Lessons Learned - Aftermarket Parts
07-02-2009, 09:08 AM
#1
Lessons Learned - Aftermarket Parts
1. The P2R Test Pipe for the CL-S does not come with exhaust gaskets. Buy some.
2. The P2R Test Pipe for the CL-S will run fine, without throwing any CELs, by taking 2 anti-foul adapters, drilling one out on the inside, and screwing it to the other, to build a spacer for the O2 sensor. 200 Miles of hard driving - no CELs.
3. The P2R Throttle Body spacer will require another gasket - it is not included.
4. The P2R Throttle Body spacer will require you to modify your plastic engine cover. As this moves the Throttle Body forward , it also moves the MAP sensor forward, and you will need to dremel out about 3/4 of an inch on your cover for it to fit.
5. The Razco lightweight pulley set does not include a thinner nut to bolt on the top pulley. The stock nut goes back on fine, but does not have but maybe 4 turns of thread to bite on. We painted the remaining threads that were exposed on the factory nut to keep it from backing out.
6. The Clutchmasters clutch and flywheel set includes the AASCO flywheel, a sturdier disc (all are sturdier in all stages) and a much heavier than stock pressure plate. Total Weight loss on the driveline with the stage 1 kit was 32lbs.
7. The Razco crank pulley removes 6.4lbs approximately from the driveline.
8. The Clutchmasters clutch pedal is very short.
9. The combination of a lightened flywheel, crank pulley, intake, headers, spacers, and test pipe builds a very noticeable amount of power above 4000RPM, but loses some power down low.
10. The lightened driveline / test pipe make tooling around under 20mph a bit lurchy and more difficult, particularly with an agressive pressure plate.
2. The P2R Test Pipe for the CL-S will run fine, without throwing any CELs, by taking 2 anti-foul adapters, drilling one out on the inside, and screwing it to the other, to build a spacer for the O2 sensor. 200 Miles of hard driving - no CELs.
3. The P2R Throttle Body spacer will require another gasket - it is not included.
4. The P2R Throttle Body spacer will require you to modify your plastic engine cover. As this moves the Throttle Body forward , it also moves the MAP sensor forward, and you will need to dremel out about 3/4 of an inch on your cover for it to fit.
5. The Razco lightweight pulley set does not include a thinner nut to bolt on the top pulley. The stock nut goes back on fine, but does not have but maybe 4 turns of thread to bite on. We painted the remaining threads that were exposed on the factory nut to keep it from backing out.
6. The Clutchmasters clutch and flywheel set includes the AASCO flywheel, a sturdier disc (all are sturdier in all stages) and a much heavier than stock pressure plate. Total Weight loss on the driveline with the stage 1 kit was 32lbs.
7. The Razco crank pulley removes 6.4lbs approximately from the driveline.
8. The Clutchmasters clutch pedal is very short.
9. The combination of a lightened flywheel, crank pulley, intake, headers, spacers, and test pipe builds a very noticeable amount of power above 4000RPM, but loses some power down low.
10. The lightened driveline / test pipe make tooling around under 20mph a bit lurchy and more difficult, particularly with an agressive pressure plate.
07-07-2009, 07:24 PM
#4
How would you describe your exhaust note with the 'headers + test pipe + CT Mufflers'?
Personally, when running through the gears @ WOT it sounds very crisp and smooth. My biggest issue is with 1st and 2nd gears through 3,500-4,500 rpms where there are some unpleasant sounds generated by my vibrant mufflers (i think this is the infamous RASP but I wouldnt really call it that. My hunch is that a higher quality muffler would not make some of the sounds my mufflers make @ that rpm range). Otherwise, it sounds very clear with some nice very nice and controlled sounds in each gear. When on the highway, the exhaust note is great. No drone (maybe a little but totally acceptable). I originally had no resonator and although the exhaust note was grittier (read: more warble type sound), the unpleasant frequencies @ various degrees of throttle position & gear made it too much for a daily driver.
Combining the 'test pipe with the crank pulley + CT headers' has given the engine excellent throttle modulation characteristics. The engine just revs with no effort which is a trait I thought it had when stock but now the stock setup would feel as if the engine is running too thick an oil or something. Also, rev matching downshifts is even more a treat than ever before.
Does anyone have 'CT Headers + Test Pipe + Resonator + Axle back_HKS/TANABE/APEXI'
setup? I like my exhaust note, but I would like something a little more distinctive BUT i am also sick of spending money trying to nail down the right exhaust sound. I am probably more obsessed about this aspect than anything else. I am considering swapping out the vibrants (paid $140CDN for both landed cost) for some HKS draggers or even buying a full tanabe cat-back off the black market. I always run test pipes on my cars because they seem to add a favourable dimension to the exhaust note with the right setup... immediate throttle tip-in suffers a little, but the top end always benefits. I think the option pulley mitigates the effect of the test pipe @ low rpms...
Personally, when running through the gears @ WOT it sounds very crisp and smooth. My biggest issue is with 1st and 2nd gears through 3,500-4,500 rpms where there are some unpleasant sounds generated by my vibrant mufflers (i think this is the infamous RASP but I wouldnt really call it that. My hunch is that a higher quality muffler would not make some of the sounds my mufflers make @ that rpm range). Otherwise, it sounds very clear with some nice very nice and controlled sounds in each gear. When on the highway, the exhaust note is great. No drone (maybe a little but totally acceptable). I originally had no resonator and although the exhaust note was grittier (read: more warble type sound), the unpleasant frequencies @ various degrees of throttle position & gear made it too much for a daily driver.
Combining the 'test pipe with the crank pulley + CT headers' has given the engine excellent throttle modulation characteristics. The engine just revs with no effort which is a trait I thought it had when stock but now the stock setup would feel as if the engine is running too thick an oil or something. Also, rev matching downshifts is even more a treat than ever before.
Does anyone have 'CT Headers + Test Pipe + Resonator + Axle back_HKS/TANABE/APEXI'
setup? I like my exhaust note, but I would like something a little more distinctive BUT i am also sick of spending money trying to nail down the right exhaust sound. I am probably more obsessed about this aspect than anything else. I am considering swapping out the vibrants (paid $140CDN for both landed cost) for some HKS draggers or even buying a full tanabe cat-back off the black market. I always run test pipes on my cars because they seem to add a favourable dimension to the exhaust note with the right setup... immediate throttle tip-in suffers a little, but the top end always benefits. I think the option pulley mitigates the effect of the test pipe @ low rpms...
07-08-2009, 08:05 AM
#7
I'm fairly frustrated by the loss of the lowend - which is more attributed to the lightened flywheel than anything else. It flat out zings from 4000 to redline...feels like it needs to go to 9k - but that's just from being an S2000 owner for too long.
It's got a nice grumble at idle - not annoying or poppy or anything.
At WOT it gets a nice grunt where you realize quickly it's not stock if you're in the car or around it. It gets a raspy grunt through the powerband, but it's subdued - refined sounding.
Sometimes the fuel dumps when backing off the throttle at high rpm and unloads down in the test pipe / collector causing a little popping. This has gotten better as the ECU has learned the new goodies.
I think with some air/fuel/vtec engage tuning on a VAFC or a Neo or something, that I can reclaim alot of the low end.
I also need to get the pipes up to 2.5s at least. The low-end woke up noticeably with the comptechs on there vs the stock mufflers.
Don't confuse backpressure with velocity - throw the car on the dyno with open headers and see what the power difference is vs any exhaust.
I'm very happy with how it sounds, the intake note is also much more prominent now that the exhaust is breathing.
It's got a nice grumble at idle - not annoying or poppy or anything.
At WOT it gets a nice grunt where you realize quickly it's not stock if you're in the car or around it. It gets a raspy grunt through the powerband, but it's subdued - refined sounding.
Sometimes the fuel dumps when backing off the throttle at high rpm and unloads down in the test pipe / collector causing a little popping. This has gotten better as the ECU has learned the new goodies.
I think with some air/fuel/vtec engage tuning on a VAFC or a Neo or something, that I can reclaim alot of the low end.
I also need to get the pipes up to 2.5s at least. The low-end woke up noticeably with the comptechs on there vs the stock mufflers.
Don't confuse backpressure with velocity - throw the car on the dyno with open headers and see what the power difference is vs any exhaust.
I'm very happy with how it sounds, the intake note is also much more prominent now that the exhaust is breathing.
Trending Topics
07-08-2009, 10:23 AM
#8
What are you running from TP to CT Mufflers? Factory b-pipe with factory resonator and mid-muffler? If so, that would explain why I get some 'rifling' between 3,500-4,500rpm as I am running custom cat-back with single resonator.
At any rate, I dont feel I lost much low end torque from the TP. I think the setup I am running sounds very good and the car feels like it makes more power now across the entire RPM range than at any point previous. Below are some points on a CT dyno that would suggest below 5,000 rpm, nothing is gained from headers/exhaust. However, with pulley/TP/CAI, it seems the car gets to 5,000rpm much quicker. When running WOT from a standstill, the car absolutely rips through the first 2 gears like never before. At this point, the 2009 SH-AWD IM seems very appealing for for its potential to add 10 tq to the wheels below 5,000. If I could make 230tq, i'd be a happy camper.
One thing that I think is very interesting is the CT Header graphs as provided by CT (Stock CLS6 vs CLS6 + CT Headers + CT Axle Back Mufflers). The graphs show ZERO gain in HP AND TQ below 5,600 RPM. The cumulative gains/losses below 5,600 rpm equate to about ZERO for both HP and TQ.
Other interesting things gleaned from the graphs:
- Peak stock HP was 227 @ 6,000RPM
- Peak modded HP was 248 @ 6,600RPM
- At 6,600 RPM, the gain is +37hp where the stock car drops to 211hp vs CT @ 248hp.
- Peak stock TQ was 215 @ 2,800-5,000rpm
- Peak modded TQ was 217 @ 3,200rpm
- At 6,600 RPM, the gain is +30tq where the stock car drops to 168tq vs CT @ 198tq.
Lastly, CT estimates drivetrain losses @ 12-13%.
Does anyone have confirmation on what we should tune a CLS6 with that has the basic bolt-ons. I am not convinced there is much more to be gained beyond what CT's graph show on an untuned car. It seems breaking 260whp/230tq is hard because of all the little variables that can affect a 100,000 mile motor... Butt dyno tells my car is now consistently putting down 245-250whp and a flat TQ line that is at least putting down the factory tq specs...
At any rate, I dont feel I lost much low end torque from the TP. I think the setup I am running sounds very good and the car feels like it makes more power now across the entire RPM range than at any point previous. Below are some points on a CT dyno that would suggest below 5,000 rpm, nothing is gained from headers/exhaust. However, with pulley/TP/CAI, it seems the car gets to 5,000rpm much quicker. When running WOT from a standstill, the car absolutely rips through the first 2 gears like never before. At this point, the 2009 SH-AWD IM seems very appealing for for its potential to add 10 tq to the wheels below 5,000. If I could make 230tq, i'd be a happy camper.
One thing that I think is very interesting is the CT Header graphs as provided by CT (Stock CLS6 vs CLS6 + CT Headers + CT Axle Back Mufflers). The graphs show ZERO gain in HP AND TQ below 5,600 RPM. The cumulative gains/losses below 5,600 rpm equate to about ZERO for both HP and TQ.
Other interesting things gleaned from the graphs:
- Peak stock HP was 227 @ 6,000RPM
- Peak modded HP was 248 @ 6,600RPM
- At 6,600 RPM, the gain is +37hp where the stock car drops to 211hp vs CT @ 248hp.
- Peak stock TQ was 215 @ 2,800-5,000rpm
- Peak modded TQ was 217 @ 3,200rpm
- At 6,600 RPM, the gain is +30tq where the stock car drops to 168tq vs CT @ 198tq.
Lastly, CT estimates drivetrain losses @ 12-13%.
Does anyone have confirmation on what we should tune a CLS6 with that has the basic bolt-ons. I am not convinced there is much more to be gained beyond what CT's graph show on an untuned car. It seems breaking 260whp/230tq is hard because of all the little variables that can affect a 100,000 mile motor... Butt dyno tells my car is now consistently putting down 245-250whp and a flat TQ line that is at least putting down the factory tq specs...
07-08-2009, 11:02 AM
#9
I've lost alot down low - I mean, tromp it and it hesitates to accelerate like lost alot. No CELS, mileage is right no - I think everything is good, but it seems to be in need of an air/fuel/timing tune. I also suspect dropping the VTEC engage point a little might be beneficial.
I am only on a 14,000 mile motor - so it shoud have lots of spunk left. I'm curious anyone that's done the VAFC or NEO - does it help any once tuned on the dyno ?
I am only on a 14,000 mile motor - so it shoud have lots of spunk left. I'm curious anyone that's done the VAFC or NEO - does it help any once tuned on the dyno ?
07-08-2009, 11:17 AM
#10
I'm running stock exhaust and resonators from the TP to the CT axlebacks.
I wonder if their DT loss coefficient would be reduced by lightened pulleys and flywheel substantially?
Don't get me wrong - the car is a rocket from 4K upward - it's the low end where it seems like it's bogging...the power is there - it's almost like it's getting too much fuel.
I wonder if their DT loss coefficient would be reduced by lightened pulleys and flywheel substantially?
Don't get me wrong - the car is a rocket from 4K upward - it's the low end where it seems like it's bogging...the power is there - it's almost like it's getting too much fuel.
07-08-2009, 12:08 PM
#13
6spder
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: North Port, FL/Chicago, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I'm running stock exhaust and resonators from the TP to the CT axlebacks.
I wonder if their DT loss coefficient would be reduced by lightened pulleys and flywheel substantially?
Don't get me wrong - the car is a rocket from 4K upward - it's the low end where it seems like it's bogging...the power is there - it's almost like it's getting too much fuel.
I wonder if their DT loss coefficient would be reduced by lightened pulleys and flywheel substantially?
Don't get me wrong - the car is a rocket from 4K upward - it's the low end where it seems like it's bogging...the power is there - it's almost like it's getting too much fuel.
i replaced the spark plugs, and throw in some witch huntered injectors and it made the difference in the world. especially at lower rpms.
since u got no cat now, you should be able to tell if there's more fuel in the exhaust. mine was running super rich and idle and low rpms, doesn't now after the plugs/injectors. i went with ngk irriduims.
07-08-2009, 01:26 PM
#14
I can add this much to your low rpm issues...
When I installed the TP & Pulley at the same time, the car felt okay.
A few weeks later, I put the CT headers in and the car again was okay with some vibration issues that are result of what I suspect to be 'overy stiff flex pipe' PLUS poly filled engine mounts. The car ran okay. Great at high RPM's but sluggish down low. I was actually really pissed.
Then I did the idle relearn procedure to calm the slightly erratic idling behaviour @ low rpms and it certainly corrected a lot of the low rpm drivability problems I was experiencing. It did wonders and the car lost a lot of its vibration issues (i know you have a new motor, so idle relearn and ECU reset is probably not your problem).
Lastly, I went on a long road trip. I took the car up to 6,500ft elevation through a mountain pass at sustained speeds above 3,500rpm in 6th. I dont know what effect this 10 hour (400mile) round-trip had on the ECU, but when I returned to sea level on Monday, the car has run really smooth and torquey ever since. It feels like it regained 10tq's down low plus the extended exhaust heat may have finally worked the flex pipe loose to the point that it doesnt cause the car to shudder nearly as much.
Question:
What I am confused about is this. Does the ECU factor-out the mods to the point that it eliminates the impact of bolt on mods OR does the ECU adjust and take advantage of the mods? My experience seems to be that it is taking advantage of the mods over time thus far...
I should also note, i did the following all at the same time 30 days ago:
--> T-Belt / Plugs / Option Pulley / Test Pipe / Synchro Mesh Tranny Fluid / Poly Mounts / Koni shocks-H&R Springs
... and then headers 2 weeks ago. So the car has had a lot of changes lately. It wasnt until after my lengthy road trip at varying elevations that the car finally started to feel like it was making the right power...
Just my 2 cents... oh, and the GM FM Synchro is unreal. It didnt start to really take effect till after the road trip as well. The gearbox is feeling better every day....
When I installed the TP & Pulley at the same time, the car felt okay.
A few weeks later, I put the CT headers in and the car again was okay with some vibration issues that are result of what I suspect to be 'overy stiff flex pipe' PLUS poly filled engine mounts. The car ran okay. Great at high RPM's but sluggish down low. I was actually really pissed.
Then I did the idle relearn procedure to calm the slightly erratic idling behaviour @ low rpms and it certainly corrected a lot of the low rpm drivability problems I was experiencing. It did wonders and the car lost a lot of its vibration issues (i know you have a new motor, so idle relearn and ECU reset is probably not your problem).
Lastly, I went on a long road trip. I took the car up to 6,500ft elevation through a mountain pass at sustained speeds above 3,500rpm in 6th. I dont know what effect this 10 hour (400mile) round-trip had on the ECU, but when I returned to sea level on Monday, the car has run really smooth and torquey ever since. It feels like it regained 10tq's down low plus the extended exhaust heat may have finally worked the flex pipe loose to the point that it doesnt cause the car to shudder nearly as much.
Question:
What I am confused about is this. Does the ECU factor-out the mods to the point that it eliminates the impact of bolt on mods OR does the ECU adjust and take advantage of the mods? My experience seems to be that it is taking advantage of the mods over time thus far...
I should also note, i did the following all at the same time 30 days ago:
--> T-Belt / Plugs / Option Pulley / Test Pipe / Synchro Mesh Tranny Fluid / Poly Mounts / Koni shocks-H&R Springs
... and then headers 2 weeks ago. So the car has had a lot of changes lately. It wasnt until after my lengthy road trip at varying elevations that the car finally started to feel like it was making the right power...
Just my 2 cents... oh, and the GM FM Synchro is unreal. It didnt start to really take effect till after the road trip as well. The gearbox is feeling better every day....
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
trinikidcl
Car Parts for Sale
2
09-04-2015 12:56 AM
