6700RPM ( no juice ) and 192lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM with a CF of 1.01 SAE and 90F/30.22HG/SL/88% RH
SFLA Type-S w/"mystery mod":
produced 240.1HP @6600RPM ( no juice )
and 203.5lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM.
Most impressive was from 3000-5000RPM, the torque was up 11-17lbft over baseline.
And for those who have to know:
The NOS shot on this car produced (w/mod installed): 282.2HP @ 6200RPM and 248.1lbft of torque (peak) @5000 RPM. This indicates a NOS jet of ~ 45-50HP shot. Bottle pressure @ test was 950 PSI (a bit low).
Note: both cars run on Amoco 93 octane
RAdams will post the Dyno's as soon as he comes to get them from me this afternoon.
J32A1 test runs begin Friday-Monday and I hope to report on Tuesday, 9/4 to the forum.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by syncivic:
<STRONG>Well,
Where do I begin....
Ok, first off, the mod on the 3.5L produced only 3-4 HP and 3-4 lbft of torque...very disappointing....this particular car had not been dyno'd before and was down on power overall (239 max peak vs 244-252 AVG) so I will be spending some time going over the recorded data (ECU parameters) to see whats up with this car. This may have skewed the gains if the car has a problem...we'll see.
Now for what most of you care about....
SFLA Type-S, the 3.2 CL-S with H/I/E produced 230.5HP @6700RPM ( no juice ) and 192lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM with a CF of 1.01 SAE and 90F/30.22HG/SL/88% RH
SFLA Type-S w/"mystery mod":
produced 240.1HP @6600RPM ( no juice )
and 203.5lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM.
Most impressive was from 3000-5000RPM, the torque was up 11-17lbft over baseline.
And for those who have to know:
The NOS shot on this car produced (w/mod installed): 282.2HP @ 6200RPM and 248.1lbft of torque (peak) @5000 RPM. This indicates a NOS jet of ~ 45-50HP shot. Bottle pressure @ test was 950 PSI (a bit low).
Note: both cars run on Amoco 93 octane
RAdams will post the Dyno's as soon as he comes to get them from me this afternoon.
J32A1 test runs begin Friday-Monday and I hope to report on Tuesday, 9/4 to the forum.</STRONG>
<STRONG>Well,
Where do I begin....
Ok, first off, the mod on the 3.5L produced only 3-4 HP and 3-4 lbft of torque...very disappointing....this particular car had not been dyno'd before and was down on power overall (239 max peak vs 244-252 AVG) so I will be spending some time going over the recorded data (ECU parameters) to see whats up with this car. This may have skewed the gains if the car has a problem...we'll see.
Now for what most of you care about....
SFLA Type-S, the 3.2 CL-S with H/I/E produced 230.5HP @6700RPM ( no juice ) and 192lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM with a CF of 1.01 SAE and 90F/30.22HG/SL/88% RH
SFLA Type-S w/"mystery mod":
produced 240.1HP @6600RPM ( no juice )
and 203.5lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM.
Most impressive was from 3000-5000RPM, the torque was up 11-17lbft over baseline.
And for those who have to know:
The NOS shot on this car produced (w/mod installed): 282.2HP @ 6200RPM and 248.1lbft of torque (peak) @5000 RPM. This indicates a NOS jet of ~ 45-50HP shot. Bottle pressure @ test was 950 PSI (a bit low).
Note: both cars run on Amoco 93 octane
RAdams will post the Dyno's as soon as he comes to get them from me this afternoon.
J32A1 test runs begin Friday-Monday and I hope to report on Tuesday, 9/4 to the forum.</STRONG>
SynCivic:
Thanks for the quick followup and results.. but the results look very similar to wat most CAI give also... ranted any bump in torque is great (11 Lbs !!) but its still a bit lower then original guesstimates. And the lowest gainz wuz on the 3.5?? I guess if you can fess up what the mod is some time in the future and how easy it is to install to da untrained owner.. it wuld make things mucheasier to debate and review
Trending Topics
Happy CL-S Pilot
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 9,215
Likes: 1
From: Nashua, NH, USA
Originally posted by RedLineTypeS:
<STRONG>
SynCivic:
Thanks for the quick followup and results.. but the results look very similar to wat most CAI give also... ranted any bump in torque is great (11 Lbs !!) but its still a bit lower then original guesstimates. And the lowest gainz wuz on the 3.5?? I guess if you can fess up what the mod is some time in the future and how easy it is to install to da untrained owner.. it wuld make things mucheasier to debate and review</STRONG>
<STRONG>
SynCivic:
Thanks for the quick followup and results.. but the results look very similar to wat most CAI give also... ranted any bump in torque is great (11 Lbs !!) but its still a bit lower then original guesstimates. And the lowest gainz wuz on the 3.5?? I guess if you can fess up what the mod is some time in the future and how easy it is to install to da untrained owner.. it wuld make things mucheasier to debate and review
</STRONG>
RelLine,
Wait till you see the Dynos. Do not rush your judgement.
We Only have the following Performace mods so far for the CLS.
1. CAI
2. Comptech Headers
3. Pulleys
and this mod..
Looking forward to see some dynos and buy one!
Moderator Alumnus
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 37,312
Likes: 337
From: SoCal
I have a question, will the CL-P/TL-P see the same gains as the CL-S/TL-S?
Some mods like Headers & CAI produce more HP in the CL-S/TL-S. Other mods like the Exhaust produce more power in the CL-P/TL-P.
Will you be selling this mod at the SEMA show? I will be there and would like to be one of the first to get this
Some mods like Headers & CAI produce more HP in the CL-S/TL-S. Other mods like the Exhaust produce more power in the CL-P/TL-P.
Will you be selling this mod at the SEMA show? I will be there and would like to be one of the first to get this
Three Wheelin'
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,325
Likes: 0
From: Phoenix, AZ
Originally posted by syncivic:
<STRONG>SFLA Type-S, the 3.2 CL-S with H/I/E produced 230.5HP @6700RPM ( no juice ) and 192lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM with a CF of 1.01 SAE and 90F/30.22HG/SL/88% RH
</STRONG>
<STRONG>SFLA Type-S, the 3.2 CL-S with H/I/E produced 230.5HP @6700RPM ( no juice ) and 192lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM with a CF of 1.01 SAE and 90F/30.22HG/SL/88% RH
</STRONG>
Here we have a CL-S with I/H/E pulling 230.5 but Mike's CL-S with only I/H pulls 236.5?? I know Mike's dyno was at about 72 degrees with less humidity. Is that enough to account for the difference? Would we would expect the car in Florida to pull about 239 if the temperature was about 70 degrees??
Thread Starter
Instructor
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
From: palm beach, fl
Redline,
Are you missing something, this test car had a CAI already installed for its 230HP baseline pull...what kind of gain did you expect? At 240HP, that is ~310 @ crank from a 3.2L or 96.9HP/L normally aspirated. Is this a bad number?
The mod gained 10HP and 11lbft peak, what was expected? At times, the torque gain was more than 17lbft.
Misunderstanding or just not impressed? Let me know.
Are you missing something, this test car had a CAI already installed for its 230HP baseline pull...what kind of gain did you expect? At 240HP, that is ~310 @ crank from a 3.2L or 96.9HP/L normally aspirated. Is this a bad number?
The mod gained 10HP and 11lbft peak, what was expected? At times, the torque gain was more than 17lbft.
Misunderstanding or just not impressed? Let me know.
Three Wheelin'
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,444
Likes: 0
From: Nothern VA
Originally posted by GoldTypeS:
<STRONG>
This may be a stupid question, but does temperature and humidity actually lower the power output of a car? I know cars are slower when it's hot and humid but I don't think I fully understand why. Can someone explain this?
Here we have a CL-S with I/H/E pulling 230.5 but Mike's CL-S with only I/H pulls 236.5?? I know Mike's dyno was at about 72 degrees with less humidity. Is that enough to account for the difference? Would we would expect the car in Florida to pull about 239 if the temperature was about 70 degrees??</STRONG>
<STRONG>
This may be a stupid question, but does temperature and humidity actually lower the power output of a car? I know cars are slower when it's hot and humid but I don't think I fully understand why. Can someone explain this?
Here we have a CL-S with I/H/E pulling 230.5 but Mike's CL-S with only I/H pulls 236.5?? I know Mike's dyno was at about 72 degrees with less humidity. Is that enough to account for the difference? Would we would expect the car in Florida to pull about 239 if the temperature was about 70 degrees??</STRONG>
FvCK KNvCKLE
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,368
Likes: 0
From: Detroit, MI.
Originally posted by GoldTypeS:
<STRONG>
This may be a stupid question, but does temperature and humidity actually lower the power output of a car? I know cars are slower when it's hot and humid but I don't think I fully understand why. Can someone explain this?
Here we have a CL-S with I/H/E pulling 230.5 but Mike's CL-S with only I/H pulls 236.5?? I know Mike's dyno was at about 72 degrees with less humidity. Is that enough to account for the difference? Would we would expect the car in Florida to pull about 239 if the temperature was about 70 degrees??</STRONG>
<STRONG>
This may be a stupid question, but does temperature and humidity actually lower the power output of a car? I know cars are slower when it's hot and humid but I don't think I fully understand why. Can someone explain this?
Here we have a CL-S with I/H/E pulling 230.5 but Mike's CL-S with only I/H pulls 236.5?? I know Mike's dyno was at about 72 degrees with less humidity. Is that enough to account for the difference? Would we would expect the car in Florida to pull about 239 if the temperature was about 70 degrees??</STRONG>
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: Rock Dog ]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by syncivic:
<STRONG>Redline,
Are you missing something, this test car had a CAI already installed for its 230HP baseline pull...what kind of gain did you expect? At 240HP, that is ~310 @ crank from a 3.2L or 96.9HP/L normally aspirated. Is this a bad number?
The mod gained 10HP and 11lbft peak, what was expected? At times, the torque gain was more than 17lbft.
Misunderstanding or just not impressed? Let me know.</STRONG>
<STRONG>Redline,
Are you missing something, this test car had a CAI already installed for its 230HP baseline pull...what kind of gain did you expect? At 240HP, that is ~310 @ crank from a 3.2L or 96.9HP/L normally aspirated. Is this a bad number?
The mod gained 10HP and 11lbft peak, what was expected? At times, the torque gain was more than 17lbft.
Misunderstanding or just not impressed? Let me know.</STRONG>
I was curious that the 3.2 with I/H/E vs 3.5 I/H that the delta peak and avg gain were very diff. and both wre off from your originle #'s .. that was all for $300 ~10 Hp & ~11LB is $30HP/LB not bad at all ! .... just was confused why the gains were so diff... not knowing what the mod is makes it hard to understand the differnece in gain between 3.2 and 3.5 .... Not flaming just wondering
Racer
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
From: NJ
Syncivic,
Should a person without headers and pulleys expect similar results? Cause I only have a CAI and if the results do not vary drastically then I'm definitely going to get this "mystery mod". Please let me know, thank you!!
Should a person without headers and pulleys expect similar results? Cause I only have a CAI and if the results do not vary drastically then I'm definitely going to get this "mystery mod". Please let me know, thank you!!
Senior Moderator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 7,588
Likes: 48
From: Port Richey, FL
Originally posted by syncivic:
<STRONG>SFLA Type-S, the 3.2 CL-S with H/I/E produced 230.5HP @6700RPM ( no juice ) and 192lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM with a CF of 1.01 SAE and 90F/30.22HG/SL/88% RH
SFLA Type-S w/"mystery mod":
produced 240.1HP @6600RPM ( no juice )
and 203.5lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM.
Most impressive was from 3000-5000RPM, the torque was up 11-17lbft over baseline.
</STRONG>
<STRONG>SFLA Type-S, the 3.2 CL-S with H/I/E produced 230.5HP @6700RPM ( no juice ) and 192lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM with a CF of 1.01 SAE and 90F/30.22HG/SL/88% RH
SFLA Type-S w/"mystery mod":
produced 240.1HP @6600RPM ( no juice )
and 203.5lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM.
Most impressive was from 3000-5000RPM, the torque was up 11-17lbft over baseline.
</STRONG>
Professional Pimp
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
From: San Francisco, CA
Originally posted by syncivic:
<STRONG>
SFLA Type-S, the 3.2 CL-S with H/I/E produced 230.5HP @6700RPM ( no juice ) and 192lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM with a CF of 1.01 SAE and 90F/30.22HG/SL/88% RH
SFLA Type-S w/"mystery mod":
produced 240.1HP @6600RPM ( no juice )
and 203.5lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM.
Most impressive was from 3000-5000RPM, the torque was up 11-17lbft over baseline.
</STRONG>
<STRONG>
SFLA Type-S, the 3.2 CL-S with H/I/E produced 230.5HP @6700RPM ( no juice ) and 192lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM with a CF of 1.01 SAE and 90F/30.22HG/SL/88% RH
SFLA Type-S w/"mystery mod":
produced 240.1HP @6600RPM ( no juice )
and 203.5lbft (peak) of torque @5900RPM.
Most impressive was from 3000-5000RPM, the torque was up 11-17lbft over baseline.
</STRONG>
*Hella* isn't a word.
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 0
From: T.W.D.Y.A, CA
Originally posted by Squishy:
<STRONG>
Am I reading this correctly? The car without the H/I/E produces more horsepower at the wheel?
</STRONG>
<STRONG>
Am I reading this correctly? The car without the H/I/E produces more horsepower at the wheel?
</STRONG>
Senior Moderator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 7,588
Likes: 48
From: Port Richey, FL
Originally posted by Squishy:
<STRONG>
Am I reading this correctly? The car without the H/I/E produces more horsepower at the wheel?
</STRONG>
<STRONG>
Am I reading this correctly? The car without the H/I/E produces more horsepower at the wheel?
</STRONG>
Senior Moderator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 7,588
Likes: 48
From: Port Richey, FL
Originally posted by syncivic:
<STRONG> the mod on the 3.5L produced only 3-4 HP and 3-4 lbft of torque...very disappointing....this particular car had not been dyno'd before and was down on power overall (239 max peak vs 244-252 AVG) so I will be spending some time going over the recorded data (ECU parameters) to see whats up with this car. This may have skewed the gains if the car has a problem...we'll see.
</STRONG>
<STRONG> the mod on the 3.5L produced only 3-4 HP and 3-4 lbft of torque...very disappointing....this particular car had not been dyno'd before and was down on power overall (239 max peak vs 244-252 AVG) so I will be spending some time going over the recorded data (ECU parameters) to see whats up with this car. This may have skewed the gains if the car has a problem...we'll see.
</STRONG>
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 27,921
Likes: 1,080
From: where the weather suits my clothes
Originally posted by Squishy:
<STRONG>
Am I reading this correctly? The car without the H/I/E produces more horsepower at the wheel?
</STRONG>
<STRONG>
Am I reading this correctly? The car without the H/I/E produces more horsepower at the wheel?
</STRONG>
I think he just forgot to write I/H/E on the second one.
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: NSXNEXT ]
S/C'd Accord Coming Soon!
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 908
Likes: 0
From: Lafayette, LA | Houston, TX (Weekends)
Woot woot! Thanks for the quick response Doug!
Now how about them dyno's!
P.S. I had my car dyno'd on a hot day when it was 94F with near 100% humidity. When I tried comparing my dyno run to a previous run when the temp was in the 70's, the DynoJet software popped up a big warning that the temperature difference b/w the two runs was extreme and that the runs should not be compared. Even with the SAE correction, it showed a pretty hefty loss of power on the hot day. Probably around 6-7hp.
Now how about them dyno's!
P.S. I had my car dyno'd on a hot day when it was 94F with near 100% humidity. When I tried comparing my dyno run to a previous run when the temp was in the 70's, the DynoJet software popped up a big warning that the temperature difference b/w the two runs was extreme and that the runs should not be compared. Even with the SAE correction, it showed a pretty hefty loss of power on the hot day. Probably around 6-7hp.
Race Director
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 10,296
Likes: 0
Originally posted by CLS16:
<STRONG>Syncivic,
Should a person without headers and pulleys expect similar results? Cause I only have a CAI and if the results do not vary drastically then I'm definitely going to get this "mystery mod". Please let me know, thank you!!</STRONG>
<STRONG>Syncivic,
Should a person without headers and pulleys expect similar results? Cause I only have a CAI and if the results do not vary drastically then I'm definitely going to get this "mystery mod". Please let me know, thank you!!</STRONG>
I only have the CAI...how much gains am i gonna see?
The Creator
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 37,950
Likes: 8
From: Albany, NY
Originally posted by amirsafdari:
<STRONG>i have the same question.
I only have the CAI...how much gains am i gonna see?</STRONG>
<STRONG>i have the same question.
I only have the CAI...how much gains am i gonna see?</STRONG>
You need to DYNO a normal human beings car. :p
Instructor
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
From: Atl, GA
Originally posted by HebrewNational:
<STRONG>This really looks like a great mod, I look forward to it coming out. Wonder where I could get it installed? Does anyone know how open Nally Acura here in Atl is to fixing up cars?</STRONG>
<STRONG>This really looks like a great mod, I look forward to it coming out. Wonder where I could get it installed? Does anyone know how open Nally Acura here in Atl is to fixing up cars?</STRONG>
I dont know how open they'd be to install this mystery mod. But they did install Comptech springs and sway bars for me... you know how they have a "deal" with each other.
i guess you can call one of their service managers and find out 7704224441 (still remember the number, just called yesterday
)
Sold 12/29/04 :-(
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,277
Likes: 0
From: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
You need to DYNO a normal human beings car.
I am a normal human being!
Seriously,
I think the mod will give better results on a lightly modded car as opposed to a car with I/H/E (don't quote me). I will check with Syncivic to be sure.
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: SFLA_Type-S ]
Thread Starter
Instructor
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
From: palm beach, fl
Guys, the dyno posted by RAdams a few days ago was a bone stock 02 TL-S with 170 miles on the clock. The graph shows stock, w/mod, w/mod and CAI. Go back and look at the posting then comment on the "stock" improvement. I think you will be happy.
I hope the J32A1 holds similar promise, we are on pins and needles over this one (much larger market to sell to)
I hope the J32A1 holds similar promise, we are on pins and needles over this one (much larger market to sell to)
Racer
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
From: NJ
Originally posted by syncivic:
<STRONG>Guys, the dyno posted by RAdams a few days ago was a bone stock 02 TL-S with 170 miles on the clock. The graph shows stock, w/mod, w/mod and CAI. Go back and look at the posting then comment on the "stock" improvement. I think you will be happy.
I hope the J32A1 holds similar promise, we are on pins and needles over this one (much larger market to sell to)</STRONG>
<STRONG>Guys, the dyno posted by RAdams a few days ago was a bone stock 02 TL-S with 170 miles on the clock. The graph shows stock, w/mod, w/mod and CAI. Go back and look at the posting then comment on the "stock" improvement. I think you will be happy.
I hope the J32A1 holds similar promise, we are on pins and needles over this one (much larger market to sell to)</STRONG>
Happy CL-S Pilot
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 9,215
Likes: 1
From: Nashua, NH, USA
