swoosh

iTrader: (5)

here let me put an end to this argument LOL....

i mod my car so when i run it against someone i come out on top....so for me top end is more important....i would rather have 10 WTQ/WHP in the 4500+ zone....and i dont mind sacrificing 10WTQ/WHP below the 2500 zone....

most the races i do are not from a stand still....hence that scenario....

but if you race someone from a dig, you might want a different scenario....or if you dont race anyone at all then you might want the low end powaaaaa......

InFaMouSLink

iTrader: (10)

shouldn't the crossover between hp and tq be at 5252rpms? wish i could see more of the sheet to confirm..

Inaccurate

^ Very often, a graph is using a different scale for the TQ number than the HP numbers. Only if the TQ and HP are using the same scale would the lines cross at 5252. The lines MUST cross at 5252 due to the math formula to derive HP. HP is a calculated figure. HP is not measured. Only TQ is measured. then the TQ values are used to calculate HP.

InFaMouSLink

iTrader: (10)

^I thought of you when i posted!! Since the scales are different we really dont know what numbers are in the midrange so everyones fight on this picture is worthless!

thisaznboi88

iTrader: (7)

what are you guys talking about?? WTF The RPM is on the bottom. HP is a comparison on the top graph. The lower graph is tq...

The graph is being compared and that why it is separated. hp old vs hp new, tq old vs tq new

swoosh

iTrader: (5)

^^^ well when a graph is at a particular scale the HP and TQ lines intersect at 5252 rpm....but when its not in scale that doesnt happen.....

doesnt mean the graph is flawed.....just on a different scale....

thisaznboi88

iTrader: (7)

do you guys want a more traditional graph like this?? random graph

InFaMouSLink

iTrader: (10)

You sir are correct, Excuse my stupidity .

swoosh

iTrader: (5)

yesssss.....

for the longest time when people dont believe in a dyno someone posted they used to say "hey TQ and HP are not crossing at 5252" LOL....it was some funny shizzz

InFaMouSLink

iTrader: (10)

I dont know how i missed that they are comparing two different runs separately... Im going to bed. Fuck you! LMAO

phatrick

I'm sure that it would make sense to get the gains from the bit of torque there, but is it justifying the loss in HP is the question haha. In all honesty, these mods do so little that there is really no justifiable cause, just hope that they'll do what they claim and show good results.

I kinda want it myself to try it out and see if I can notice it. If not definitely looking to do some PNP work like you did yourself.

swoosh

iTrader: (5)

Alex, go to bed YO !!!

WhyTF are you still on the thread....you said you were gonna sleep almost 30 minutes back....

thisaznboi88

iTrader: (7)

<3 you guys. Now go to bed.

rush

iTrader: (1)

Lol

swoosh

iTrader: (5)

Inaccurate

Sorry thisaznboi88. I didn't look at the graph before I posted.





For our forum as a whole (just using phatrick as an example), I wish our forum would learn that HP and TQ are not two separate entities. HP is a calculated figure. HP is not measured. Only TQ is measured. Then the TQ values are used to calculate HP.

An engine can be modded to shift the TQ production more into the lower RPM range or more into the higher RPM range. The slang "torquey" or "has a lot of torque" is just a slang meaning that the torque is biased toward the lower RPM range. The slang "peaky" or "has low torque" is just slang meaning the torque production is biased toward the higher RPM range.

I also wish that people would stop saying TQ causes this and HP is responsible for that. If a person would learn what the technical term (I am not being sarcastic) of Power really meant, it would help a lot. First of all, do a google search for "Quarter mile acceleration formula" (or click here). All you will see is HP is used to predict acceleration, not TQ. This applies for max top end speed too. That is, if you wanted to predict top speed, HP is used not TQ. So, please stop saying that TQ is used for that and HP is used for this. The only thing that matters is HP, not TQ.

The key to understanding this whole mess is that HP involves the overall gearing of the vehicle. If the torque is produced in the higher RPM ranges, then the car can stay in a lower gear longer for the torque multiplication from the gearing. Guess what, that is the definition of Power in a nutshell.

Now there is one exception to what I said.... the concern of having the power from a dig provided that you have traction to put the power to the ground. In a race car, the gearing would be changed to be at the optimum gearing from a dig to suit the powerband. But for us, we can not change our gearing. So, yes we need to be careful to not shift too much torque away from the low rpm's toward the higher rpm's. Racing is about compromises. Pick where you what your torque to be located to match your needs. If you seldom race from a dig, then you can afford to move your torque to higher rpm's.

The key to this is to pick where you want your strength to be. If you are only interested in having the most acceleration from a roll, determine what your usable rpm range is. For the 5AT, it is approx 4500 - 6500 RPM (provided that you are not using SS). In this example, you would need to focus on the *average HP* produced between 4500 - 6500 RPM.

If you modded the engine to shift more power between 4500-5500 than 5500-6500, the car would accelerate the same if it had more power between 5500-6500 than 4500-5500, This is because the average power has remain the same within the overall 4500 - 6500 RPM range.

flexer

But HP is directly proportional to Tq, so its all the same. You are stressing HP, but I am fine with someone saying torque as well if they know what to say.

Since HP = torque * Engine RPM, than really they should say they are trying to hold torque out in the upper RPM range, or trying to increase torque at higher RPM's. Than anyone that understands the formula would know that higher torque, at higher RPM, means higher HP.

Here is a good article about it:

http://www.enginebasics.com/Engine%2...%20Torque.html

JR

thisaznboi88

iTrader: (7)

Hp=( tq x rpm )/5252 exceptions to this equation are from electric motors that make 100% tq at 0-1rpm.

MayorMcCheese

Guys I got a question maybe problem

Other than PCDs I'm near fully bolted on my 6 speed speed .. Port n polished .. Intake Jpipe exhaust under drive pulley plus I'm a 6speed... I was driving home tonight , I just installed my CAI tonight .. And when I'm in lower gear and in my power band I go full throttle and car pulls .. But when I get to Vtec , car backfires a little stability blinks once or twice and I continue to go ... Now it's nothing serious BUT when I spoke to my mechanic who did my install he said its because I've done all these mods adding more air into the engine but fuel is still the same .. And I need more fuel .. He said higher output fuel pump or fuel injectors or even some type of tune or programme
Now my accord uses regular 87 octane so I'm thinking and my mechanic recommended using 93octane in the meantime since it could help
I actually agree .. What do I think

thisaznboi88

iTrader: (7)

I think your running rich now. Too much air. Then car dumps more fuel to compensate. When you shift some of the fuels escape without getting burned. and then ignites in the exhuast area.

InFaMouSLink

iTrader: (10)

Run 93.

thisaznboi88

iTrader: (7)

can you data log the car A/F?

I know my car backfires/ pop everytime I shift gears, but it sounds pretty kool. That was before I did runners and IM. only j-pipe and exhaust cause it to pop.

BostonSilverTypeS

+1 what he said...run 93 and every so often dump some octane booster in your tank it will help!

thisaznboi88

iTrader: (7)

octane booster doesn't do jack. Raise the oct like .5 so its like 93.5. lol Dump 103 Unleaded race gas

BostonSilverTypeS

^all depends...I know it's hard to find but there is a part store around my way that sells 102 octane booster and it does wonders!!!...but yeah can't go wrong with some 103 race fuel if you can find some that is....prolly easier out west to find that stuff...around here only place that sells race fuel is a sunoco station at the strip when its open season !!

MayorMcCheese

thanks fir the response guys , im gonna take a video tomorrow to show u .. its kinda cool though going wot and heating the car and than the bop bop sound

I'm gonna run 93 though for a little to see I'm actually surprised what i thought of doing was actually your opinion too.. I'll post a sloppy video tomorow but its hard driving stick n doing videos lol r

as for the.103 octane there'snothing by me that settle but i bet i could find some online of i looked hard enough

InFaMouSLink

iTrader: (10)

Just run 93. You'll be fine. Higher octane will burn quicker and stops the backfire. Even when I had my 91 accord 10 years ago I never used anything but 93. Shit back then I even used sunoco 94. (Gas prices were still around a dollar back then)

InFaMouSLink

iTrader: (10)

Breaking traction at higher rpms. Turn off the traction control and see what happens when you hit <5K rpms. I posted a video where my first gear has no traction at all above 5k. its a page back.. does yours do it in every gear?

MayorMcCheese

i was in third full throttle n it broke.. but im not sure if tires slipped or if.stability stepped in to slow the engine... ill get a.video later

BostonSilverTypeS

Exactly, I got a 93 accord stock and she also gets 93octane and to this day it still runs beautiful...never had a single fuel issue with it!!....shit even my little 50cc scooter gets 93octane!....and yeah I remember those 94Sunoco days!!!...good times for fuel!! those days are long gone unfortunately

MayorMcCheese

i spent 50 dollars on gas at 397 a gallon and got 3/4

i did a video but stupid me left the radio on and i missed 3rd because i tried going into 3rd using my phone to push in the gear lol FAIL lol

for now on im going to run premium even if it doesnt require premium.. with all my mods theyd probably work better together with a better fuel.. plus i only use shell so some V power

Hacura

I'll be installing the MPP 1/2 aluminum spacer this week. Wonder if anyone else is running this and has any issues?



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

swoosh

iTrader: (5)

^^^ lets see how that works out buddy....

am eager to see how it will work out....

thisaznboi88

iTrader: (7)

where did you get that?

InFaMouSLink

iTrader: (10)

^ he said MPP

Hacura

Yeah, I got it from Moores and will be installing it later this week. Just got back from vacation and am jet lagged. The spacers not as thick as the MDX spacer but will be sandwiched between two P2R gaskets. I thought I read somewhere about the optimal spacer thickness being 1/4" - 1/2" and that the MDX spacer was too thick causing top end loss which would make sense since the MDX needs more power lower in the band due to the target demographics.

I don't know if I will even be able to notice top end loss or whatever this turbulence is.

swoosh

iTrader: (5)

^^^ well if that proves nice, i might get my spacer cnc-ed and sell half of it

thisaznboi88

iTrader: (7)

careful with the p2r gasket. Mine melted cuz too much vtec!

Hacura

^^^ oh shit really. I was thinking of not installing it on the lower end of the spacer. Did you do the ultimate cooling mod? The hybrid UCM is my next project before summer so moar vtec is a go. lol

thisaznboi88

iTrader: (7)

didn't you see my thread? this was after 1 month





I didn't do the ultimate cooling mod. Going to run water/meth. I don't like cutting up stuff that I can see.