TheChamp531

iTrader: (3)

The stock intake wasn't poorly designed. So you're saying if a dyno sheet showed that a CAI made 300WHP you'd believe it? Come on...

TheChamp531

iTrader: (3)

Also wanted to tell you that your car is not really making 226 WHP, if anything, if you calculate your STD number to a SAE corrected calculation you would only have about 215 WHP with the dyno you've given.

Rick_TL-S

Sounds like you're bottlenecking the exhaust. Buy a new exhaust or modify the current one a bit and you should be able to open her up a bit more.

swoosh

iTrader: (5)

anx1300c

iTrader: (2)

Please, share some of your engineering wizardry with us by explaining why/how the oem intake is not just poorly designed, or even very poorly designed, but VERY VERY POORLY DESIGNED.

LasVegasTL

CometVR4

Dynos can vary run to run.

TheChamp531

iTrader: (3)

I just have a bad feeling that the shop that dyno his car after the install, changed the conditions (humidity, temperature, dew point, etc...).

KN_TL

iTrader: (3)

Maybe the shop who dyno'd the car also sold him the intake so they wanted him to believe that he was getting more for the money?

I know I have no place to compare HP per buck with the money I am putting into my ride but I am just adding my thoughts to why these numbers are so different from most.

I hate cars

Exactly! I measured no vacuum in my intake tract with a stock paper filter at full throttle.
These two are what I was getting at before. I think the dyno operator probably sold the parts and screwed with settings to produce a good gain. I've seen it done personally.

anx1300c

iTrader: (2)

IIRC, when the 3G TL was released in late '03, its 3.2 was the second highest output N/A V6 available in any production car, second only to the 350Z/G coupe, but the 3.2 in the NSX had the Z beat by 3 hp. Acura engineers didn't achieve this feat by using poorly or very poorly designed intakes, let alone VERY VERY POORLY designed intakes....lol.

(And let's not forget Acura was working with 300cc less displacement.)

stvtec

iTrader: (2)

I like turtles.

Dave_B

Elapsed time might be different between runs due to changes in 60 foot, but MPH should be within 1mph if not less. MPH shows available HP and it's really hard to screw up MPH because you can have horrible 60 foot, but still trap the same as a run with a good 60 foot. The key to tracking gains and losses at the strip is to run at the same strip, under similiar conditions, similiar car setup, and calculate the density altitude to account for any slight atmospheric variance. I've dynoed my cars and I've evaluated the runs at the strip. I MUCH prefer evaluating the car at the strip because it's truely a real world test.

Dynos can be flakey and like others have pointed, you can manipulate them. Additionally, just because part X made 15whp on the dyno, doesn't mean much to me. I need to know over what span of rpm the gain was made. You can gain 50whp across the 500rpms and the car will not be any quicker in the 1/4 mile. The key is that the entire powerband get shifted upwards, not just a small fraction of it. It's called power under the curve. That's what will make you quicker.

Also, you need to the game of averages. How many other TLs have seen these types of gains with an intake? Hardly any. Same goes for the G and Z cars. Intakes don't do squat, but every once in a while someone posts a dyno slip that shows a particular intake making 10whp whereas there are 10 other cars that have dynoed the same intake and made 0 to 2whp. I'd venture the truth in the gain lies somewhere closer to no gain.

Sonnick

To the OP: Based on your dyno, your car gained a substantial amount of power from a CAI alone. Whether this be due to a horribly dirt-filled filter, a large hole in your stock intake, or just some unforeseen anomoly, it did happen. What everyone is saying is that on a healthy car, a CAI doesn't do much more than make noise. For some reason the dyno showed an obscene amount of power from the CAI alone.

Going to the track is definitely a great indication of how much power is gained/lost. Yes, dynos can be very helpful for before/after as you have shown, but they are not always accurate. Listen to IHC and Dave_B, and numerous others in this thread...they do know a thing or 2.

One thing I will disagree with though, is that trap speed will barely change from driver to driver. I always thought if you shift faster and crisper, even the trap speed will be higher. I understand trap shows relative power/weight, but I can't see someone that shifts rather slow yielding the same trap as a much faster shifter. Correct me if I'm wrong?

I hate cars

It's pretty much unchaged regardless of driver. The driver will make the difference in ET. MPH is just the car. Anything short of taking 3 seconds between shifts and lifting before the end will not affect trap speeds.

I've literally done a 1/8 mile burnout with a 3 second 60' and trap speed was nearly unchanged.

There are very, very few variables in trap speed while there are 20 or more on the dyno. If the dyno says you gained 50hp but you run the exact same trap speed, which one are you going to believe? The machine's estimation or the car's actual performance.

BostonSilverTypeS

^ I get what your saying, but correct me if im wrong...for example say you spin your tires off the line and you miss shift or shift into a higher gear or what have you...by the time you reach the 1/4 trap speed should be very different

Now I get what your saying as far as taking off and shifting normal versus shifting to perfection it would not change trap speed much, but espicially in manual transmission cars trap speed can very depending on driver....or for that matter auto's.....case in point last time i went i slipped all thru 3rd and then the auto skipped to 5 in ss mode..by the time i corrected to pick up speed i trapped at 76mph versus 98mph....you get what I mean right?

so explain further how trap speed will be the same regardless?

also i do agree if vehicle is driven hard and everything lines up at the track that the numbers there are better comparasion then dyno, but like others have stated dyno's have their pros/cons just like the track

OP: im not saying those numbers are BS, but I do believe something weird is going on with that dyno....I mean not even AEM themselves claim that much power and usually they post higher numbers then actual people...But hey thanks anyway for taking your time and posting the info!!

I hate cars

A slipping trans will kill trap speed but it will also kill hp on the dyno.

You have to be reasonable here. If shifts are even remotely similar and it's shifted to the correct gear each time and the clutch is not slipping, etc, trap speeds will remain the same.

anx1300c

iTrader: (2)

You can spin through the 1/8 mile marker if your car makes enough power, but once you eventually hook, your mph is still going to be the same as on a clean launch. The forward inertia is still present. Obviously if you miss third and go straight to fifth, then your trap speed will suffer greatly.

ModMechanic

I agree however a cone shaped air filter has a greater surface area then the factory filter so its quite possible that the dyno was accurate unless the initial run was on a cold engine. Oil viscosity does play a role...

anx1300c

iTrader: (2)

Lol, I remember this thread.

It should have stayed in the graveyard.

Bruce Banner

iTrader: (2)

In 3...2...

Scottwax

If the TS had an Accord, the gains might be a bit more believable (although baseline and after numbers would have been lower) do the more restrictive intake design. For example, K&N makes the same intake for both. They claim a 7 hp gain on the TL and a 10 hp gain on the Accord despite the Accord's smaller engine. Whether or not the stock intake is bad enough to get 16 hp, that's debatable. I have an AEM v2 on my car, it seems to pull better on top end (my son said my car felt stronger to him after I installed the intake and immediately wanted to get one for his Prelude...) but since I didn't dyno it before and after I have no way of knowing. But since I plan on doing other mods to my car, at least I'll have a decent amount of air coming in when the time comes.

With regards to factory designs leaving horsepower on the table, of course they do. When they design an intake, they have to keep in mind noise regulations and what the average Joe wants. Most people don't want to hear intake noise, not even in a performance oriented car. I have a customer who picked up 18 rwhp on a dyno with an aftermarket intake on his C6 Z06. And if that isn't a performance car, I don't know what is.

I hate cars

The argument isn't whether a cone filter has more flow than a factory filter, it does. Additional flow does not help when the stock filter is not a restriction and offers more unrestricted flow than the engine can use.


Oil viscosity does not play a role. Once hot, the difference in viscosity is very small between the common weights we use. We're talking under 2hp and that's within the accuracy of the dyno making it inmeasurable. In theory viscosity can make a difference but in real life it's not enough to measure accurately. Don't forget that with a thinner oil certain parts can have more friction, especially the ring to cylinder friction.
1,000% agreed.
An air filter upgrade is only good for what you touched on, making sure it has enough air for future mods in most cases. I would do the same, knowing I was going to be needing more airflow down the road. I'm glad your son noticed the power up top because even if the stock intake tract was restrictive it will never make more power down low, only at high rpm and full throttle with the aftermarket CAI. Maybe the Accord's intake tract is more restrictive or maybe it doesn't get outside air, do either of those apply?


Induction noise is easily muffled without causing a restriction. Just the air box and a paper filter is usually plenty for most cars.


If the Z06 picked up hp and it was repeatable in both stock and aftermarket I would be looking at the piping and whether or not it's able to get cooler air than before. The engineers aren't going to undersize an air filter to save $.001 per car. A 427 making over 500hp is more likely to see gains from mods than a 3.2L making half the power.


The only real compromises I see today are centered around making sure water does not make it's way into the engine which might mean a "hot air" intake from the factory in which case the CAI might work. The TL-S has a slightly smaller air filter than the base TL even though it makes a good bit more power which goes back to my point that the engineers size a filter large enough to not only be zero restriction when new but to be able to load up with dirt and still flow good enough.


But again, the testing has to be done right and on a dyno with the hood up it doesn't simulate real life. The hood is up, the car is not moving. I didn't re-read this thread so I might have mentioned it but my GN does not have a CAI even at over 700 crank hp, 200hp more than the Z06. The reason behind it is I noticed that with just a K&N under the hood my air temps going into the filter were getting close to 190F in stop and go traffic. The air going into the engine was near ambient thanks to the intercooler but I still wanted ambient at the turbo inlet. I was going to put the CAI back on but luckily I floored it first and noticed the air temp into the filter dropped to ambient in a couple seconds. The engine drew enough fresh air into the engine bay at full throttle that it got the full CAI effect but without the additional plumbing and dirt/water from the CAI. Things happen out on the street that are unaccounted for on the dyno like my car getting ambient air at full throttle. More accurate would be to run the car at the track and see if trap speed changes. That would be a true test and I don't know why manufacturers do not do this. Do they not know any better or are they afraid there would be no difference. If they ran it down the 1/4 before and after a CAI and showed repeatable gains I would have nothing more to say.

Scottwax

The Accord design is definitely more restrictive, the resonator for the intake is massive and the path through it pretty convoluted. But Accord buyers for the most part are more conservative than a TL buyer, especially Accord sedan owners. I believe the Accord coupes have a less restrictive intake design but the sedan is pretty crappy. Pulls in air towards the top of the radiator support, then down a pipe, into the resonator, then back up into the airbox.

Bruce Banner

iTrader: (2)