How to get to 300HP?
#41
Powered by Guinness
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Stockton, CA
Age: 55
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally Posted by takuyaah
not to burst your bubble or anything...quarter mile time for most 6 speed TL's r in range of 14.5-14.8 (motor trend and car and driver,road and truck)so..you are trying to car 0.6 to 0.9 sec in quarter mile time...just to let you know...linearly...you are talking about..cutting 0-60 time...from 6.2-6.5(TL) to...5.3-5.5(911)
#42
The TL is a J series block...so is the 6 and 7gen Accord V6 models... Would it be possible to tkae headers from a 6gen accord v6 and put them on the 2k4 TL? Wonder if anyone in dallas wants to try? I have a set of headers for my Accord that are about to come out.
cams...hmmm I would not recommend opening up any J3x engine...you always end up with pieces here and there haha. A remapped ECU would be interesting but at the same time, I would be waving goodbye to the warranty.
cams...hmmm I would not recommend opening up any J3x engine...you always end up with pieces here and there haha. A remapped ECU would be interesting but at the same time, I would be waving goodbye to the warranty.
#43
Powered by Guinness
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Stockton, CA
Age: 55
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
No, it's a different head. The exhaust manifold is cast into the head with a single outlet. The first two cats connect directly to the heads. I have to believe power was lost in this design based on my experiences with long vs. short header tube designs. Too bad...not much can be done.
#45
Originally Posted by Aegir
No, it's a different head. The exhaust manifold is cast into the head with a single outlet. The first two cats connect directly to the heads. I have to believe power was lost in this design based on my experiences with long vs. short header tube designs. Too bad...not much can be done.
Originally Posted by nitrotiger
I wonder if the computer would go crazy if you remove the cats off the header and came up with your own down pipe from the mainfold hmmmm
#46
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: south jersey
Posts: 874
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I figured thar would be the response i would get :toothless i spoke to comptech friday they said the next thing they are doing for the TL is the exhaust and it needs 1 bad the piping is so small
#47
Originally Posted by pabound
I agree with NORSE396's original reply - Filter, intake mods, exhaust and an ECU upgrade whenever it is available. If you're really out there, you can extrude-hone everything...
REMEMBER, guys, our CR is 11.0:1. NOT a good idea for ANY power adder.
my .02
REMEMBER, guys, our CR is 11.0:1. NOT a good idea for ANY power adder.
my .02
and as an added bonus, u wouldn't have to use premium fuel.
#49
Burning Brakes
Am I wrong or aren't the headers forged with the block on this car ?? making it impossible to modify them, leaving mods up to intake and exhaust
All of the iVTEC blocks are this way. But so far iVTEC is only in the 4cyl models.
All of the iVTEC blocks are this way. But so far iVTEC is only in the 4cyl models.
#50
Originally Posted by Sherlock
Am I wrong or aren't the headers forged with the block on this car ?? making it impossible to modify them, leaving mods up to intake and exhaust
All of the iVTEC blocks are this way. But so far iVTEC is only in the 4cyl models.
All of the iVTEC blocks are this way. But so far iVTEC is only in the 4cyl models.
#51
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: so cal
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
put an 02/03 type S motor in it w/ headers and Ice box.. Thats 300hp!
couldnt resist,, sorry. This really sucks about the new and improved exhaust manafold. I think it was an intensional attemp to keep people from unleashing the hugh high end gain capable w/ headers.
couldnt resist,, sorry. This really sucks about the new and improved exhaust manafold. I think it was an intensional attemp to keep people from unleashing the hugh high end gain capable w/ headers.
#52
SOLD
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lakehood, CO
Age: 40
Posts: 1,210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Norse396
The exhaust manifold is crimped and could use updating, the exhaust isn't too bad but of course more horsepower is available there. The stock CAI is restrictive, removing the silencer could help here but nobody has shown an interest in that part. The computer has been shown to hold back over 6200rpm. While we know the engine makes peak HP at 6200 it is capable of more, so a new ECU mapping could help A LOT.
#53
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: so cal
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
based on the Type s engine the most restictive part was the exhaust manafold, the 04's got 10 more hp by redesigning the intake((CAI)3-5hp gain) and using higher flow exhaust componants((cats imparticular)the other 5-8hp) On the type S there's 27whp tied up in the E manafold thats about 35-38hp at the crank. Thats where the power/flow restiction lies, not ferther down the tail pipe.
#54
7th Gear
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Mesa, AZ
Age: 49
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Norse396
Why anybody would mention cams and supercharger for such a small gain I'll never know. ...<snip>...Get more air into the motor, and more air out, the engine is nothing but an air pump after all.
#55
SOLD
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lakehood, CO
Age: 40
Posts: 1,210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by yield2S
based on the Type s engine the most restictive part was the exhaust manafold, the 04's got 10 more hp by redesigning the intake((CAI)3-5hp gain) and using higher flow exhaust componants((cats imparticular)the other 5-8hp) On the type S there's 27whp tied up in the E manafold thats about 35-38hp at the crank. Thats where the power/flow restiction lies, not ferther down the tail pipe.
#56
Registered Abuser of VTEC
Originally Posted by Norse396
The exhaust manifold is crimped and could use updating, the exhaust isn't too bad but of course more horsepower is available there. The stock CAI is restrictive, removing the silencer could help here but nobody has shown an interest in that part. The computer has been shown to hold back over 6200rpm. While we know the engine makes peak HP at 6200 it is capable of more, so a new ECU mapping could help A LOT.
You'd think they tested the ECU and optimized it for everyday driving.
#58
[This really sucks about the new and improved exhaust manafold (sic). I think it was an intensional (sic) attemp (sic) to keep people from unleashing the hugh (sic) high end gain capable w/ headers.]
Actually the integrated exhaust "manifold" cast into the cylinder head and higher flow "close coupled catalytic converters" installed up at the cylinder heads improves cold start emissions performance, as the catalysts reach optimum operating temperature quicker. The "close coupled catalytic converters" clean the exhaust of carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbons (HC) while the converter under the vehicle cleans up nitrogen oxide (NoX). Part of Honda's environmental + performance strategy.
Actually the integrated exhaust "manifold" cast into the cylinder head and higher flow "close coupled catalytic converters" installed up at the cylinder heads improves cold start emissions performance, as the catalysts reach optimum operating temperature quicker. The "close coupled catalytic converters" clean the exhaust of carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbons (HC) while the converter under the vehicle cleans up nitrogen oxide (NoX). Part of Honda's environmental + performance strategy.
#59
http://www.caranddriver.com/article...5&page_number=1
The Steering Column
Slowly but surely, horsepower is killing front drive.
BY CSABA CSERE
July 2004
There seems to be considerable trepidation in some Detroit circles about the switch from front- to rear-wheel drive in cars such as the Chrysler 300, Dodge Magnum (replacing the Intrepid), and Cadillac STS. And if we believe our spies, most future big sedans from the Big Three will propel themselves via their rear wheels.
Some critics view this switch as little more than a fashion statement, much like raising or dropping the hemline of a woman’s skirt, and designed to juice sales by giving advertisers something to talk about. Others don’t want to lose front-wheel drive’s traction advantages in winter and fret about fishtailing down snowy city streets with a rear-driver. Some even worry about losing the slightly lighter weight and more efficient packaging available with front drive.
Given the enormous expense of replacing a front-drive car with a rear-drive one, no car company would do it just to provide the marketers with a new talking point. On the other hand, a discussion of front drive versus rear drive in slippery conditions is more relevant. There’s little question that by placing between 60 and 65 percent of a vehicle’s weight over its driving wheels, front drive develops more traction than does rear drive—unless the rear-drive car happens to be a Porsche 911. The only thing better is four-wheel drive, which puts 100 percent of a vehicle’s weight on its driving wheels.
Adding traction control into the equation doesn’t alter this traction pecking order. However, traction control does ensure that a vehicle makes the most of its available grip and helps a clumsy driver from losing control because of wheelspin.
Remember, though, that the definition of traction is grip that allows acceleration. Grip for cornering and braking is completely different, and there’s no evidence that front drive provides any advantage in these areas during winter driving. Electronic stability-control systems make the most of the available grip regardless of which wheels are driven, but if you really want secure winter handling, you need to change to snow tires. Four snow tires will improve traction as well as braking and cornering grip to the point where the winter merits of front and rear drive are rendered irrelevant.
Once we get away from the slippery stuff, rear drive has traditionally displayed better handling because it splits the duties of steering, cornering, acceleration, and braking more equitably among the four tires.
During acceleration, for example, although front drive provides more traction the instant you press the throttle, that advantage diminishes as soon as the car begins to accelerate. This action is caused by the inertia of the car’s center of gravity that is about a foot and a half above the pavement. Commonly called “weight transfer,” this effect on an Acura TSX, which has about 60 percent of its weight on its front wheels when standing still, shifts more than 300 pounds from its front to its rear wheels under hard acceleration in first gear.
The BMW 325i, similar to the TSX in size and performance, has a nearly 50/50 weight split. When accelerating, it undergoes a similar front-to-rear load transfer. But whereas traction in the TSX decreases about 20 percent under hard acceleration, in the 325, it increases by a similar amount.
Under braking, a similar load shift occurs, only this time it’s from the rear tires toward the fronts. With a front-drive car, this means that during maximum braking the front tires might be doing more than 80 percent of the stopping. A more even distribution of braking force would be beneficial, which is why rear-heavy cars such as Porsche 911s always stop very well. Obviously, the forward weight bias of front-drive cars is not helpful.
Nor does it help in cornering, where an equal weight distribution works best. In fact, since so much cornering takes place in combination with some acceleration, a rearward weight bias is advantageous, particularly when combined with larger rear tires. A mid-engine layout provides this configuration, which is why it is chosen by all race-car builders when the rules permit.
Okay, most of us are not exploring limit handling on the street, but we’re all familiar with the many ways that applying power can corrupt the steering feel of front-drive cars. Torque steer is the classic problem, causing the steering wheel to twitch in your hands while the car pulls in one direction or the other when you press on the gas. Equal-length half-shafts going to the front wheels have largely eliminated this problem, but others remain.
During hard acceleration in the lower gears, front-drive cars often lose some directional stability and are easily deflected by bumps, dips, and crowns in the pavement. Rear-drive cars can fishtail when they lose traction, but front-drivers often “fishhead” under the same circumstances.
In corners, particularly slow ones, many front-drive cars lose self-centering under power. The driver can’t easily tell whether this is a front-drive effect or an impending loss of grip. In some cars, such as the Dodge SRT-4, you can let go of the wheel completely in midcorner under power and the steering wheel doesn’t move a degree. And when a limited-slip differential is employed in a front-driver, these effects are sometimes amplified as the diff decides which wheel to favor with power.
Despite these flaws, we’ve found many front-drive cars over the years with terrific handling. But this was years ago, when power was more scarce than it is today.
The first VW GTI sold in America—back in 1983—had all of 90 horsepower and needed 9.7 seconds to get to 60 mph. When Chevrolet introduced its front-drive Celebrity mid-size sedan in 1982, its most powerful engine was a 2.8-liter V-6 with 112 horsepower. That Celebrity replaced the rear-drive Malibu with a standard 3.8-liter V-6 making 110 horsepower. With only a piddling 112 horses, it didn’t matter which end of the Chevy was driven.
But today, Honda Accords and Nissan Altimas come with 240-hp V-6s, and 300-hp luxury sedans are everywhere. At these power levels, front-drive has reached the limit of its competence.
I don’t even want to think about driving a 340-hp Chrysler 300C Hemi V-8 delivering power through its front wheels. In the end, you can have either front drive or plenty of power. But you can’t have both.
The Steering Column
Slowly but surely, horsepower is killing front drive.
BY CSABA CSERE
July 2004
There seems to be considerable trepidation in some Detroit circles about the switch from front- to rear-wheel drive in cars such as the Chrysler 300, Dodge Magnum (replacing the Intrepid), and Cadillac STS. And if we believe our spies, most future big sedans from the Big Three will propel themselves via their rear wheels.
Some critics view this switch as little more than a fashion statement, much like raising or dropping the hemline of a woman’s skirt, and designed to juice sales by giving advertisers something to talk about. Others don’t want to lose front-wheel drive’s traction advantages in winter and fret about fishtailing down snowy city streets with a rear-driver. Some even worry about losing the slightly lighter weight and more efficient packaging available with front drive.
Given the enormous expense of replacing a front-drive car with a rear-drive one, no car company would do it just to provide the marketers with a new talking point. On the other hand, a discussion of front drive versus rear drive in slippery conditions is more relevant. There’s little question that by placing between 60 and 65 percent of a vehicle’s weight over its driving wheels, front drive develops more traction than does rear drive—unless the rear-drive car happens to be a Porsche 911. The only thing better is four-wheel drive, which puts 100 percent of a vehicle’s weight on its driving wheels.
Adding traction control into the equation doesn’t alter this traction pecking order. However, traction control does ensure that a vehicle makes the most of its available grip and helps a clumsy driver from losing control because of wheelspin.
Remember, though, that the definition of traction is grip that allows acceleration. Grip for cornering and braking is completely different, and there’s no evidence that front drive provides any advantage in these areas during winter driving. Electronic stability-control systems make the most of the available grip regardless of which wheels are driven, but if you really want secure winter handling, you need to change to snow tires. Four snow tires will improve traction as well as braking and cornering grip to the point where the winter merits of front and rear drive are rendered irrelevant.
Once we get away from the slippery stuff, rear drive has traditionally displayed better handling because it splits the duties of steering, cornering, acceleration, and braking more equitably among the four tires.
During acceleration, for example, although front drive provides more traction the instant you press the throttle, that advantage diminishes as soon as the car begins to accelerate. This action is caused by the inertia of the car’s center of gravity that is about a foot and a half above the pavement. Commonly called “weight transfer,” this effect on an Acura TSX, which has about 60 percent of its weight on its front wheels when standing still, shifts more than 300 pounds from its front to its rear wheels under hard acceleration in first gear.
The BMW 325i, similar to the TSX in size and performance, has a nearly 50/50 weight split. When accelerating, it undergoes a similar front-to-rear load transfer. But whereas traction in the TSX decreases about 20 percent under hard acceleration, in the 325, it increases by a similar amount.
Under braking, a similar load shift occurs, only this time it’s from the rear tires toward the fronts. With a front-drive car, this means that during maximum braking the front tires might be doing more than 80 percent of the stopping. A more even distribution of braking force would be beneficial, which is why rear-heavy cars such as Porsche 911s always stop very well. Obviously, the forward weight bias of front-drive cars is not helpful.
Nor does it help in cornering, where an equal weight distribution works best. In fact, since so much cornering takes place in combination with some acceleration, a rearward weight bias is advantageous, particularly when combined with larger rear tires. A mid-engine layout provides this configuration, which is why it is chosen by all race-car builders when the rules permit.
Okay, most of us are not exploring limit handling on the street, but we’re all familiar with the many ways that applying power can corrupt the steering feel of front-drive cars. Torque steer is the classic problem, causing the steering wheel to twitch in your hands while the car pulls in one direction or the other when you press on the gas. Equal-length half-shafts going to the front wheels have largely eliminated this problem, but others remain.
During hard acceleration in the lower gears, front-drive cars often lose some directional stability and are easily deflected by bumps, dips, and crowns in the pavement. Rear-drive cars can fishtail when they lose traction, but front-drivers often “fishhead” under the same circumstances.
In corners, particularly slow ones, many front-drive cars lose self-centering under power. The driver can’t easily tell whether this is a front-drive effect or an impending loss of grip. In some cars, such as the Dodge SRT-4, you can let go of the wheel completely in midcorner under power and the steering wheel doesn’t move a degree. And when a limited-slip differential is employed in a front-driver, these effects are sometimes amplified as the diff decides which wheel to favor with power.
Despite these flaws, we’ve found many front-drive cars over the years with terrific handling. But this was years ago, when power was more scarce than it is today.
The first VW GTI sold in America—back in 1983—had all of 90 horsepower and needed 9.7 seconds to get to 60 mph. When Chevrolet introduced its front-drive Celebrity mid-size sedan in 1982, its most powerful engine was a 2.8-liter V-6 with 112 horsepower. That Celebrity replaced the rear-drive Malibu with a standard 3.8-liter V-6 making 110 horsepower. With only a piddling 112 horses, it didn’t matter which end of the Chevy was driven.
But today, Honda Accords and Nissan Altimas come with 240-hp V-6s, and 300-hp luxury sedans are everywhere. At these power levels, front-drive has reached the limit of its competence.
I don’t even want to think about driving a 340-hp Chrysler 300C Hemi V-8 delivering power through its front wheels. In the end, you can have either front drive or plenty of power. But you can’t have both.
#60
'06 750Li Sapphire/Creme
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Age: 61
Posts: 2,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1Sick - Bullshi...... Those guys are wrong as much as they are right. I think 320HP would be a nice FWD car. Maybe not the quickest of the line but once you get over 350HP, even the RWD will spin like a MOFO unless you "feather" it. I should know. I have a RWD CLK55 with 342HP and 376ft/lbs torque. Stock rears were 245 and spun. A number of use dropped 265's on there (as big as we could go in stock wheel wells). Still spun... So unless your ready to have a daily driver running drag radials, anything over 350HP is going to spin, spin, spin (with most drivers anyway). Give me 320HP in this vs. 90% of the idiots with 350HP spinning their wheels and let's see who gets to the end of the track first...IMHO
#61
you guys make me laugh....... go to ure local track and look at all the civics integras rsx's and s200 that are pushin 400 hp then come back. no shit the tires are gunna spin but in rwd that happens .. so wats the big deal i wuld much ratehr have tl with 340 hp that spins off the line than a stock one that doesnt in a race any day
#62
Originally Posted by ndabunka
1Sick - Bullshi...... Those guys are wrong as much as they are right. I think 320HP would be a nice FWD car. Maybe not the quickest of the line but once you get over 350HP, even the RWD will spin like a MOFO unless you "feather" it. I should know. I have a RWD CLK55 with 342HP and 376ft/lbs torque. Stock rears were 245 and spun. A number of use dropped 265's on there (as big as we could go in stock wheel wells). Still spun... So unless your ready to have a daily driver running drag radials, anything over 350HP is going to spin, spin, spin (with most drivers anyway). Give me 320HP in this vs. 90% of the idiots with 350HP spinning their wheels and let's see who gets to the end of the track first...IMHO
And if FWD were so great with high horsepower, your very own ACURA RL would be FWD again instead of AWD next go round.
#63
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: so cal
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ACuraR
[This really sucks about the new and improved exhaust manafold (sic). I think it was an intensional (sic) attemp (sic) to keep people from unleashing the hugh (sic) high end gain capable w/ headers.]
Actually the integrated exhaust "manifold" cast into the cylinder head and higher flow "close coupled catalytic converters" installed up at the cylinder heads improves cold start emissions performance, as the catalysts reach optimum operating temperature quicker. The "close coupled catalytic converters" clean the exhaust of carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbons (HC) while the converter under the vehicle cleans up nitrogen oxide (NoX). Part of Honda's environmental + performance strategy.
Actually the integrated exhaust "manifold" cast into the cylinder head and higher flow "close coupled catalytic converters" installed up at the cylinder heads improves cold start emissions performance, as the catalysts reach optimum operating temperature quicker. The "close coupled catalytic converters" clean the exhaust of carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbons (HC) while the converter under the vehicle cleans up nitrogen oxide (NoX). Part of Honda's environmental + performance strategy.
#64
Powered by Guinness
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Stockton, CA
Age: 55
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Any car with this level of power demands a certain degree of respect and control. There are plenty of second-gen cars putting 300+ whp to the ground that are very fast and a lot of fun to drive. However, there are negative dynamics related to power application and steering in FWD that are not seen in RWD. Even at 'only' 270hp, I can push my car and experience this. It wouldn't stop me from adding a supercharger, but power/steering dynamics will get worse as power increases. Yes, it can be avoided by altering driving style and being 'smooth', but it's clear that many, including Honda, agree that FWD is not the preferred platform for higher power levels.
#65
Powered by Guinness
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Stockton, CA
Age: 55
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally Posted by yield2S
Tats nise butt nun off tat stuf hellps 2 get 2 300hps, maker o faxt itts becuz uf thee oboved menthioned tat u kant eezally gett to 300hps
#66
Shift_faster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 1,965
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by yield2S
Tats nise butt nun off tat stuf hellps 2 get 2 300hps, maker o faxt itts becuz uf thee oboved menthioned tat u kant eezally gett to 300hps
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
rp_guy
Member Cars for Sale
9
07-16-2017 07:33 AM