Ported/Polished Upper Intake Manifold and Runners!
11-09-2011, 11:13 PM
#281
Suzuka Master
iTrader: (2)
Unsprung weight relates to how the suspension reacts to bumps.
Unsprung weight has no bearing on acceleration and deceleration.
Rotational mass related to acceleration and deceleration.
Rotational mass has no bearing to how the suspension reacts to bumps.
I usually refer to rotational mass as "dynamic weight". I do this for the sake of clarity for the reader.
Rotational mass is more commonly known as the Flywheel Effect. A heavy wheel is difficult to get into motion (rotation) and is difficult to slow it's rotation speed.
Then, there is the moment-of-inertia aspects to rotational mass. The further out from the axis that the mass is centered, the more flywheel effect the mass will have.
More advanced topics include the difference between weight and mass. Please Google this to learn more about this topic.
And for the record, I do not agree at all with the post directly above by " the fenda rolla". His weight reduction from the rims is not equivalent to 320 pounds of STATIC weight loss.
Each pound of rotational weight saved at wheel RPM (i.e. wheel weight) is worth 3 pounds of static body weight and each pound saved at engine RPM (driveshaft, flywheel, etc) is worth 15 pounds of static body weight. Allegedly, the book "Chassis Engineering" by Herb Adams has a chart showing this 1-3-15 relationship.
This seems to be a good rule of thumb to use when figuring effects of weight reduction on an average car. These figures are just rough estimates at best.
For me, these conversions factors appear sensible. And, based on my experiences with my "TL Diet", these conversion factors match my experiences.
Unsprung weight has no bearing on acceleration and deceleration.
Rotational mass related to acceleration and deceleration.
Rotational mass has no bearing to how the suspension reacts to bumps.
I usually refer to rotational mass as "dynamic weight". I do this for the sake of clarity for the reader.
Rotational mass is more commonly known as the Flywheel Effect. A heavy wheel is difficult to get into motion (rotation) and is difficult to slow it's rotation speed.
Then, there is the moment-of-inertia aspects to rotational mass. The further out from the axis that the mass is centered, the more flywheel effect the mass will have.
More advanced topics include the difference between weight and mass. Please Google this to learn more about this topic.
And for the record, I do not agree at all with the post directly above by " the fenda rolla". His weight reduction from the rims is not equivalent to 320 pounds of STATIC weight loss.
Each pound of rotational weight saved at wheel RPM (i.e. wheel weight) is worth 3 pounds of static body weight and each pound saved at engine RPM (driveshaft, flywheel, etc) is worth 15 pounds of static body weight. Allegedly, the book "Chassis Engineering" by Herb Adams has a chart showing this 1-3-15 relationship.
This seems to be a good rule of thumb to use when figuring effects of weight reduction on an average car. These figures are just rough estimates at best.
For me, these conversions factors appear sensible. And, based on my experiences with my "TL Diet", these conversion factors match my experiences.
I know that when I replaced my nearly bald Turanzas (24lbs new, probably ~21 lbs worn, with new 29 lb Potenza 960's, I felt a slight loss in acceleration. It was roughly the same difference between a full/empty gas tank. Great A/S tire, but heavy as hell.
11-09-2011, 11:14 PM
#282
The Track Terror
Thanks for the clarification Inaccurate...guess I need to do a bit more reading on that! Also, it would be a good comparison to see how added wheel/tire weight would affect acceleration, such as in 1/4 mile times/trap speed...the only reason I mention this is because for whatever reason I definitely notice a big difference in acceleration from a roll and a dig going from my stock wheels to my RPF1s...
11-09-2011, 11:21 PM
#283
Suzuka Master
iTrader: (2)
Thanks for the clarification Inaccurate...guess I need to do a bit more reading on that! Also, it would be a good comparison to see how added wheel/tire weight would affect acceleration, such as in 1/4 mile times/trap speed...the only reason I mention this is because for whatever reason I definitely notice a big difference in acceleration from a roll and a dig going from my stock wheels to my RPF1s...
11-09-2011, 11:24 PM
#284
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
sweet....does the rule of 3 apply to the tire as well ? can we average it out ?
my new setup which am looking at will drop ~20 lbs per side (currently am at 53-ish lbs per rim/tire....my stock is ~49 lbs....this setup will be ~33lbs).....
so dropping 20 x 4 x 3 = 240lbs static....
my new setup which am looking at will drop ~20 lbs per side (currently am at 53-ish lbs per rim/tire....my stock is ~49 lbs....this setup will be ~33lbs).....
so dropping 20 x 4 x 3 = 240lbs static....
11-09-2011, 11:25 PM
#285
Safety Car
@ anx1300c
I agree completely with your above post. What you are describing is the moment-of-inertia aspects to rotational mass. And, it is very important as you stated. So much so that I will be getting shaved tires in the near furture.
@ the fenda rolla
It is easy to estimate fairly accurately.
100 lb reduction = 0.1 secind quicker 1/4 mile ET.
10 Hp increase = 0.1 secind quicker 1/4 mile ET.
So, your rims should give you an approx 0.1 secind quicker 1/4 mile ET.
I agree completely with your above post. What you are describing is the moment-of-inertia aspects to rotational mass. And, it is very important as you stated. So much so that I will be getting shaved tires in the near furture.
@ the fenda rolla
It is easy to estimate fairly accurately.
100 lb reduction = 0.1 secind quicker 1/4 mile ET.
10 Hp increase = 0.1 secind quicker 1/4 mile ET.
So, your rims should give you an approx 0.1 secind quicker 1/4 mile ET.
11-09-2011, 11:28 PM
#286
The Track Terror
Well, glad we thoroughly derailed this thread! Good info being thrown around here...
11-09-2011, 11:29 PM
#288
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
^^^ niceeeee.....
I would like to talk about cams, since you are giving away great info
Here is what I was thinking:
ECU, port the heads, maybe a tl-s cam
I would like to talk about cams, since you are giving away great info
Here is what I was thinking:
ECU, port the heads, maybe a tl-s cam
11-09-2011, 11:35 PM
#289
The Track Terror
11-09-2011, 11:42 PM
#290
Safety Car
The only people making a cam for the J-Engine is Bisimoto. You want the Level 2 cam. It has 255 degrees on the intake side at 0.050" lift. This is the type of cam that I was discussing. Not a baby oem TL-S camshaft.
TL-S camshaft =
Bisimoto Level 2 cam =
Bisimoto Level 2 Cam (click here)
bisimoto cam for j-series (click here)
Last edited by Inaccurate; 11-09-2011 at 11:45 PM.
11-10-2011, 02:48 AM
#293
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
Yes I was thinking of springs and retainers as well....and of couse the valves....
KMS has a package which upgrades all of these....here is the link:
http://www.honda-performance.com/valve-train.asp
I was thinking:
STEP1 : Upgrade with KMS package ($600)
STEP2 : Bismoto cams ($1200-1400)
STEP3 : Heads + Pistons + Rods (fawking expensive) ($2500 atleast)
So well KMS Package + Cams + Injectors + JnR ECU = (looking at hitting 350whp on a 05 5AT)
PS: dont forget the weight loss....
KMS has a package which upgrades all of these....here is the link:
http://www.honda-performance.com/valve-train.asp
I was thinking:
STEP1 : Upgrade with KMS package ($600)
STEP2 : Bismoto cams ($1200-1400)
STEP3 : Heads + Pistons + Rods (fawking expensive) ($2500 atleast)
So well KMS Package + Cams + Injectors + JnR ECU =
(looking at hitting 350whp on a 05 5AT)PS: dont forget the weight loss....
11-10-2011, 02:56 AM
#294
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
Also Inaccurate bro....I heard bad things about the Level2 and Bismoto as they just regrind it and for a 5AT you will loose tons of low end....
did you look more into it ?
did you look more into it ?
The following users liked this post:
Acura TL Builder (06-28-2020)
11-10-2011, 07:44 AM
#296
sweet....does the rule of 3 apply to the tire as well ? can we average it out ?
my new setup which am looking at will drop ~20 lbs per side (currently am at 53-ish lbs per rim/tire....my stock is ~49 lbs....this setup will be ~33lbs).....
so dropping 20 x 4 x 3 = 240lbs static....
my new setup which am looking at will drop ~20 lbs per side (currently am at 53-ish lbs per rim/tire....my stock is ~49 lbs....this setup will be ~33lbs).....
so dropping 20 x 4 x 3 = 240lbs static....
11-10-2011, 08:01 AM
#297
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
^^^ I was thinking the same....lets see how this goes....i need to sell my current setup before I can buy this new setup.... LOL
11-10-2011, 08:15 AM
#299
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
^^^ I know continental DW are one of the lighter tires....~18 lbs for tires....and the rims are 14 lbs....so around 32 lbs....am assuming what 4-5 lbs per tire maxxxx ? i would be way offf....
11-10-2011, 09:10 AM
#300
Safety Car
Are you all trying to turn me into IHC (grit teeth 
) 
Lessons -
Tire = the rubber part
Rim = the metal part
Wheel = the rim with the tire mounted
And..... air pressure in the tire does *not* have any weight. A tire with 32 PSI does not mean that you added an additional 32 lbs (mass) to the wheel. The air inside the tire, being either 5 psi or 50 psi, adds no weight to the wheel. And please no smart replies about the mass of air because we are not interested in tracking infinitesimal amounts of weight.
) Lessons -
Tire = the rubber part
Rim = the metal part
Wheel = the rim with the tire mounted
And..... air pressure in the tire does *not* have any weight. A tire with 32 PSI does not mean that you added an additional 32 lbs (mass) to the wheel. The air inside the tire, being either 5 psi or 50 psi, adds no weight to the wheel. And please no smart replies about the mass of air because we are not interested in tracking infinitesimal amounts of weight.
The following users liked this post:
justnspace (05-03-2012)
11-10-2011, 09:12 AM
#301
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
^^^ so i was right eh....well i will still compare the setup with and without air....
32lbs it is
32lbs it is
11-10-2011, 09:16 AM
#303
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
^^^ 
then why run tires ? just the rims
then why run tires ? just the rims
11-10-2011, 09:18 AM
#304
All motor
Inaccurate: Great info on the ratios. 1 thing that I think we are all forgetting. The static weight loss of wheels/tires wouldn't get multiplied by 4, but by 2 since we are FWD and essentially 'forcing' only 2 wheels to move, rather than all 4.
The TL-s cams may be a decent upgrade for the 3.0L Accord (still nowhere near Bisi's), but for the 3.2, I don't think it's worth it. All these 3.5/3.6 builds that have the TL-s cam are severely under-camming their cars. I'd guess another 20whp is easily possible with the Bisi cams, and slightly more with an increased rev limit. On J32a.com, they talk about the stock J32a2 cam duration. I believe they calculated the duration to be 224* @ .050", and the lift to be .015" less than Bisi's Stage 2 (not quite sure on this). I'm not sure what the duration/lift is on the TL-s cams, but it can't be that much higher than stock considering Bisi's numbers.
11-10-2011, 09:47 AM
#305
Safety Car
It has nothing what-so-ever to do with if the wheel is a "driving wheel" (applying power to the ground). It is only the “flywheel effect” that matters, and all four wheels experience the same “flywheel effect”.
11-10-2011, 09:47 AM
#306
Are you all trying to turn me into IHC (grit teeth )
Lessons -
Tire = the rubber part
Rim = the metal part
Wheel = the rim with the tire mounted
And..... air pressure in the tire does *not* have any weight. A tire with 32 PSI does not mean that you added an additional 32 lbs (mass) to the wheel. The air inside the tire, being either 5 psi or 50 psi, adds no weight to the wheel. And please no smart replies about the mass of air because we are not interested in tracking infinitesimal amounts of weight.
) Lessons -
Tire = the rubber part
Rim = the metal part
Wheel = the rim with the tire mounted
And..... air pressure in the tire does *not* have any weight. A tire with 32 PSI does not mean that you added an additional 32 lbs (mass) to the wheel. The air inside the tire, being either 5 psi or 50 psi, adds no weight to the wheel. And please no smart replies about the mass of air because we are not interested in tracking infinitesimal amounts of weight.
11-10-2011, 01:21 PM
#307
All motor
It applies to all four wheels equally. Because all four wheels must increase their rotational speed (RPM) equally, all four wheels benefit equally from the reduced rotating mass.
It has nothing what-so-ever to do with if the wheel is a "driving wheel" (applying power to the ground). It is only the “flywheel effect” that matters, and all four wheels experience the same “flywheel effect”.
It has nothing what-so-ever to do with if the wheel is a "driving wheel" (applying power to the ground). It is only the “flywheel effect” that matters, and all four wheels experience the same “flywheel effect”.
The fact that you said lightening mass closer to the crank (flywheel) is given a ratio of '15' when compared to '3' for wheels really gave me a headache. If you don't know, my Stage 2 clutch/lw flywheel combo was in the car, but wasn't going into gear because of the clutch pedal adjustment (something I found out later after a new stock clutch setup was installed). This would've surely increased my rate of acceleration substantially being that it takes off about 10lbs from the flywheel if I'm not mistaken.
11-10-2011, 02:34 PM
#308
Safety Car
^ The conversion factor is tied to the rate of rotational acceleration of the rotating mass. I know... I am making your headache worse. Sorry.
Here is what I mean in more common language. The quicker the crank spins-up, the more negative impact the weight will have on acceleration. What this means is that first gear would see the biggest improvement from the lighter clutch/flywheel. And, high gear would see much less improvement.
Here is what I mean in more common language. The quicker the crank spins-up, the more negative impact the weight will have on acceleration. What this means is that first gear would see the biggest improvement from the lighter clutch/flywheel. And, high gear would see much less improvement.
11-10-2011, 03:32 PM
#309
Safety Car
Yes, going to a real cam with a lot of duration like the Level 2 does have it's drawbacks and special conditions and requirements. This is why I need a lot of time to write a good reply.
Quick answer -
- it does KILL bottom end
- Ideally requires gears, which we can't get.
- Must have a very free flowing exhaust
- Ideal shift point would be at 7000 RPM versus the oem ideal point at 6500 RPM
- Rough engine idle
- Low vacuum at idle for the brake booster. That is, power brakes might have stiff pedal sometimes.
- Bad gas mileage
Yes, it is a regrind. I see no problem with that provided they do a quality job. If we had flat tappet lifters, then I would be concerned. But, we have roller lifters. so, the roller lifters should not put too much stress on the lobes. And, I know that the J does not use lifters. I am using the term "lifters" just to convey the thought.
Last edited by Inaccurate; 11-10-2011 at 03:35 PM.
The following users liked this post:
thisaznboi88 (11-10-2011)
11-10-2011, 07:54 PM
#311
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
I was hoping to have time today to write more to explain. But, I was too busy today. So, just a quick reply for now.
Yes, going to a real cam with a lot of duration like the Level 2 does have it's drawbacks and special conditions and requirements. This is why I need a lot of time to write a good reply.
Quick answer -
- it does KILL bottom end
- Ideally requires gears, which we can't get.
- Must have a very free flowing exhaust
- Ideal shift point would be at 7000 RPM versus the oem ideal point at 6500 RPM
- Rough engine idle
- Low vacuum at idle for the brake booster. That is, power brakes might have stiff pedal sometimes.
- Bad gas mileage
Yes, it is a regrind. I see no problem with that provided they do a quality job. If we had flat tappet lifters, then I would be concerned. But, we have roller lifters. so, the roller lifters should not put too much stress on the lobes. And, I know that the J does not use lifters. I am using the term "lifters" just to convey the thought.
Yes, going to a real cam with a lot of duration like the Level 2 does have it's drawbacks and special conditions and requirements. This is why I need a lot of time to write a good reply.
Quick answer -
- it does KILL bottom end
- Ideally requires gears, which we can't get.
- Must have a very free flowing exhaust
- Ideal shift point would be at 7000 RPM versus the oem ideal point at 6500 RPM
- Rough engine idle
- Low vacuum at idle for the brake booster. That is, power brakes might have stiff pedal sometimes.
- Bad gas mileage
Yes, it is a regrind. I see no problem with that provided they do a quality job. If we had flat tappet lifters, then I would be concerned. But, we have roller lifters. so, the roller lifters should not put too much stress on the lobes. And, I know that the J does not use lifters. I am using the term "lifters" just to convey the thought.
- it does KILL bottom end - a big NO NO...we have very little to begin with. Thats why I was thinking of a type S cam....cheaper, OEM, wont loose much low end....or a bismoto level 1.....
- Ideally requires gears, which we can't get. : yes...forsee a problem here...
- Must have a very free flowing exhaust: Now this I do....haha....
- Ideal shift point would be at 7000 RPM versus the oem ideal point at 6500 RPM yes with the retainers/springs/the full kit/ecu....you can bump the redline upto 7.5-8K and throw the vtec down to 4000-4200rpm and call it a day
- Rough engine idle
- Low vacuum at idle for the brake booster. That is, power brakes might have stiff pedal sometimes. : can we uppp the idle from 600-700 rpm to ~800-900 rpm ? this will get rid of the rough idle and brake booster problem ?
- Bad gas mileage: I can live with this....i know i will be missing the 33mpg...its already gone down to 30mpg highway at same speeds from the intake/exhaust mods....
11-10-2011, 09:06 PM
#313
Suzuka Master
iTrader: (2)
^ The conversion factor is tied to the rate of rotational acceleration of the rotating mass. I know... I am making your headache worse. Sorry.
Here is what I mean in more common language. The quicker the crank spins-up, the more negative impact the weight will have on acceleration. What this means is that first gear would see the biggest improvement from the lighter clutch/flywheel. And, high gear would see much less improvement.
Here is what I mean in more common language. The quicker the crank spins-up, the more negative impact the weight will have on acceleration. What this means is that first gear would see the biggest improvement from the lighter clutch/flywheel. And, high gear would see much less improvement.
On a semi related note, I have heard of RWD guys making good gains with a lightened drive shaft. Going from a 35 lb shaft to a 10-15 lb aluminum unit can make a big difference.
11-11-2011, 08:42 AM
#314
All motor
^ The conversion factor is tied to the rate of rotational acceleration of the rotating mass. I know... I am making your headache worse. Sorry.
Here is what I mean in more common language. The quicker the crank spins-up, the more negative impact the weight will have on acceleration. What this means is that first gear would see the biggest improvement from the lighter clutch/flywheel. And, high gear would see much less improvement.
Here is what I mean in more common language. The quicker the crank spins-up, the more negative impact the weight will have on acceleration. What this means is that first gear would see the biggest improvement from the lighter clutch/flywheel. And, high gear would see much less improvement.
With that said, with a long duration cam, our low end would be adversely effected. But, at the same time, I feel that in a drag race you are rarely ever at low RPM. As long as you stay in the powerband, the cam should really have no effect on low gear acceleration. Just driving around town, yes I would imagine our low end would decrease. However, by low end i think we are talking under 3000RPM. I like cruising under 3K, but at the same time, as long as the revs are up (as in racing or at the track), the cam really shouldn't negatively effect performance.
Last edited by Sonnick; 11-11-2011 at 08:47 AM.
11-11-2011, 11:43 AM
#315
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
This is one of the few videos of my UA6 5AT which i ever recorded. It is on some local desolate roads at 2am. You can hear the came lope at idle only in the rattling keys since my car was so sound deadened. This is simply to show the low powerband of the car. 60ft times were 2.2 flat. Id say its a pretty well engineered cam, even on an auto. No brake boost issuss or other bull. My buddy and i run the stage1 and stage2 cams, the difference being that my 5AT robbed so much power that this stage 1 had me by a few horsepower and a good 200lb weight advantage (from the scales). I have since purchased a UA7 6MT and am completing my build with that engine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1NL...e_gdata_player
11-11-2011, 01:02 PM
#316
All motor
Very nice video. Was that with your 19" wheels on as well? I couldn't really hear the lopey idle since I'm at work and couldn't turn it loud, but it looks like it moves.
I'm very interested to hear how much power you make with the 6MT. I'm assuming another 6-8%, or about 335-345whp. It's also nice to see one of your buddies going with Bisi's cams as well. Has he ran at the track with his 6MT and cams?
I'm very interested to hear how much power you make with the 6MT. I'm assuming another 6-8%, or about 335-345whp. It's also nice to see one of your buddies going with Bisi's cams as well. Has he ran at the track with his 6MT and cams?
11-11-2011, 01:06 PM
#317
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Very nice video. Was that with your 19" wheels on as well? I couldn't really hear the lopey idle since I'm at work and couldn't turn it loud, but it looks like it moves.
I'm very interested to hear how much power you make with the 6MT. I'm assuming another 6-8%, or about 335-345whp. It's also nice to see one of your buddies going with Bisi's cams as well. Has he ran at the track with his 6MT and cams?
I'm very interested to hear how much power you make with the 6MT. I'm assuming another 6-8%, or about 335-345whp. It's also nice to see one of your buddies going with Bisi's cams as well. Has he ran at the track with his 6MT and cams?
11-11-2011, 01:26 PM
#318
All motor
Oooh I know who you are talking about. If we are talking about the same guy, as far as I know he isn't even tuned. But I could be wrong.
Btw that's an amazing ET and trap. That shows he is putting down some serious power. I expect you to be in the 12s @110+ once your build is done
Good luck with it man
Btw that's an amazing ET and trap. That shows he is putting down some serious power. I expect you to be in the 12s @110+ once your build is done
Good luck with it man
11-12-2011, 02:53 AM
#320
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
^^^ I do not think there is a DIY....if everything goes as planned I will be cammed in the next few days 