J30a5 dyno (Me)
 

So I went to get dynod again today. Last time I put down 250/209 uncorrected. Mods were:
I/PCD/RV6 V1 Jpipe/OBX catback/Ported intake manifold

Mods added:
Custom Jpipe
Collector to 3" exhaust
UR pulley (stock size)
IM Butterfly delete

I will have to post the graph tomorrow. New SAE corrected numbers are 256/222. Uncorrected I put down 264/229. Needless to say I am very pleased with the gains. It was not in the exact dyno, but at the same shop (moved) and was told the dynos read very similar. So I gained 14hp/20tq with the above mods :D

way to go, sonnick.

always nice to see the mods we do ACTUALLY do improve on dyno runs. keep it up! :thumbsup:

More info on your 3" exhaust. :wish: Single exit? Which muffler(s)? Is the new exhaust much louder than the previous exhaust? I am thinking that the 3" exhaust caused the lion's share of the improvement. :yum:

Congrats :thumbsup:

your little 3.0 is making nice power!

Well done, Sonnick! This puts a little more perspective on those vids you posted in the racing section!

Thanks guys. Here is the graph of all 4 runs.

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d45/Sonnick/photo.jpg

I was particularly surprised with torque gain. Previously I made 209 uncorrected and here 222 SAE corrected. I wish I was over 200wtq sooner lol, but what can you do. :thumbsup:

I did a total of 4 dyno runs, all in 4th gear. I dyno'd twice with the foglight cover in and twice without and it made no difference. Btw, this was just a baseline ;)

You did those runs back to back? bcs there's almost no difference between them and that's great!

Im curious to see the difference the IM butterly made, but i would have to see the previous graph..if it filled the high end. The top is very smooth in this graph.

What did you do different with the custom Jpipe vs V1.
Im trying to see where most of your gains came from.

We did 2 runs back to back, waited about 10 min or so, then did the last 2. I believe the 3rd run produced the best numbers.

The custom Jpipe has longer primaries (but shorter than rv6 v3), a better collector, and exits to a 3" exhaust compared to 2 3/8". The butterfly delete smooths out the midrange a bit, but I don't think I gained any top end from it.

Below is the link to my first (minus the x). 90mph is 5k rpm. I'm assuming all other lines are ~500RPM increments.

http://www.v6xperformance.net/forums...s-im-dyno.html

nice numbers!!

The J30 is running strong! Did you notice any low end loss when doing the butterfly delete, or was it all gain? Please let me know anything you noticed after you removed it.

I think it came from the 3" exhaust. I gained a shit load of power from my 3" Single Exit. It was like getting the gains from the PCD's all over again.

@Sonnick

More info on your 3" exhaust. :wish: Single exit? Which muffler(s)? Is the new exhaust much louder than the previous exhaust? I am thinking that the 3" exhaust caused the lion's share of the improvement. :yum:

^ so, the butterfly delete caused most of his gains?

According to his post above, he says "I don't think I gained any top end from the [butterfly delete]."

^that was a joke. lol

Sorry Inaccurate I completely forgot to answer your question! I have a 3in midpipe which branches off into two 2.5in pipes and 2 Dynomax Ultraflow mufflers. I'm also using a Magnaflow 6in round by 30in body muffler on the midpipe. I'm actually shocked how loud the OBX was when paired with the PCDs because it was so quiet before. I think the 3in is a bit louder though overall.

Justin, I think he was saying that my 3in exhaust is what gave me the increase in power and I agree. The butterfly delete smooths out the powerband around 4k or si, but other than that not exactly sure if it produced any gains up top. I honestly don't think I lost low end but I can't be certain. The butterflies normally open around 4k I believe, which is when my torque took off. Looking at my previous graph, I don't really see a big diff in low end. I'll look at it more closely tomorrow though.

Oooh, in that case... so was my answer. :snicker:

Can someone tell me what "torque" is?

Torque is not lost.... It only shifts up in the power band.
You often hear people say after doing some exhaust mod
"I lost some low end but gained top end"
Power band shifts up higher, resulting in that nice full gain up to where you usually see it dip.... Which is important, because now every time you shift, you fall back into a better power band, and theres less slacking up top

Sonnic, you're right. I didn't know exactly how the setup was with the 3".

Sonic,

I am sorry for asking what your exhaust was. You know that I am very aware of your setup. :tongue:

I guess I was thinking that you changed it recently. Thanks for being a good sport and answering my question anyway. :thumbsup:

Fixed it. You forgot the red again.......

You be the master of the funnies :thumbsup:

And, I mean that in a good way :snicker:

Dude you are the funnies :thumbsup:

Opel, my mistake. You are 100% right about the powerband 'shifting higher.' I'm not so sure the butterflies did that though. I will post both of my graphs in the same post for comparison.

NEW DYNO:

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d45/Sonnick/photo.jpg


PREVIOUS DYNO

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4...ick/Mydyno.jpg

You really need an Engine Management, by looking at your graph, your tq improved the most on the 3inch collecter/Jpipe mod. With an Engine Management, you could be seeing power throughout your whole rpm.

I'm looking at this through my phone and can't see the previous graph rpm clearly.
Trying to compare them through the rpm range. Ill look when I get by a comp

The only thing is, the previous dyno was done by MPH and not engine speed. It can be quickly changed, but the shop I went to moved/closed down. I doubt I could get this graph again. I asked 100x for them to email and they never did.

However, the line at 90mph is ~5K RPM. So I'm assuming each line to the left and right of that would be increasing/decreasing incrementally by 500RPM. It makes sense considering redline is 6800RPM, and it looks like the graph stops at 6800RPM with the previous assumptions. Not a perfect comparison, but they best we can do.

I agree bouncer, with a tune the graph would be much smoother throughout the midrange with some gain up top. I don't have an AFR graph, but can probably get it from them. It was in the 13.1-13.6 range throughout most of the powerband from what I remember. It dropped to ~12.7 for a 500 RPM increment or so, then back up. I believe Rodney tuned in the mid 12s for AFR?

Ah, I couldn't tell it was mph.....

As far as Rodney tuning with mid 12s afr....
I think thats a bit to high for FI... Especially on not so strong bottoms as out cars.
I believe 11.8 is as high as you wanna be... Down to 11.3.
Away from dangerous lean numbers, and not too rich to soak the chamber.

^ I meant all motor.

That should be fine then.
Btw, off topic but haven't been here in a while.... What did you end up doing about the clutch? I remember you were having problems with the CM set.

Just went the OEM route. I still have to do the slave mod :tomato:

How many miles are on your motor?

95k.

Twas a joke. :tomato: I have (had) a 4-cylinder Accord.

Ah that sucks. I remember I wanted to take a look, but can't remember why I didn't. Its been a while.

LOL, good one......I had no idea

Sonnick, I think you gained more like 20 whp overall. I thought your last run was STD, not uncorrected? And also, I remember you saying you only spiked to 250 whp, and in reality it was more like 245. If so, that would equal mid 230's SAE using the rough 4% difference factor. If so, you actually gained ~20!

256 SAE is pretty stout for basic bolt ons, considering TOV only got 216-217 out of their stock test car. You're within about 5 whp of the 6MT base TL that Rodney tuned. I'm sure you can pick up another easy 20 with a tune, ported runners and bored TB.

I don't think you can apply percentage to dyno numbers......5% can change different numbers drastically.
Same with drivetrain loss.... Some apply about 15%. Lets say 20% for easier calculations....A car making 300bhp, -20%=240whp, 60hp loss
Now the same car making 600bhp, -20%= 480whp, 120hp loss.

Why should a car making more hp, lose more.

^ Thanks Anx. Yea the other dyno was STD corrected. The spike on my previous dyno was the 255, so the numbers were 250/209 STD. My STD numbers this time were 264/229.

I'm very happy with the gains for sure and the overall numbers. Again, all dynos will read differently, so it's not as easy as just comparing my car to one that Rodney tuned. I will say though, that if I gained this much power from the 3" exhaust untuned on my 3.0, imagine tuned on the 3.2!

My goal is to make 270 untuned by the end of June but that's all I'm gonna say :D

Opel: You can apply % difference to numbers. Why do you think the high HP cars from the factory have a larger gap in their crank/wheel HP numbers? Unless of course they are underrated. The TL puts down what, 225whp stock in 6MT form? From 258? While I bet a CTS-v (556 crank) puts down under 500. Big difference. Drivetrain loss is applied evenly as are SAE corrections.

Have you thought about adding the manifold spacer to move the powerband to the left? It might make an interesting change with all of your mods.

Although I do like low end torque, I prefer the top end HP :)

The difference usually comes out to roughly 4% between SAE and STD, with SAE always reading lower since it corrects to 29.23 InHg dry air and 77 degrees F vs 29.92 InHg dry air and 60 degrees F for STD correction. The 4% isn't scientific, but close. And being that all auto manufacturers use SAE J1349 when publishing power figures, it keeps apples to apples rather than confusing people who just focus on straight up numbers. STD is more for bragging rights. We all know 17 degrees in either direction can have a pretty significant effect on how these cars run. It's like if two identical cars hit two different tracks and car A runs when it's 35 degrees out and car B runs at 85 degrees. Car A might trap 3-4 mph higher than car B, so everyone on the internet thinks car A is way faster, when it really isn't. Same principle applies when someone dynos their car, completely uncorrected on a very cold day and posts their numbers; everyone thinks their car is stronger than it actually is.

http://www.gfchips.com/images/produc...gforcechip.jpg

LOL