iforyou

iTrader: (1)

Lol, I posted a lot of tech talk before? I can't even remember haha!

You know, I still think that sound when you shifted from 2nd to 3rd gear was kinda weird. I think this is where a 6-speed gearbox is beneficial.

Wavehogger

Yea, i'm going to check into a couple things and yes the 6-speed will probably keep it way into the VTEC eliminating it all together. So out of your 4,000+ posts you can't remember huh? lol

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

lol too much school work!

neuronbob

I haven't been around 4G too much lately. Wavehogger, thank you for your posts. I can't wait for the 6MT SH-AWD to be released. That stuff will be a winner!

And I use Dynolicious for my S2000 and once in the RL. I agree that it's pretty much dead on. iPhone FTW!

BEAR-AvHistory

I think it will depend on the gear ratios in the 6 speed. The current one will drop you to just below the vtec initiation point on the 1/2 shift unless you really crowd the red line. The spacing on the rest of the gears gets progressively closer so you should remain in vtec all the time.

To me whats more important no matter how high you shift even at red line you are behind the torque curve of 5000rpm on the 1/2 shift.

Another thing of interest is the HP peak on the SHAWD is 100RPM higher then the base but the red line is 100RPM less giving you less margin to make a clean shift if you are attempting to come down & still be in vtec.

I start my shift in the '06 at about 6300 so its complete by 6500RPM.

The 1/2 shift will put it just short, maybe 100/150RPM of vtec but you still have a lot of gear ratio going for you so it only a matter of maybe 1000's of a second before you are in vtec. The advantage is I don't think the performance difference is truly measurable one way or another but you do insure you will not hit the rev limiter & shut yourself down all together

Wavehogger

Well my lost FedEx 17" TL wheel arrived today, in perfect condition! And I threw them all on for the winter.

I drove it a little and I have to say I'm surprised that the ride isn't that much different. The biggest difference is when it hits the larger bumbs and pot holes, it's a little softer but not much. I guess most of it is the suspension setup for the SH-AWD model. And the road noise on the highway is almost exactly the same, so I'm glad I got the 19's.. and so will someone else on the forum who was worried.

However; Now I only had a chance to do two quick tests and I was almost out of gas (22 miles left on the trip computer) so less weight than my usual 1/2 tank but, the 0-60 wasn't much different but the slightly faster of the two runs was my fastest recorded 1/4 mile time so far, of 14.4 @99.1 mph, just beating a 14.5 I got once and the rest being 14.6-14.8. So a slight increase over what I had been getting, maybe .1-.2 quicker and 1-2 mph higher than the average of 96-98. It did feel lighter on its feet in the higher mph's, but man did I lose my grip in the corners. It's going to be a long 4 months.

Of course I don't want BIG BEAR to attack me so I will say that this of course is not be a 'real' track time using the dynolicious, but all things being equal, it is better than I could achieve with the 19's, running my tests in the same location etc.

So this isn't shocking news and more a confirmation of what everyone thought would happen. I bet the stock 18's are about the same or ever so slightly quicker than the 19's. But with normal variation run to run the difference probably wouldn't be statistically significant. And when picking up the 17 & 19, I can't say I felt much of a weight difference. So it's more that turning a larger wheel requires more HP.

I bet the 17's vs 19's are why the Edmunds review had the base TL a tick quicker in a straight line. If you put the 19's on the base and ran them both 19's vs 19's the SH-AWD would probably win its extra 25 HP. Just enough to carry the extra 260lbs.

BEAR-AvHistory

Hey, I would never do such a thing since I am a martial artist & we teach people how to defend not necessarily how to attack.

maverickinvestor

Got to handed to you for willing to "test" your brand new 4G during its break in period for Azine!!!

I am still babying my 3G even though it has over 3000 miles on it!

maverickinvestor

As Funakoshi famously stated: "karate ni sente nashi" or "There is no first attack in karate."

"But when attacked, watch out!" Not from Funakoshi

Wow Bear that picture is very impressive! How long have you been practicing MA?

You do get around! Aviation, track, MA, travel!

Wavehogger

I bet those are styrofoam! Just KIDDING! I feel special that you would post yourself demonstrating your skills on my thread, thanks. I took Karate when I was about 12, and learned some basic defense routines, punches, & kicks. It was exciting but then we had to move and I had to stop. I wish I could have stayed with it.

Isn't it true that a bear will sometimes attack, just because he's a bear and he's hungry?

Wavehogger

LOL, well modern engine tolerances are less than they used to be and this is a very controversial topic. Sure to get people going. I've broken in a lot of motors and they all ran great and the ones kept in the family or sold to friends did some high mileage without any problems. Below is the link to how I basically think it should be done, but I have my own secret variation of his methods.

http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

14.4@99mph, that's a pretty significant improvement!

BEAR-AvHistory

About 9 years, stated when I was just a kid of 58. I recently got a 3rd degree in Tae Kwon Do & have a first in Hap Ki Do.

The thing I like about our school is I have to pull my own weight & they don't cut me any slack because of my age.




BTW if any of you are in Raleigh our school is on Falls of the Neuse just south of 540.

On the other stuff being a bit, well maybe a lot, older then most of the guys here just means I have had more time in my life to do things then most of you have so far. Also being retired gives my a lot of time to follow up on things I always wanted to do.

I got a pilots license about the same time I got a drivers license but never was really able to either afford the expense or have the time to try aerobatics till much later in life.

Now that I can do it I have an inner ear problem & can't pass the FAA medical so I need to go up with an IP in the back seat.

Such is life.

BEAR-AvHistory

Was just showing off. Really though, its nice to cross swords on a thread with some one who does not take it personal or get their feelings hurt.

Never met one in the woods so I really don't know. That being said I do know its not a good plan for a bears wife to send him to the supermarket when he is hungry

BEAR-AvHistory

Thing to be careful about with this guy is he talking motorcycle engines not cars.

Might be OK for a race engine that will be torn down anyway. Certainly there is no break-in for a top fuel engine that can get rebuilt between rounds..

On the street I usually just drive normally with a lot of changing of speeds for the first 500 or so & change the oil when its recommended.

Even on engines I built myself I followed the original manufactures break-in recommendations, especially for the first oil change due to the assembly grease.

Wavehogger

Yeah but I only got it once and I was almost out of gas..and on an empty stomach so the car was basically driving itself. But I'll check it again later to be sure. Remember, I did get a 14.5 in that same exact spot once, so it may be just a hair quicker. The good old butt dyno felt something after shifting into 3rd. It seemed to build a little faster, but it could be the placebo effect. As soon as I know more, you'll know.

Wavehogger

Yes, I know what you mean most of his motors are raced and torn down. But he does say that his principles apply to all 4 cycle engines. And my dad has been a racer & custom street rod builder for his whole life in Cali and he and his friends who also believe that it's important to take it easy for the first few miles but then to break it in more quickly to work things in faster rather than draw it out. I was lucky to go on a few break in runs and remember talking with him about this subject many years ago. And then to get that oil out right away. but it's all a matter of opinion. If you build a tight motor I don't think you can really screw it up unless you totally abuse it repeatedly from the get go. But even then, when I was a teenager my friends and I built small blocks ourselves and we were brutal to those things and they ran awesome for us..

And I have to give props to you Bear for getting into all kinds of trouble. Lifes to short not to start MA in your 60's! Your wife must love all your adventures. And I love crossing swords here, and learning from the great master.

dr_brains510

So how accurate is this dynolicious program? Is it better to purchase the application for $12.99 and never take it to the track if the results are dead on?

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

go to youtube and search for that program. It's pretty accurate but of course it's best to go to the track.

cp3117

Its fun to use and will give you a rough idea of what your car is running but its not as accurate as taking it to a track or getting professional equipment installed.

I have seen some videos where it shows the program to be fairly accurate on one 1/4 mile run at a track but unfortunatly it was one run and no 0-60 times etc where shown. It would be interesting to see what it produces on average.

In this link you can see that in 0-60 times its slow by .66s

http://www.motivemag.com/pub/news/Te...sus_VBox.shtml

Wavehogger was nice enough to do a bunch of tests with his 2009 TL and if you look at his best run of 5.44 then compare and time his video you will see ironically its almost .66s + to fast and on average his results showed quicker than what the video's showed.

The ipod/iphone is obviously mass produced and wasnt designed for this type of testing and therefore isnt calibrated or certified such as a Vbox etc which most professional automotive mags etc use (which in turn also cost thousands of dollars more). Its also very important that you mount your ipod properly or else the numbers will be way off.

Personally i am considering getting one as i am not close to a track and once i rebuild my small block for my 67 RS/SS Camaro this winter i want to get a rough idea of what it may run before i take it to a professional track for more accurate numbers.

If you already have a ipod or iphone the $12.99 IMO is worth it if your not close to a track and you want to have some fun.

S2000 Driver

Wonderful news all around!

maverickinvestor

I think both you and Bear deserve major props for your self-control shown in these threads.

You guys argue passionately and informatively without stooping to the childish name calling that seem to be so frequently shown by some of the other posters here.

As I was reading through these other threads, I was appalled by some of things said by some posters. And all for what? A car! I think people really need to show more civility in these forums.

But then again after seeing the news of people trampling a human being for VCRs and others popping each other off in TRU without any regard to all the kids around them, I suppose these other posters actions here are not so surprising.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

As long as you find a way to strap it down very tightly, then it's going to be decently accurate. If you simply mount it to the windshield (like the one shown in CP3117's test), then obviously it's going to be quite inaccurate. I already gave an explanation in another thread, so I'm not going to repeat here. But basically, when you look at that setup, you will see the iphone will be bouncing qute violently. I have used that mounting kit before for video taping highway condition, and I had to drive very carefully to prevent too much vibration. I think this is where professional equipment is better. I'd imagine those $10000 systems can tell what vibration it is (bumps, or acceleration).

I think it's a good idea to ask wave how he got his iphone strapped down.

MMike1981

Ive used the iPod app in my RDX....its actually pretty dead on, i mean, guys, for 13 BUCKS, you can get a PRETTY DECENT evaluation of what your car is doing...for must of us, thats sufficient, at least for me...its obviously will not be exact given all the variables (is it tied down, being held, on the dash, where its mounted etc) but damn for 13 bucks ill take it.

the thing was pretty much dead on with measured g's in my truck compared to the mags...

cp3117

I agree that mounting it will be very important in achieving accurate results. You may want to research a proper mounting device and dont just throw in the console and go for a run.

Look at the mounting device they used in the test i showed and then look at the video that "iforyou" is talking about in another thread where they tested for 1/4 mile times. You will see that they are using the same mounting bracket that secures the device using the windshield and dash (which seems fairly secure in the video and not bouncing violently) yet one is fairly accurate (in 1/4 mile times) and the other is .66s off (in 0-60 testing). Then look at Wavehoggers numbers and again they are off by well over half a second compared to his videos which show low 6's.

This shows like i stated before that the iphone/ipod is obviously not designed for this use whereas the professional devices used by professional auto journalists, magazines and even manufacturers, use additional electronic measuring devices to insure accuracy.

Its still a nice program for $12.99 but dont expect deadly accurate results (probably accurate within .5s - .75s +/- either way depending on what application your looking at)

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

Interestingly we counted the 0-60mph times to be mid 5 to low 6's in Wave's videos. And it's pretty much dead-on in all of his videos. I mean, unless I'm doing my math wrong...7s - 1.5s, that's 5.5s?

Wavehogger

Edmund's response to me giving them my input on the brake torque issue.

Thanks for your feedback. We'll share your comments with our editors.

Warren
Automotive Content Editor

BEAR-AvHistory

It will be really great if they follow up on it & get an official reply from Honda.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

Wow, I'm surprised they actually replied. Hopefully they will follow up.

cp3117

Na, your math looks good to me.

Its just you must be either looking at a different video or stopping and starting your watch a little quicker than me.

You even said in a different thread that Wave's 5.44s was to fast and something seemed wrong so i dont know whats changed now unless i missed an updated video.

Lets just say we agree to disagree on this as the videos are out there for people to judge on their own. Otherwise i think we will be debating which watch is more accurate...Tag or Breitling?

Wavehogger

ok men, and I say that losely. I didn't post them all to start a 'timer debate' thread. I think iforyou said before that the fastest 0-60 vid seemed to time out to slightly under 6 seconds, not 5.44 and I'll 2nd that. I think after all the mags and my tests we know what is and isn't.

So no fighting, tomorrow is my B-Day! :gheyhug:

Bear: That would be awesome, but I wonder if they'll spend the time/effort on this, and do you think Honda is going to want to publicize this anti-performance factoid on paper? We all know Honda is the company that never prints performance #'s about their cars, so at best Edmund's may attempt to confirm my findings if and when they get a TL again. If they do, I bet we'll see some sort of update on it if they can actually improve the 0-60 and/or 1/4 mile times with the information.

S2000 Driver

Congratulations [in advance] Hogger -- mine was this week, too!

Wavehogger

Right back at ya S, thanks!

cp3117

:surrender

LOL. Sounds good Wave and happy Pre-Birthday also from

BEAR-AvHistory

The testers might want to take another shot at it & post the results since it can only make them look good. Maybe even give you a "thanks for the input". ....I think Honda will just keep its corporate head down & hope it goes away.

Wavehogger

Such a wise and funny Bear you are. Exactly what I think Honda will do, And how exciting would that be to mentioned or at least acknowledged from Edmund's. but not getting hopes up.

And thanks CP

Wavehogger

And I know this crazy long thread is getting old, but I believe that Jeff over at TOV was right about the sort of weird issue I talked about here earlier below;

2) If you listen in #18 you can hear and see the slight delay in power when the car shifts out of 2nd... It's at 5K so I doubt its a VTEC thing, must just be the computer.

After many more miles, I've found that if you're holding manually in a gear (mainly 3rd) and hit the throttle hard anywhere above 4000-4500rpm you can almost always feel the above happen. Although it doesn't always hold back, in fact many times it will rapidly rev up from say 4500 to 5500 and then the converter feels like it locks and then it gradually climbs as the car goes faster, sounding in synch. But occsionally after the converter locks you will hear the engine tone sort of stay steady instead of climbing rapidly. So this sound is less a delay and more an interruption of the rapid rev-up when the converter locks, taking the engine a second to change its tone because it is now revving up slower. It's just most noticable in 3rd gear. Man that was long.. Ok I'm done!

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

lol wave already cleared it up for me

and happy birthday wave!

jeowen

Great tech responses going on in this thread- I have a much more "simple question", that I am sure one of you guys can clear up for me. The "No Brake Torque" and "Full Brake Torque"- being such a large performance difference, please explain the difference in driving behavior that results in such gain- thanks

BEAR-AvHistory

It was a technique developed in the last century, sounds like a long time ago, to help eliminate the lag when you just floor the pedal on an AT transmission from a standing start. All torque converters have some slop (slippage) built into them so that the car can idle in gear without stalling out. In most street cars this RPM is pretty low & in the teens

So when you punch the gas, since the engine was at its pure idle rpm & the torque converter was at fill slip, it had to rev up into its power band while the torque converter spun up to where the driven half was now driving the un-driven half enabling the car to moved foward. This lag cost you in 0-60 & 1/4 mile time.

Power breaking is simply holding the brake down to prevent the car from moving while the torque converter is spun up to its stall speed.

The stall speed is the maximum RPM the engine can deliver with the car in gear, brakes on & not moving with the gas pedal to the floor. The engine is now closer to its power band & the torque converter now has all the slippage forced out of it so the launch is faster & the times to 60 & 1/4 are reduced.

Track only drag race cars run what are known as high stall speed converter. These can be well up in the engines RPM range. This allows for example a TL with one to sit on the staring line in gear with the brakes locked, the car not moving & the engine revving into Vtec.