J30A4 292whp SAE
02-28-2014, 05:22 PM
#1
Pro
Thread Starter
J30A4 292whp SAE
A fella at another enthusiest site recently had his J30A4 dynoed at 292whp (302 uncorrected).
This is his mod list.
4in CAI wrapped 9in AEM dry flow filter
bored 3.7 tb,
3.7 manifold
ported & polished runners
TLs cams,
rv6 pcd, rv6 Jpipe v3,
2.5 - 3inch cone to 3 inch single mandrel bent exhaust
rdx injectors
flashpro
Now realize, this is a stock head car with only TLs cams. Heads have proven to give at least 20whp.
Ignore the torque numbers.
This is his mod list.
4in CAI wrapped 9in AEM dry flow filter
bored 3.7 tb,
3.7 manifold
ported & polished runners
TLs cams,
rv6 pcd, rv6 Jpipe v3,
2.5 - 3inch cone to 3 inch single mandrel bent exhaust
rdx injectors
flashpro
Now realize, this is a stock head car with only TLs cams. Heads have proven to give at least 20whp.
Ignore the torque numbers.
02-28-2014, 06:59 PM
#5
Pro
Thread Starter
Trending Topics
03-01-2014, 05:11 AM
#8
Pro
Thread Starter
03-02-2014, 12:28 AM
#9
Suzuka Master
iTrader: (2)
Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand the preoccupation with dynos. They're all different. They're a decent tool to monitor individual progress when using the same one each time, but that's about it. He made 264 before, on a different dyno. The only changes are Flashpro and RDX injectors, which certainly aren't good for 28 whp. I'm sure the car runs strong. A bone stock 7G 6MT Accord, with ~215 WHP should be good for 98 mph in the quarter. If this car is making a true 292, it's good for 106 mph corrected traps at stock weight; 107 with basic weight reduction. Certainly possible, but slips speak louder than dynos.
The following users liked this post:
flexer (03-03-2014)
03-02-2014, 12:49 AM
#10
If these are the numbers I am thinking of(and the build) the heads, runners, intake manifold, and throttle body, are all from the 3.7, with the heads and runners ported, the tls cams, and some serious tuning with a very custom exhaust.
stock pistons, oem valves and valvetrain though. Total build cost was somewhere in the 2-3g range but brought an additional 60-80 hp to the car. This on a 32a2-a3 block would be quite impressive.
stock pistons, oem valves and valvetrain though. Total build cost was somewhere in the 2-3g range but brought an additional 60-80 hp to the car. This on a 32a2-a3 block would be quite impressive.
03-02-2014, 06:01 AM
#11
Pro
Thread Starter
If these are the numbers I am thinking of(and the build) the heads, runners, intake manifold, and throttle body, are all from the 3.7, with the heads and runners ported, the tls cams, and some serious tuning with a very custom exhaust.
stock pistons, oem valves and valvetrain though. Total build cost was somewhere in the 2-3g range but brought an additional 60-80 hp to the car. This on a 32a2-a3 block would be quite impressive.
stock pistons, oem valves and valvetrain though. Total build cost was somewhere in the 2-3g range but brought an additional 60-80 hp to the car. This on a 32a2-a3 block would be quite impressive.
03-02-2014, 08:52 AM
#13
Pro
Thread Starter
03-02-2014, 03:31 PM
#14
My mistake, I thought this was 325's build
03-02-2014, 04:02 PM
#15
takin care of Business in
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kansas City, MO
Age: 40
Posts: 30,994
Received 4,732 Likes
on
4,064 Posts
Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand the preoccupation with dynos. They're all different. They're a decent tool to monitor individual progress when using the same one each time, but that's about it. He made 264 before, on a different dyno. The only changes are Flashpro and RDX injectors, which certainly aren't good for 28 whp.
more than dyno's EVERY CAR IS DIFFERENT....some cars react to some mods and some dont...If the AFR/Timing was thrown out of whack with the mods, I am very certain and a good tune + injectors will gain him 28whp....
with the JnR ECU, I have dyno's of car gaining 25+whp and wtq and some gaining barely 5-6whp since there was no tweaking to be done....so it all depends on how the ECU reacts after certain mods are done...
Great numbers OP, I wish to get to 300-ish someday
03-02-2014, 06:08 PM
#16
Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand the preoccupation with dynos. They're all different. They're a decent tool to monitor individual progress when using the same one each time, but that's about it. He made 264 before, on a different dyno. The only changes are Flashpro and RDX injectors, which certainly aren't good for 28 whp. I'm sure the car runs strong. A bone stock 7G 6MT Accord, with ~215 WHP should be good for 98 mph in the quarter. If this car is making a true 292, it's good for 106 mph corrected traps at stock weight; 107 with basic weight reduction. Certainly possible, but slips speak louder than dynos.
03-02-2014, 06:50 PM
#17
Side note.. My car went 13.6 when it made 227whp/200wtq on a mustang dyno while.. A month later on a Dynocom Dyno in NC no mods were changed and I made 246whp/228wtq... so right there is a 19whp/28wtq gain just a change in elevation and dyno. Mustang is at 325ft above while Dynocom was 2350ft. sae numbers.
The following users liked this post:
Sonnick (03-17-2014)
03-03-2014, 08:18 AM
#18
Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand the preoccupation with dynos. They're all different. They're a decent tool to monitor individual progress when using the same one each time, but that's about it. He made 264 before, on a different dyno. The only changes are Flashpro and RDX injectors, which certainly aren't good for 28 whp. I'm sure the car runs strong. A bone stock 7G 6MT Accord, with ~215 WHP should be good for 98 mph in the quarter. If this car is making a true 292, it's good for 106 mph corrected traps at stock weight; 107 with basic weight reduction. Certainly possible, but slips speak louder than dynos.
03-03-2014, 04:07 PM
#20
takin care of Business in
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kansas City, MO
Age: 40
Posts: 30,994
Received 4,732 Likes
on
4,064 Posts
a lot of people keep going by trap speed and slip times....it is also a measure and VERY VERY inconsistent....you can have different times and speed depending on how you launch and how you shift and how much fuel you are carrying and how your tires are how much slip you had....
a dyno takes all those variables out....
03-03-2014, 09:32 PM
#21
Suzuka Master
iTrader: (2)
Enlighten me on what you think is incorrect, instead of "lol' ing" like you're 17.
Anil, trap speeds are a pretty accurate measure of how much power a car is making if you use the same correction calculator each time. ET's mean very little, as they're traction dependent, which is a huge variable, but trap speeds are not affected by anything but power, weight and atmospheric conditions. DA calculators take care of the last variable, and as long as you maintain the same weight of the car, the first variable, which is the car's power and what we're looking to determine, then becomes evident. It's a huge myth that traction has anything to do with trap speed, hence power. You can tear the tires off and run a horrid ET and your trap won't be affected. It's certainly not science, but it's more accurate than comparing different dynos.
so is the drag strip....
a lot of people keep going by trap speed and slip times....it is also a measure and VERY VERY inconsistent....you can have different times and speed depending on how you launch and how you shift and how much fuel you are carrying and how your tires are how much slip you had....
a dyno takes all those variables out....
a lot of people keep going by trap speed and slip times....it is also a measure and VERY VERY inconsistent....you can have different times and speed depending on how you launch and how you shift and how much fuel you are carrying and how your tires are how much slip you had....
a dyno takes all those variables out....
03-03-2014, 09:42 PM
#22
Why, you are already getting into your feelings and would rather not destroy a good thread... I doubt you care anyways
03-03-2014, 09:47 PM
#23
Suzuka Master
iTrader: (2)
Side note.. My car went 13.6 when it made 227whp/200wtq on a mustang dyno while.. A month later on a Dynocom Dyno in NC no mods were changed and I made 246whp/228wtq... so right there is a 19whp/28wtq gain just a change in elevation and dyno. Mustang is at 325ft above while Dynocom was 2350ft. sae numbers.
BTW, are you still running a base tune or are you dyno/e-tuned yet??
The following users liked this post:
Grand_hustle17 (03-05-2014)
03-04-2014, 10:20 AM
#26
takin care of Business in
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kansas City, MO
Age: 40
Posts: 30,994
Received 4,732 Likes
on
4,064 Posts
Anil, trap speeds are a pretty accurate measure of how much power a car is making if you use the same correction calculator each time. ET's mean very little, as they're traction dependent, which is a huge variable, but trap speeds are not affected by anything but power, weight and atmospheric conditions. DA calculators take care of the last variable, and as long as you maintain the same weight of the car, the first variable, which is the car's power and what we're looking to determine, then becomes evident. It's a huge myth that traction has anything to do with trap speed, hence power. You can tear the tires off and run a horrid ET and your trap won't be affected. It's certainly not science, but it's more accurate than comparing different dynos.
hell I use Torque PRO with A BT dongle and I get weird fluctuations in my reading when doing a 40-80 run....depends a lot of throttle % and the weather and the IAT and the ECT and the traction....if I jump on the throttle tooo early and spin wheels, I can see my 40-80 taking a hit but almost .25 seconds...I cant imagine the impact that will have on 0-105 (assuming you are trapping 105mph)...
again, am just thinking out loud and could be completely wrong about this...
03-04-2014, 12:52 PM
#27
Moderator
iTrader: (7)
I have to agree with anx1300c here. Trap speeds aren't really affected by how you launch. I mean unless you purposely drive horribly like hitting the rev limiter way too long, your trap speed will be all within 1-2 mph of each other even if you have a bad launch.
Think of it like this. Trap speed is basically measuring how much you can bring the speedometer up to over a fixed distance. Time is irrelevant. Even if you cruised for like the first 20 feet of the strip at 5mph, you will probably only lower your trap speed by like 2-3mph or so. The reason is that at the end of the track when you're going triple digits, you're traveling at around 147 fps(100mph). By losing that 20feet at the beginning, you really only lost less than half a second extra to accelerate. How much higher trap speed would you have gotten in that fraction of a second? 2-3mph?
Now, in that same scenario where you cruised at 5mph for 20 feet, you would have got a horrible 1/4 mile time. That probably would have added over a full second to your ET. (A 13 second car vs a 14 second car is a huge difference)
Think of it like this. Trap speed is basically measuring how much you can bring the speedometer up to over a fixed distance. Time is irrelevant. Even if you cruised for like the first 20 feet of the strip at 5mph, you will probably only lower your trap speed by like 2-3mph or so. The reason is that at the end of the track when you're going triple digits, you're traveling at around 147 fps(100mph). By losing that 20feet at the beginning, you really only lost less than half a second extra to accelerate. How much higher trap speed would you have gotten in that fraction of a second? 2-3mph?
Now, in that same scenario where you cruised at 5mph for 20 feet, you would have got a horrible 1/4 mile time. That probably would have added over a full second to your ET. (A 13 second car vs a 14 second car is a huge difference)
Last edited by paperboy42190; 03-04-2014 at 01:00 PM.
The following users liked this post:
anx1300c (03-10-2014)
03-04-2014, 01:04 PM
#28
Moderator
iTrader: (7)
If you still stand by your belief though I will post back here with the lesson.
03-04-2014, 01:05 PM
#29
Pro
Thread Starter
2-3mph is a huge difference. The saying goes 10whp for every mph (give or take) that's a 20-30whp 'loss' for a bad start or missing a gear or going to hard Into second etc.
I've been to the track and have trapped between 79-82 mph in the 1/8th. I don't see why it couldn't magnify the longer the track. Overall '8-10 trips down the track add up the mph then divide by 8-10 would give you a good average and thus give you a good idea of what your making, but again that's what sae numbers are suppose to do as well.
I've been to the track and have trapped between 79-82 mph in the 1/8th. I don't see why it couldn't magnify the longer the track. Overall '8-10 trips down the track add up the mph then divide by 8-10 would give you a good average and thus give you a good idea of what your making, but again that's what sae numbers are suppose to do as well.
03-04-2014, 01:23 PM
#30
Moderator
iTrader: (7)
That example was cruising at 5mph for 20 ft. that's like worse than a horrible launch. So what I was getting at was that even doing a bad launch wont lose 3mph in the trap speed, but doing a bad launch can easily lose over a second in the ET.
wrong again. The longer the track the less "magnified" it will be. The longer track gives you even more room for error when it comes to the trap speed. Think about it like this. If you extended it to a full 1 mile drag, what would the result be? At the end of the 1 mile, you'll be doing like what? 130? or whatever it is.
The reason it's less "magnified" is that cars accelerate slower at the end of the track. At 130mph(just an example), acceleration wouldnt be like how it is around 80mph. So you said with your example of "79-82mph" those 3 mph comes and goes pretty quick, but do you think it'll be the same from 130-133? it's going to take a much longer time to accelerate those extra 3mph. Not to mention, at those speeds, you need an even longer distance.
The point is, the longer the track, the more time and distance you have to kind of minimize any errors. If you gave 10 same cars to 10 different drivers of all skill levels. Chances are, at 1/8 mile, there would be quite a few trap speed and ET discrepancies due to different launches and shifts. At 1 mile though, they should all be going about the same trap speed.
wrong again. The longer the track the less "magnified" it will be. The longer track gives you even more room for error when it comes to the trap speed. Think about it like this. If you extended it to a full 1 mile drag, what would the result be? At the end of the 1 mile, you'll be doing like what? 130? or whatever it is.
The reason it's less "magnified" is that cars accelerate slower at the end of the track. At 130mph(just an example), acceleration wouldnt be like how it is around 80mph. So you said with your example of "79-82mph" those 3 mph comes and goes pretty quick, but do you think it'll be the same from 130-133? it's going to take a much longer time to accelerate those extra 3mph. Not to mention, at those speeds, you need an even longer distance.
The point is, the longer the track, the more time and distance you have to kind of minimize any errors. If you gave 10 same cars to 10 different drivers of all skill levels. Chances are, at 1/8 mile, there would be quite a few trap speed and ET discrepancies due to different launches and shifts. At 1 mile though, they should all be going about the same trap speed.
Last edited by paperboy42190; 03-04-2014 at 01:25 PM.
The following users liked this post:
Sonnick (05-06-2014)
03-04-2014, 02:46 PM
#31
Pro
Thread Starter
Tell me, how is 122mph trap speed a 12 second car and 120mph a 11 second car while both having the same power car weight etc.
Last edited by NvrDwn; 03-04-2014 at 02:50 PM.
The following users liked this post:
Sonnick (05-06-2014)
03-04-2014, 03:24 PM
#33
takin care of Business in
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kansas City, MO
Age: 40
Posts: 30,994
Received 4,732 Likes
on
4,064 Posts
see, YOU CANT PLEASE EVERYONE !!!
if you to the track there are many many variables...if you shift at 6600rpm on 1 run and 6300 on the next, I bet it changes the trap speed and ET....and when you are gauging 'how much power a mod made" those variables need to be spot on...
on the dyno, there are variables as well with different dyno's and different types and many other factors....
so lets just take a congratulate the OP with the power he is putting down and call it a day?
I usually dont argue over numbers UNLESS someone with a BASE 5AT post a dyno doing 270whp, or a fully bolted Type S dyno-ing at 210whp
if you to the track there are many many variables...if you shift at 6600rpm on 1 run and 6300 on the next, I bet it changes the trap speed and ET....and when you are gauging 'how much power a mod made" those variables need to be spot on...
on the dyno, there are variables as well with different dyno's and different types and many other factors....
so lets just take a congratulate the OP with the power he is putting down and call it a day?
I usually dont argue over numbers UNLESS someone with a BASE 5AT post a dyno doing 270whp, or a fully bolted Type S dyno-ing at 210whp
03-04-2014, 03:34 PM
#34
Pro
Thread Starter
a 122mph trap speed does not have to mean a 12 second car. also, a 120mph trap speed does not have to mean an 11 second car.
how much more clear can I be? trap speed is an indication of overall power without regard to traction.
1/4 mile time is a combination of power, traction, gear ratio, and driver ability
There are lots of ways to learn about this online. If you want a more technical explanation and proof though you'll have to take a physics class and learn the simple equations of motion.
how much more clear can I be? trap speed is an indication of overall power without regard to traction.
1/4 mile time is a combination of power, traction, gear ratio, and driver ability
There are lots of ways to learn about this online. If you want a more technical explanation and proof though you'll have to take a physics class and learn the simple equations of motion.
03-04-2014, 03:35 PM
#35
Moderator
iTrader: (7)
how much more clear can I be? trap speed is an indication of overall power without regard to traction.
1/4 mile time is a combination of power, traction, gear ratio, and driver ability
There are lots of ways to learn about this online. If you want a more technical explanation and proof though you'll have to take a physics class and learn the simple equations of motion.
03-04-2014, 03:41 PM
#36
Moderator
iTrader: (7)
wrong again. The longer the track the less "magnified" it will be. The longer track gives you even more room for error when it comes to the trap speed. Think about it like this. If you extended it to a full 1 mile drag, what would the result be? At the end of the 1 mile, you'll be doing like what? 130? or whatever it is.
The reason it's less "magnified" is that cars accelerate slower at the end of the track. At 130mph(just an example), acceleration wouldnt be like how it is around 80mph. So you said with your example of "79-82mph" those 3 mph comes and goes pretty quick, but do you think it'll be the same from 130-133? it's going to take a much longer time to accelerate those extra 3mph. Not to mention, at those speeds, you need an even longer distance.
The point is, the longer the track, the more time and distance you have to kind of minimize any errors. If you gave 10 same cars to 10 different drivers of all skill levels. Chances are, at 1/8 mile, there would be quite a few trap speed and ET discrepancies due to different launches and shifts. At 1 mile though, they should all be going about the same trap speed.
The reason it's less "magnified" is that cars accelerate slower at the end of the track. At 130mph(just an example), acceleration wouldnt be like how it is around 80mph. So you said with your example of "79-82mph" those 3 mph comes and goes pretty quick, but do you think it'll be the same from 130-133? it's going to take a much longer time to accelerate those extra 3mph. Not to mention, at those speeds, you need an even longer distance.
The point is, the longer the track, the more time and distance you have to kind of minimize any errors. If you gave 10 same cars to 10 different drivers of all skill levels. Chances are, at 1/8 mile, there would be quite a few trap speed and ET discrepancies due to different launches and shifts. At 1 mile though, they should all be going about the same trap speed.
03-04-2014, 07:34 PM
#38
The following users liked this post:
Hacura (05-04-2014)
The following 2 users liked this post by paperboy42190:
Sonnick (03-17-2014),
thisaznboi88 (03-04-2014)