I'm gonna stick my neck out here and reckon on my next trip I can still achieve 6.5L/100k's
I generally get around the 9.2 so leadfooting it reading 10.5 is, well, friggin' unbelievable IMHO, but a tankful will tell.
Printable View
I'm gonna stick my neck out here and reckon on my next trip I can still achieve 6.5L/100k's
I generally get around the 9.2 so leadfooting it reading 10.5 is, well, friggin' unbelievable IMHO, but a tankful will tell.
+ since it's a new "toy" consumption is gonna go up anyway as your "testing" it. After a few weeks and you're used to the new power band it should go back to normal or maybe even drop as you press the accelerator less to generate the same amount of power.
Well I went for a ride for a few hours with Merlin today in his Extreme JTune Euro so thought I'd give my feedback. First let me just say he had a box trailer on the whole time as he was picking up his old exhaust so he couldn't really give it heaps, esp around corners. Also let me point out the parts are not final production on this car yet so it could differ slightly but it's pretty damn close.
Pro's:
Much better low end torque and usable power band. You rearly need any thing above 6k rpm. You don't feel vtec anymore though since it's almost always on if you give it a lil bit of stick.
Con's:
Exhaust is waaaayyyy too loud IMHO. Unless you're in 6th and literally cruising with little to no gas you can here it. It is a nice sound, don't get me wrong, but I did have to raise my voice and repeat the odd sentence because of the exhaust noise. It's especially loud with the windows down.
James marketted it as a quiet exhaust so I'd hate to hear loud. The sound does resonate a fair bit through the cabin. I believe different manifold bushings are
Comments, not good or bad:
You can't hear the CAI over the exhaust. I do personally like an intake sound over an exhaust sound.
The exhaust tips are big but not overly huge. You certainly see other cars with cannon's that are bigger. It's a personal preference. It would be nice to have a different shape. I quite like the stock shape of the oem tips.
Would I buy it?
Unsure but it wasn't final parts and not a true test since we had a trailer on the back. I'd really like to try a mild tune to see the difference with similiar mods. The amount of exhaust noise did put me off a little as it's much larger than expected.
I'll give it a go....Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
Sorry got to query those numbers.
If the Jtune hub dyno shows 125kw at peak stock and around 158kw with extreme that is 26.4% increase so around 177kw at the engine.
:thumbsup:I am only speaking theoretically, hence the "if", so until the dyno is done after my ECU is back etc, I can only speculate.Quote:
Originally Posted by yfin
But, is it reasonable to quote a 30-40% gain at the flywheel as the comparison I am doing is using manufactured quoted flywheel KW?
Besides, Yfin, u r still the quickest here...by far...:thumbsup:
No, yfin's method of calculation is correct. You have to compare before and after readings on the same Jtune dyno to get the percentage gain, and then apply that percentage to the manufacturer quoted flywheel kW. So it's 177kW.Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
Sorry, but I can't do that as a comparison unless I put all the other cars on the same dyno...der...Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
Or would you like me to put them all down the 400m for u..............:eek:
so with the mild flash how much extra KW at the wheel would you get compared to stock?
Maybe it was just me then. As I said "no offending intended" or something along those lines :p . Look perhaps I may have over exagerated. The car (euro) just doesn't drive like 2.4L motor. There's just no torque there. I'm sure if you kept the car at boiling point, it would run with dc2's & dc5's. But what i'm talking about is the effort to bring it to vtec. The euro owners would know what i'm talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by yfin
P.S Why would you buy a rex, it's a subaru at the end of the day :eek:
On contrary, the stock Euro has less torque when in VTEC than when at a lower RPM. :) Try 2nd gear. The Euro pulls harder at 4000-5000rpm than at over 6000rpm.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7ypeR
You have to remember, eventhough it is a 2.4L engine, it's still an inline 4. If you want more torque, it needs to be a 2.4L V6 or I6.
The Australian DC5 engine is not really any stronger than the Euro's imo. It makes 147kw (only 7kw more) at a high 7400rpm and makes a lot less torque (only 192nm compared to 223nm). It needs more revs on board to get it going since it doesn't have the capacity. The only reason it's quicker than the Euro is because it's much lighter with shorter gearing.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7ypeR
I think you need to do some more reading aaronng and not continue to state your opinion as fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
Try starting here..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroke_ratio
Torque output is primarily based on bore/stroke ratio in a NA engine.
Search is your friend......:thumbsup:
Looking at the dyno the mild flash is more about gains below peak power and torque. The peak difference is not all that much.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnprocter
Stock on hub dyno is around 125kw - with mild flash and intake it is around 132kw.
So that takes it to around 148kw at the engine (assuming stock is 140kw).
But I think the stock car is underquoted by Honda from the factory and probably is closer to 147kw than it is to 140kw. Or it could be the drivetrain is just very efficient as more powerful 147kw rated cars read similar to the Euro on the same dyno.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
I can agree with both Merlin086 and yfin in this discussion. I also own a SSS Nissan Bluebird with an I4 2.4Ltr, 112kw/210nm. It is a little undersquare compared to the Euro and I can definitely notice more torque than the Euro below 3000rpm but above that point the Euro is better, despite being a little heavier.
With a 6 cylinder engine, you get more combustion cycles per rotation of the crankshaft, thus giving you the feeling that it is not struggling to build up torque and revs. Haven't you noticed that even an older 2.5L V6 or inline-6 revs up very willingly from idle when compared to the Euro's modern engine? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
Bore and stroke defines the optimum range of RPM efficiency. Oversquare engines stay efficient at high RPM while undersquare ones are less efficient since they have a longer stroke but have better response at low to mid RPM.
Typical aaronng, there you go talking "feelings", I am talking FACT!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
This article will explain it better than I can, especially as it is discussing the K series engines.
http://books.google.com/books?id=0rY...rk0xMvmn2gOYW0
And here you are quoting a wiki article that has no references. Anyone can write a wiki article. I know I have. I don't trust wiki articles except for light reading unless they are referenced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
Remember, pistons and rods have inertia too. The higher the number of cylinders you have for the same capacity, the lighter the pistons and rods. The lighter the pistons and rods, the lower the inertia and you require less energy to increase their velocity (and RPM). ;)
If you are so adamant that the k24a being undersquare is the reason why it has more torque at mid-RPM, then tell me why does the b18c, which is also undersquare has most of its torque at the upper RPM range? Peak torque can be shifted upwards around using cams of longer duration and lift. It's not only dictated by bore/stroke ratio. Of course, in a k24a, it is also limited by poor filling efficiency above 5000rpm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
Merlin - not sure what is unclear about what Aaron or I have said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
If on the same dyno the Jtune stuff shows 26% gain at hubs (peak)- that percentage increase can be used to work out the gain from Honda's figure of 140kw at the engine. 140 * 1.26 = 177kw
The thing is the peak power for the extreme package is not its biggest selling point. It is the gains lower in the rev range that are most impressive.
BTW Merlin, did you read that external link in that Wiki article you posted? It says that you can't predict how revvy the engine is based solely on the bore/stroke ratio. Here is the link so you don't have to go through that article again: http://g-speed.com/pbh/bore-vs-stroke.html
Quote from JTune website
“Dyno Results – The Extreme package provides maximum improvement for both power & torque throughout the rev ranges combined with a vtec point of 3148. Gains of over 45% are seen in both power & torque at 6000rpm. Peak power is generated by 6000 which is maintained all the way to Redline at 7200rpm”
In fact when you do the math’s 105.7kw vs 158.3ks @ 6000rpm is almost a 50% increase in power mid range, now that’s worth talking about !!!!!!!
Me and my brother were at the APC open day last week for JTune and went for a drive with Merlin and believe me the mid range performance is mind blowing, who cares about peak performance mid range is where we all drive, although still a 26% increase at peak power is still nothing to sneeze at.
I think Merlin summarized it nicely it exceeded his expectations and it exceeded mine for sure.
Just to clarify what I wrote....
"Euro Lux 1450kg -196kw =7.39kg/kw
(with jtune
xtreme if 40%gain)
Euro Lux 1450kg -182kw =7.96kg/kw
(with jtune
xtreme if 30%gain)"
Please note the "if"
It was speculation and not stated as fact.
Suppose I could have quoted 26% gain @peak (edit typo)
......................
"Torque output is primarily based on bore/stroke ratio in a NA engine."
Please stop reading into my statements what I didn't say!
Nowhere did I profess to be quoting accurate dyno figures as it was a theoretical comparison.
Nowhere did I state that factors such as cam angles, component weight etc, don't influence available torque, but it is a fact that the primary reason for torque output is bore/stroke ratio in a NA engine. Don't blame me!
At 6000 rpm there is much more than a 26% gain its a 50% gain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
Keep in mind that between 6000-7000rpm the stock car makes an additional 20kw on the hub dyno. The Jtune car's power actually drops after 6000rpm.
The stock car has a dip at 6000rpm so it makes the numbers look even more significant (which is why they picked that point for comparison). Essentially what the extreme package does is it moves the peak power back and smooth out the power curve which makes the car more drivable but in terms of peak power gains it's not really that impressive. 177kw at the crank seems about right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jooboo
Oops...corrected.....:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by jooboo
Kick my butt pleez, my proof reader was at lunch........:thumbdwn:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sodaz
Power curve?....there is no noticeable power curve...believe me....I have done a bit of testing this week!
I dare not speculate any more on the actual output of my car on a different dyno but the driveability is certainly more than 26% better IMHO, probably cause I don't drive around between 6-7000 rpm......
Now that would get some unwanted attention.......:thumbsup:
PS going to do a Db test from inside and out too.
No, the primary reason for torque output is NOT bore/stroke ratio. :) That is my argument. The primary reason is capacity, the 2nd reason is how well the engine breathes (both in and out). Bore/stroke is at best the 3rd reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
Otherwise, why does the F22C with an 87 x 90.7mm bore and stroke (0.959 bore/stroke ratio) make 220Nm? That is almost the same amount of torque as the K24A's 223Nm using an 87 x 99mm bore and stroke (0.879 ratio). By your reasoning, the k24a should make much more torque than the F22C because it is more undersquare (by quite alot). Note, the K24A3 has a capacity of 2354cc while the F22C has 2157cc. Even with an extra 197cc and an even more undersquare design, all it can muster is 3Nm advantage? ;)
Bore/stroke ratio is NOT the primary reason for torque output.
The power curve I was referring to is the dyno's power curve. I think you misunderstood what I was saying. The Jtune's curve is much flatter than the stock car which means there's no sharp drops or gains. The peak power is produced at a lower 6000rpm compared to stock (closer to 7000rpm) so for everyday driving it's better but if you're going all out the difference is not as much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
Since when is 6000rpm mid range?! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by jooboo
LOL that's so true. Mid range is like 3000-4000rpm.Quote:
Originally Posted by yfin
Cool man, I wasn't contradicting you.Quote:
Originally Posted by sodaz
I was just saying that if you look at the graph, the "curve" is almost non-existent and that is how the car drives.
No noticeable vtec point, just a smoother,even rate of acceleration under power.
Yes, I was very impressed as to how linear the Jtune extreme was. The bonus to this was when you shifted to the next gear, the car would then pull hard again without hesitation. That is something I haven't felt on other Euros even with other aftermarket I/H/E setups and piggyback tuning, even Toda headers!
you havent driven my car :pQuote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
lol jokes, my car has nothing below 5000.... and when you shift from 1st to second at 7400rpm, theres way too much hesitation before you feel it "pulling" again... :(
why would a 6 cylinder with same displacement numbers provide more torque, itd just b smoother wouldnt?Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
I'm not talking about peak torque (223Nm @ 4500rpm) but the actual torque at RPM lower than peak torque RPM. I find that in the Euro you get caught out with lack of torque at low RPM (waiting to hit about 3500rpm after which it pulls nicely), while a V6 or I6 of similar capacity doesn't have that problem and just revs up nicely. It's because a 6 cylinder has 1.5 times more power strokes than a 4 cylinder engine in each revolution of the crankshaft. At low RPM, the time in between power strokes in a 4 cylinder is longer than in a 6 cylinder, so you take longer to get the RPM up.Quote:
Originally Posted by phobolism
hence why the M3s I6 3.2L is such a beast!
just curious guys if i were to get the mild tune done and crashed one day etc would my insurance company be able to see that it has been tuned? and like not pay me out for the crash or whatever? thanks
Fark I wish theyd get on the the mild flash. Im super keen and my orders been in for a long time. Im hoping for a 15% increase with I/H and mild flash. As per their website. With the lighter weight of my standard and add 15% power I reckon ill be happy for my $1500 investment. Good BFB. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
I don't see the point of argument here to be honest, and without bothering to study the details of who is arguing with who and who has which point, to me, obviously a longer stroke engine (under-square) is designed to have more bottom end torque, so the torque curve distribution shifts towards the left side on a graph. In sacrifice, top-end power will be slightly restricted as the bore is narrower for top-end breathing, also, piston speed increases too much so it cannot rev as freely as a short stroke engine (such as F1 engines with around 2.5:1 bore to stroke, so the stroke is very short).
The theory goes that the ideal ratio is supposedly to be 1:1 as it has the balance of low end torque and high end revs, and the torque curve (which is 100% proportional to acceleration curve) will be flat. Think new 2.2L S2000 and the older Nissan SR20 engines. Good balance of everything.
Engine design, friction levels, number of cylinders, etc, are other parts of the equation but overall the bore/stroke ratio is quite relevant to the engine's performance.
And let's not be confused about 'peak torque' as I sense too many people get confused with. Here we're only talking bout torque distribution curve by design.
The Euro's success lies with the fact that it has good mid-range torque for a 4 cylinder NA but fairly adequate or even sporty top-end power/torque, with good revs on board for an 'under-square' design. Its not a conventional design but as a family sports car isn't usually over-revved, it satisfies 80% of Euro Accord buyers who need more low-mid range torque but still has high end torque.
Funnily enough, if you have driven the normal Accord 2.4L, in fact, that car has been tuned to have even more low-mid range torque than the Euro Accord version, despite basically same engine design, yet, that car lacks the high-end torque/power of the Euro Accord.
One could argue that the Euro Accord can be 'tuned' to have both better low-mid range torque like the Accord 2.4L as well as keeping the higher-end torque/power at higher RPMS. :p
^
Damn well written as a overall summary.........:thumbsup:
Shouldn't offend too many.....lol
I've driven the normal 2.4L Accord and found it had no balls at all anywhere in the rev range. It was an auto though but that is also comparing to an auto Euro.
The diifference is
06 Accord VTi 2.4.....218 Nm @4000 rpm
06 Accord Euro 2.4...223 Nm @4500rpm
The Accord 2.4L's engine has milder lowcams than the Euro and also smaller ports, narrower intake plenum and its highcam intake lobe much milder as well.
Thanks for pointing that out. So obviously that Accord is not meant to have been 'tuned' with as much higher end power by secondary design.
To me anyway, having driven a few Hondas to see the differences, the 2.4L Accord had more low end torque available than the 2.4L Euro Accord. Granted its not much.
BTW, I've always waited forever for Honda to release a performance coupe to outperform the M3s and AMGs and Audi S's. Now Lexus/Toyota has seen the dark side before Honda has.
Didn't they tell you when this would be ready when you ordered?Quote:
Originally Posted by Suntzu
From what i understand you won't be seeing it until approx. mid January.Quote:
Originally Posted by Suntzu
can someone answer my question please :( is there anything visually different?Quote:
Originally Posted by johnprocter
No nothing visually different, although driving it would be a giveaway.
but insurance company would have no idea how a normal euro drives compared to a jtune flashed euro... besides, if your in a big accident anyway, i dont think your car will be driving anywhere afterwards... think about it this way, after a crash your car goes to a repair yard, there, a representative of the insurance company looks over your vehicle for any non claimed items... im 100% sure they wouldnt be able to tell youve got your ecu tuned... even if they could, it would only have been to fix you air/fuel ratios right? :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
Except for the fact that the car goes back from the repairer to a Honda dealer to have the ECU settings for the ABS, DSC, etc. reset (speaking from experience).Quote:
Originally Posted by EUR003act
If you don't disclose everything to the insurance company (you'll find the clause in your policy somewhere), they don't have to cover any costs, and you may find yourself footing the bill not only for your own repairs but anyone else's too ...
Thats not exactly true,Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobster
theres lots of laws in place for which an insurance company would need to have solid proof that the non disclosure of a certain modification could have led to the accident/damage which occured.
It use to be how you say it but theres some pretty strong consumer based laws when it comes to insurance and denying claims, they may try to deny it but they have to have a pretty solid case in order for it to be completely successful if the claim is taken to court
yeah but if theres nothing visual then they wouldn't be able to tell.. because they dont have a stock euro to compare the drive with anyway.. (assuming the car is in a drivable state etc)
It's not detectable by Honda scan tools so Jtune say.
Got an update. Its happening soon. Ill be o/s when it does but ill get my mild flash done when im away. So i wont be able to report in until late Jan. Im excited :)
How soon? :p
any updates on when the Extreme kits are expected to ship?
Updates on JTune
http://www.jtune.com.au/news.html
Civic Type R Mild Flash is due out 4th of Jan 2008 !!!
CTR due on 4th Jan... Havent we ALL heard this before ??? Lol to all those poor civic owners who are hoping to get it then...
On a less cynical note is any one doing a DIY with the extreme kit ? If things pan out and I keep my Euro I will most likely be getting the extreme kit but will have to fit it myself, due to my remote location. So any experiences or tips would be great. Cheers guys (& girls)
Me too! I am doing my extreme pack myself. I'll let you know when I get it....:pQuote:
Originally Posted by Gibbo
Not sure we've ever been given a Firm release date before though, just a "coupla days" style responseQuote:
Originally Posted by Gibbo
If i go with the Extreme kit ill be installing myself
ooer
http://www.hondatech.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=1772Quote:
As of the 4th of January 2007 we will have our Ultimate Euro package available.
The ultimate package is an upgrade for all Extreme owners which includes the installation of Toda Cams and valve springs.
This package is designed for the all out NA fan, providing maximum possible power using the latest technology in exhaust design and cam shaft design.
Price $2500.00 + installation
For more information please email us info@jtune.com.au
ultimate package =D
2500 on top of the 5000 for the extreme? that's steep..Quote:
Originally Posted by enkay
I think I'm happy with the torque steer how it is!.....lol
hahaha wtf cant u get a custom turbo or some shit for $8000?
ECU would take up about $3000 of that, then a few hundreds more for tuning. Not much leftover for a turbo.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnprocter
well how much at the wheel you reckon you'd total up with a euro after spending 8grand on it with this extreme and ultimate shit lol
Well if you look on the Jtune website it states approx a 15% increase over the extreme pack...so approx 180+ @ the hubs?Quote:
Originally Posted by johnprocter
impressive but i dunno if its worth 8grand lol
whao...this hondata thing is still not available?
my goodness.......
it is available.. www.jtune.com.au
Should have come to the Brissy demo a few weeks ago and checked it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by baboo
Got the full package on my car, could have taken you for a drive...:thumbsup:
hahaha steve (baboo) has an R34 GTR. dont think he'll be lookin back at gettin a euro anytime soonQuote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
HAHA so true. GTRs are on a different league altogether.Quote:
Originally Posted by stephen8512
Fair enough, but my car's not 4 sale anyway........lolQuote:
Originally Posted by sodaz
But I'm sure he wouldn't be the first to make the switch from a skyline...:eek:
.....or his missus might drive one(if he has one)..........:thumbsup:
...but then if he drives a R34 he probably can't afford one(missus)...:thumbdwn:
Baboo used to own a Euro and was one of the earliest modders from what I remember. He's also tracked his Euro a lot. The Euro's a great daily driver but if you're after some serious performance, the Euro isn't really that good of a platform even with extensive mods (unless you turbo it). You'll get a lot more bang for buck if you spent the same amount of money on the GTR.Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
8 grand.....that is expensive for 180@wheels.
now someone needs to make a turbo kit for the euro and do comparisons.
i 2nd thatQuote:
Originally Posted by 10KRPM
did someone say turbo?
http://www.nnomo-racing.com/honda_nn..._cl9_turbo.jpg
yfin i told u not to post pics of my car man wtf.. LOL
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin086
I would've loved to take a ride in the hondata'd Euro.
Here's couple of videos when my euro was taken to the track
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrt_H2bJsgA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWj4mtmdmBM
If hondata was available back then, I'm pretty sure I could've gone a wee bit faster!:thumbsup:
please tell me you have more pics of that euro!!!! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by yfin
more specifics please about the turbo euro.
what turbo?
comp ratio?
ecu?
intercooler size?
etc etc etc