DIY: 2009 TL SH AWD intake manifold install on 01 CLS
10-14-2009, 05:57 PM
#41
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
I may be misinterpretting your question, so I answered it two ways 
If youre asking about the small TB on the large intake then:
There isnt any turbulence going from a small opening to a large opening, only the other way around. The air isnt flowing in from all angles, its in a stream.
If your talking about getting the TB ported:
Having the TB ported smoothed out the imperfections in the OEM unit so there would be much less turbulence within the TB.
I think thats what you were asking anyways. Ive been working since 530 this morning and my brain is fried. Still working too.
If youre asking about the small TB on the large intake then:
There isnt any turbulence going from a small opening to a large opening, only the other way around. The air isnt flowing in from all angles, its in a stream.
If your talking about getting the TB ported:
Having the TB ported smoothed out the imperfections in the OEM unit so there would be much less turbulence within the TB.
I think thats what you were asking anyways. Ive been working since 530 this morning and my brain is fried. Still working too.
10-14-2009, 08:31 PM
#42
Not 4 Wheelin Anymore!
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Baltimore
Age: 39
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, that makes sense, I'll probably be doing this next year and since I have the wheels, tires, and suspension figured out, it's on to planning the next mod. I just want to make sure I do it right and don't want to cut corners that are necessary. Thanks for the response.
I'm also interested to see how Rajca's spacer mod works out and if he plans on using that in conjunction with an 09 manifold. I guess we'll wait and see.
I'm also interested to see how Rajca's spacer mod works out and if he plans on using that in conjunction with an 09 manifold. I guess we'll wait and see.
10-14-2009, 08:43 PM
#44
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
Ill be cleaning it up some in the coming months. The thing that kills it is the damn ugly power steering pump to the left.
10-14-2009, 08:57 PM
#45
GO RANGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
10-30-2009, 08:59 PM
#47
been doing some research
so what i need to do this is
OEM:
17160-RK2-A00- intake manifold $207.23
17140-RK1-A01- intake manifold cover $156.98
P2R:
Part #: P383-tb adapter $69.99
we we looking at about $455
let see how much power it makes.
or i will keep my spacer add something
and see if that will equal the same gains as this for 1/4 of the price.
so what i need to do this is
OEM:
17160-RK2-A00- intake manifold $207.23
17140-RK1-A01- intake manifold cover $156.98
P2R:
Part #: P383-tb adapter $69.99
we we looking at about $455
let see how much power it makes.
or i will keep my spacer add something
and see if that will equal the same gains as this for 1/4 of the price.
10-31-2009, 12:39 AM
#48
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
been doing some research
so what i need to do this is
OEM:
17160-RK2-A00- intake manifold $207.23
17140-RK1-A01- intake manifold cover $156.98
P2R:
Part #: P383-tb adapter $69.99
we we looking at about $455
let see how much power it makes.
or i will keep my spacer add something and see if that will equal the same gains as this for 1/4 of the price.
so what i need to do this is
OEM:
17160-RK2-A00- intake manifold $207.23
17140-RK1-A01- intake manifold cover $156.98
P2R:
Part #: P383-tb adapter $69.99
we we looking at about $455
let see how much power it makes.
or i will keep my spacer add something
and see if that will equal the same gains as this for 1/4 of the price.
10-31-2009, 10:18 AM
#50
k sorry to sound like a hater but... That dyno only showed gains of 6 HP? and 5 TQ?
The P2R plenums gained 8hp and 12 tq on an 01-cls, WITHOUT port and polish.
For all the work and extra finagling I think P2R is the way to go. AND it looks 5 times better.
I thought this manifold would have gotten 15 hp and tq to make it worth the hassle.
It looks hype, I just wish it all added up in the result category.
The P2R plenums gained 8hp and 12 tq on an 01-cls, WITHOUT port and polish.
For all the work and extra finagling I think P2R is the way to go. AND it looks 5 times better.
I thought this manifold would have gotten 15 hp and tq to make it worth the hassle.
It looks hype, I just wish it all added up in the result category.
10-31-2009, 10:39 AM
#51
GO RANGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Do you think P2R has this on their race car if the plenums are better? It certainly would have been much cheaper for them to stay with the plenums.
That dyno is of a motor with compression issues they are not suggestive of the gains this provides.
I disagree that the plenums look better. This looks great imho.
That dyno is of a motor with compression issues they are not suggestive of the gains this provides.
I disagree that the plenums look better. This looks great imho.
10-31-2009, 01:07 PM
#52
You Cannot Rule out the fact:
P2R is also running a much better engine management system that can take full advantage of the manifold. That of which 90% of the people looking into this mod DO NOT HAVE.
It's harder to install, you may need to worry about clearance, you need to relocate things, and there may be other issue like idle problems and what not.
All i'm saying is for the average joe wanting more hp. It seems like a lot for a little. If you catch my drift
Not to discredit any of you who've put the TLC into this new creative mod. I applaud your perserverence.
I'm simply stating my opinion for those who haven't asked or looked at all the variables.
I'd love to see the dyno that proves this mod surpasses the plenums. Then I'd be all on your side
P2R is also running a much better engine management system that can take full advantage of the manifold. That of which 90% of the people looking into this mod DO NOT HAVE.
It's harder to install, you may need to worry about clearance, you need to relocate things, and there may be other issue like idle problems and what not.
All i'm saying is for the average joe wanting more hp. It seems like a lot for a little. If you catch my drift
Not to discredit any of you who've put the TLC into this new creative mod. I applaud your perserverence.
I'm simply stating my opinion for those who haven't asked or looked at all the variables.
I'd love to see the dyno that proves this mod surpasses the plenums. Then I'd be all on your side
Last edited by CL-S progression 01; 10-31-2009 at 01:10 PM.
10-31-2009, 02:41 PM
#53
GO RANGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
There were no idle issues after my IACV was replaced, it failed at teh same time as I did this mod.
Not to discredit any of you who've put the TLC into this new creative mod. I applaud your perserverence.
I'm simply stating my opinion for those who haven't asked or looked at all the variables.
I'd love to see the dyno that proves this mod surpasses the plenums. Then I'd be all on your side
I'm simply stating my opinion for those who haven't asked or looked at all the variables.
I'd love to see the dyno that proves this mod surpasses the plenums. Then I'd be all on your side
P2R stands to make money on the plenums,more than on the adapter I'd say he has a stake in not bringing this mod forward.
I am not looking to argue, and I have no stake in either mod. I am simply stating this mod solidified all my other mods and made the car go from 0-60 in 6.5 (average) to 0-60 in 4.7. that is a significant gain which means there was a significant HP/TQ gain.
I really think this thread as a DIY needs to keep the chatter out seeing as there was significant complaints about the posting that went on in the original thread so I created this one to have it be a fact based DIY.
10-31-2009, 03:46 PM
#55
GO RANGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
I mistyped nothing I asked nicely and you are calling me a liar gtfo my thread with your ot junk this is a diy about a specific mod not a what is better thread.
10-31-2009, 04:32 PM
#57
GO RANGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Mods can we get this diy that was created because people complained the original thread was cluttered closed please?
10-31-2009, 10:41 PM
#60
GO RANGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Wow really?
I did not pick anything. I have access to a private airfield. Before I modded the car I did runs. I had difficulty nailing down the 1/4 mile times so I am not posting them but on over 30 0-60s I averaged 6.5 stock there were higher & lower that is how average is arrived at, same goes for the after.
I don't need anyone to believe me, I don't care if anyone does this mod. I shared my information freely trying to help people, people complained the first thread was too cluttered with ot chatter so finally I created this diy which is now also full of ot chatter.
I have to say it is irritating.
I did not pick anything. I have access to a private airfield. Before I modded the car I did runs. I had difficulty nailing down the 1/4 mile times so I am not posting them but on over 30 0-60s I averaged 6.5 stock there were higher & lower that is how average is arrived at, same goes for the after.
I don't need anyone to believe me, I don't care if anyone does this mod. I shared my information freely trying to help people, people complained the first thread was too cluttered with ot chatter so finally I created this diy which is now also full of ot chatter.
I have to say it is irritating.
10-31-2009, 11:01 PM
#62
GO RANGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
The time was starting when movement was detected and set to stop at 60. This was done using Dynolicious on my iPhone.
Please don't do the mod, do your stealth deal and keep it a secret.
10-31-2009, 11:21 PM
#63
not to be a hard ass but once i do my project and get some DYNO numbers ill post it.
but i cant get the 4.7 sec out of my mind. i mean thats sti, evo, '10 camarro ss, audi rs4, toyota supra territory. not saying thats a bad thing but if u hav ever driven in any of those, its fucking fast.
but i cant get the 4.7 sec out of my mind. i mean thats sti, evo, '10 camarro ss, audi rs4, toyota supra territory. not saying thats a bad thing but if u hav ever driven in any of those, its fucking fast.
10-31-2009, 11:35 PM
#64
GO RANGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Look at my mods, it is about everything but boost that is available for our cars. It was well maintained and maybe was just a lucky motor that was made correctly.
I just know that was the average of multiple runs.
I am not a kid that is looking to impress, I am a guy that mods my cars and shares my results.
I just know that was the average of multiple runs.
I am not a kid that is looking to impress, I am a guy that mods my cars and shares my results.
11-01-2009, 02:03 AM
#65
4.7sec 0-60 on a cl-s not gonna happen......ever, FWD + high output motor + 1 leg differential = no. even the newer 08TLS cant get much under 6 and it has 35+ MORE hp.even a limited slip differential will not let you get there......
11-01-2009, 02:09 AM
#66
ran some quick numbers
it would take approximately 450hp to get a CLS to a 4.6 0-60 time in automatic form and 415hp with a manual
http://www.060calculator.com/
it would take approximately 450hp to get a CLS to a 4.6 0-60 time in automatic form and 415hp with a manual
http://www.060calculator.com/
11-01-2009, 02:31 AM
#68
to stay on topic, i believe the dyno of this mod should be taken down because it really isnt showing what this mod can really do. and since ppl dont like to read (about the state of the car the dynos were done on), they are assuming its just a waste of money for only 5 hp. (no offense towards civicdrivr, i appreciate the time and effort you've put into this along with e30, i hope you understand where im coming from and dont take it the wrong way)
11-01-2009, 04:27 AM
#69
a 3k lb 3rd gen TL can do it.
https://acurazine.com/forums/showpos...2&postcount=50
but yea an iphone app isnt evidence imo.
https://acurazine.com/forums/showpos...2&postcount=50
but yea an iphone app isnt evidence imo.
11-01-2009, 06:37 AM
#70
GO RANGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
I do not give a damn what numbers you ran, I do not care what your opinion on my timing method was. I did this mod, I spent the time and money and until you actually do some real work stfu.
your opinion is moot seeing as the numbers are the numbers.
Did anyone ask your opinion in this or the original thread?
Last edited by e30cabrio; 11-01-2009 at 06:41 AM.
11-01-2009, 07:11 AM
#71
some body needs to scracth up the 50-75 for a couple of before and after pulls.
I'm sure there is power increases over the cls manifold and some might say its too small for the money.
Also I bet if the clp owners went with the mod they would rack in decent power #'s for the money.
I think this dude and civic are trying to do some newer shit to are motors and digg'n for a few extra pony's without having to crack into the block is always a plus.
Far as the 0-60 time it's possible with enough "power" in our cars IF you could get enough "traction".
Any way man, Continue on and keep busting out some more new mods.Since you done this one I've been following your thread,And waiting for some new stuff up your sleave. Watch out for racja,I think he has some stuff up his sleave too.
I'm sure there is power increases over the cls manifold and some might say its too small for the money.
Also I bet if the clp owners went with the mod they would rack in decent power #'s for the money.
I think this dude and civic are trying to do some newer shit to are motors and digg'n for a few extra pony's without having to crack into the block is always a plus.
Far as the 0-60 time it's possible with enough "power" in our cars IF you could get enough "traction".
Any way man, Continue on and keep busting out some more new mods.Since you done this one I've been following your thread,And waiting for some new stuff up your sleave. Watch out for racja,I think he has some stuff up his sleave too.
11-01-2009, 10:20 AM
#72
Well after looking at the TL video posted in this thread... I'm going to say that e30s times are plausible, but not confirmed.
The j32 is a strange engine. It loves more air. The IM swap will definitely give more hp and tq in the lower rpm ranges which this car needs and throughout the range as shown in the dyno. The 1/4 times with all of e30s mods I predict are 13.6-14.0 range with 250ish-260ish whp.
I believe the j32 was sluggish in the 0-60 times in stock form only because Acura put some hp/tq robbing parts on to prevent traction issues when accelerating from 0-60. This engine is not weak by any means as proven by countless members on Azine.
The j32 is a strange engine. It loves more air. The IM swap will definitely give more hp and tq in the lower rpm ranges which this car needs and throughout the range as shown in the dyno. The 1/4 times with all of e30s mods I predict are 13.6-14.0 range with 250ish-260ish whp.
I believe the j32 was sluggish in the 0-60 times in stock form only because Acura put some hp/tq robbing parts on to prevent traction issues when accelerating from 0-60. This engine is not weak by any means as proven by countless members on Azine.
11-01-2009, 10:31 AM
#73
GO RANGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
I posted the time because people were demanding numbers. I don't care about what my HP is and don't have time to get a haircut let alone go to a dyno, wait around for my turn and do the several runs necessary to get a reasonable result.
The numbers were created on an airstrip in 85 degree temps @ 15% humidity at approximately 800 feet elevation. They were I believe accurate and I am sorry if anyone thinks I am making them up but don't care. The car is freaking fast, it is not race car fast, it is not super car fast but for what it is it is fast.
I killed a highly modified 968 last night by a wide margin shocking both me & my friend that owns it.
It was in the 50's at the same above numbers on the same airstrip.
This entire experience of being treated like a snake oil salesman when all I was trying to do was share my results is very irritating and I will think long and hard with sharing any future mods I tackle.
I am not selling anything. I have no relationship with P2R other than customer and I submit the reason Sean has been absent from both of these threads is he is not interested in being bombarded with prove it demands like he got with the intake (on my car and great) and the plenums.
I believe he has backed out of making amazing headers for our car due to the general attitude that can be seen in this thread.
The numbers were created on an airstrip in 85 degree temps @ 15% humidity at approximately 800 feet elevation. They were I believe accurate and I am sorry if anyone thinks I am making them up but don't care. The car is freaking fast, it is not race car fast, it is not super car fast but for what it is it is fast.
I killed a highly modified 968 last night by a wide margin shocking both me & my friend that owns it.
It was in the 50's at the same above numbers on the same airstrip.
This entire experience of being treated like a snake oil salesman when all I was trying to do was share my results is very irritating and I will think long and hard with sharing any future mods I tackle.
I am not selling anything. I have no relationship with P2R other than customer and I submit the reason Sean has been absent from both of these threads is he is not interested in being bombarded with prove it demands like he got with the intake (on my car and great) and the plenums.
I believe he has backed out of making amazing headers for our car due to the general attitude that can be seen in this thread.
Last edited by e30cabrio; 11-01-2009 at 10:35 AM.
11-01-2009, 11:41 AM
#74
https://acurazine.com/forums/3g-tl-performance-parts-modifications-112/m-010-putting-tl-diet-update-links-post-1-a-610974/
long thread but hes a few pounds under 3k.
11-01-2009, 11:52 AM
#75
I am not selling anything. I have no relationship with P2R other than customer and I submit the reason Sean has been absent from both of these threads is he is not interested in being bombarded with prove it demands like he got with the intake (on my car and great) and the plenums.
I believe he has backed out of making amazing headers for our car due to the general attitude that can be seen in this thread.
I believe he has backed out of making amazing headers for our car due to the general attitude that can be seen in this thread.
11-01-2009, 12:12 PM
#76
and e30, not to be a dick, but if you're going to be claiming crazy times like that you need some type of proof.
look at it from the other side. lets say i came into this thread saying "i installed this manifold and i ran a 13 flat in the quarter mile!" (which is what a 4.7 0-60 should be around)
of course someone is going to say "Prove it."
and of course i'd respond by saying "I DONT HAVE TO PROVE ANYTHING!!! I DONT CARE HOW MUCH HP I HAVE! I WORKED HARD ON THIS MOD I DONT HAVE TO PROVE ANYTHING TO YOU EVEN THOUGH I CLAIM THESE NUMBERS, MY IPHONE APP IS SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN TO BE 100% CORRECT!!! I HATE YOU ALL! WHY DO I SHARE MY UNBELIEVABLE TIMES WITH YOU GUYS WHEN YOU DONT BELIEVE ME AND I SHOW NO PROOF!!! I DONT THINK IM GONNA SHARE ANYTHING ON THIS SITE EVER AGAIN!"
i mean come on lol
look at it from the other side. lets say i came into this thread saying "i installed this manifold and i ran a 13 flat in the quarter mile!" (which is what a 4.7 0-60 should be around)
of course someone is going to say "Prove it."
and of course i'd respond by saying "I DONT HAVE TO PROVE ANYTHING!!! I DONT CARE HOW MUCH HP I HAVE! I WORKED HARD ON THIS MOD I DONT HAVE TO PROVE ANYTHING TO YOU EVEN THOUGH I CLAIM THESE NUMBERS, MY IPHONE APP IS SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN TO BE 100% CORRECT!!! I HATE YOU ALL! WHY DO I SHARE MY UNBELIEVABLE TIMES WITH YOU GUYS WHEN YOU DONT BELIEVE ME AND I SHOW NO PROOF!!! I DONT THINK IM GONNA SHARE ANYTHING ON THIS SITE EVER AGAIN!"
i mean come on lol
11-01-2009, 02:55 PM
#78
e30 if you can run 4.7 0-60...
Find an M3 2001-2007 and race it.
If you get owned... which I bet you would, then you know your not 4.7 0-60
lol I am almost fully bolted and my CL is fast. and it's MILES away from 4.7 0-60
If you can actually do 4.7 0-60 then your 1/4 mile should be mid 13s
M3 is 13.5 1/4 mile and 4.7 0-60 AT BEST...
So i guess you got the only 13 second auto cl-s on the block eh?
PLEASE POST A VIDEO OF YOUR MENTAL CL so we can settle this debate. and make sure there's volume so we know you didn't fast forward it..
sorry if i sound like a dick. But everything you claim doesn't add up
Find an M3 2001-2007 and race it.
If you get owned... which I bet you would, then you know your not 4.7 0-60
lol I am almost fully bolted and my CL is fast. and it's MILES away from 4.7 0-60
If you can actually do 4.7 0-60 then your 1/4 mile should be mid 13s
M3 is 13.5 1/4 mile and 4.7 0-60 AT BEST...
So i guess you got the only 13 second auto cl-s on the block eh?
PLEASE POST A VIDEO OF YOUR MENTAL CL so we can settle this debate. and make sure there's volume so we know you didn't fast forward it..
sorry if i sound like a dick. But everything you claim doesn't add up
Last edited by CL-S progression 01; 11-01-2009 at 02:58 PM.
11-01-2009, 03:01 PM
#79
GO RANGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
e30 if you can run 4.7 0-60...
Find an M3 2001-2007 and race it.
If you get owned... which I bet you would, then you know your not 4.7 0-60
lol I am almost fully bolted and my CL is fast. and it's MILES away from 4.7 0-60
If you can actually do 4.7 0-60 then your 1/4 mile should be mid 13s
M3 is 13.5 1/4 mile and 4.7 0-60 AT BEST...
So i guess you got the only 13 second auto cl-s on the block eh?
PLEASE POST A VIDEO OF YOUR MENTAL CL so we can settle this debate. and make sure there's volume so we know you didn't fast forward it..
sorry if i sound like a dick. But everything you claim doesn't add up
Find an M3 2001-2007 and race it.
If you get owned... which I bet you would, then you know your not 4.7 0-60
lol I am almost fully bolted and my CL is fast. and it's MILES away from 4.7 0-60
If you can actually do 4.7 0-60 then your 1/4 mile should be mid 13s
M3 is 13.5 1/4 mile and 4.7 0-60 AT BEST...
So i guess you got the only 13 second auto cl-s on the block eh?
PLEASE POST A VIDEO OF YOUR MENTAL CL so we can settle this debate. and make sure there's volume so we know you didn't fast forward it..
sorry if i sound like a dick. But everything you claim doesn't add up
I am not here to impress anyone. I did what I said I would do (did this mod, shared the diy and results). Believe it, don't believe it whatever.
If I raced an M3 and posted that I killed it you would say I was lying. If I posted a video you would say it was photoshopped, Hell if I posted a freaking dragstrip slip you would say it was from someone elses car.
I do not care what you think you are insignificant in my world.
Last edited by e30cabrio; 11-01-2009 at 03:04 PM.
11-01-2009, 04:08 PM
#80
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
The last comment I read was by CLS Progression.
Sean at P2R used to run the plenums. He switched to the TL manifold. Yes, both options make power, but one makes more. Both setups were running the same engine management (AEM EMS) and both were tuned. The TL manifold made more power.
Im not getting the most out of this mod for a number of reasons. 1) I have compression issues. 2) My intake is strangling the motor. 3) my exhaust sucks.
I replaced the stock mufflers and installed CT axlebacks after that dyno run was done and I felt more power. So as I said, my engine is not the best motor to rely on for testing.
Its your money, spend it any way you like. Im not getting into this argument regarding 0-60 times. Who cares.
Sean at P2R used to run the plenums. He switched to the TL manifold. Yes, both options make power, but one makes more. Both setups were running the same engine management (AEM EMS) and both were tuned. The TL manifold made more power.
Im not getting the most out of this mod for a number of reasons. 1) I have compression issues. 2) My intake is strangling the motor. 3) my exhaust sucks.
I replaced the stock mufflers and installed CT axlebacks after that dyno run was done and I felt more power. So as I said, my engine is not the best motor to rely on for testing.
Its your money, spend it any way you like. Im not getting into this argument regarding 0-60 times. Who cares.