Dyno results for different filters on a CAI fitted Euro

Hi guys,

Well yesterday I did a few dyno runs to see what gains I got from installing the Injen CAI, using the BMC twin cone filter, and using the K&N filter that comes with the kit.

Needless to say I'm really quite disappointed with the results.

In summary......

Stock = 115.2kW (154.5hp)
Injen CAI + included filter = 118.0kW (158.2hp)
Injen CAI + BMC filter = 117.5kW (157.6hp)

I was really expecting about the same 11hp gains that are shown on the TSX which would've been about 123kW. My butt dyno says there's a gain, and even the power value from my RSM (which should be taken with a grain of salt) suggests the increase is much grater than these dynos reveal.

I first posted here:

It here,
http://www.acura-tsx.com/forums/show...474#post397474
so you can read up in full if you're interested. ;) I'm feeling too lazy to parrot myself at the moment.

Matell

I wouldn't get too hung up on dyno figures. If the car is more responsive - it is worth it. The CAI is low cost and you got a gain.

A couple of questions/observations - you mention in your post it was much hotter - what was the temperature? I know my car is VERY different over 28 degrees.

Did you install the injen and then immediately dyno? I was reading somewhere about giving the ECU time (eg 10 minutes of driving) to adjust to the new air.

Did you install the hondata gaskett yet? Also is this 3rd or 4th gear?

I think a more accurate assessment of the CAI is acceleration figures. If you have a base number before the CAI you can see if there is an improvement. I know Euroaccord13 had an improvement with the K&N - I think he initially went from 7.8 seconds stock (with G-sensor timing which is fairly accurate) down to around 7.4 with the K&N Typhoon. Nick - correct me if I am wrong.

*** update - just read your linked post - 3rd gear. Looking at those air fuel ratios - totally different to my dyno chart. Can someone explain these figures to me? My air fuel ratio was above 11 for the entire run and almost peaks at 12.5. What does it mean if Mattels air/fuel is between 10.5 and 11.5 - presumably it means less fuel and more air - right?

Actually, the lower the number, the more fuel there is.
Since it is rich, I think Matell's ECU still hasn't learnt to optimise the air:fuel ratio. SHould do a few full throttle runs to let the ecu learn first before dynoing the CAI

Thanks yfin. I'm not too hung up on it now anyway. But still plan to repeat the tests on another dyno.

I know ambient outside the workshop was 30C+ yesterday, it was only a few cooler inside. I'd say there was probably about a 5-4degC difference between my baseline run a few weeks ago and these yesterday. I think from looking at the bottom of the graph it indicates that ambient temp was 25C, intake temp was 30C, relative humidity was 60%, and barometric pressure was 101.3

Those values almost sound like ideal's for the software and calibration, not actuals. But I may be wrong...it felt worse than that.

I've had the intake installed for almost 4 weeks now, all the time running the BMC filter (with and without drycharger). So the ECU may've had to adapt a little to the filter change between runs, but I imagine that'd be of negligable effect.

I'd planned on doing before and after acceleration tests, but due to the inability of the installer to install the RSM+G-Sensor I installed the CAI first, then a week after that I installed the RSM myself. So I might go get some more acceleration figures tonight which will be with the K&N filter.

Yeah I'm not to sure about the air to fuel ratio either. :scratchhead:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aaronng

Actually, the lower the number, the more fuel there is.
Since it is rich, I think Matell's ECU still hasn't learnt to optimise the air:fuel ratio. SHould do a few full throttle runs to let the ecu learn first before dynoing the CAI

---

That makes sense now......however I've been sinking the boot since I installed the intake weeks ago, with shifts at redline. However by full throttle run if you mean running at near the max in gear speed with WOT at near max revs for approx 15seconds, then no I haven't done many of them since installed.

sorry to ask a noob question but wats a BMC filter?
and does the INJEN CAI come with the K&N filter?
:S

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stephen8512

sorry to ask a noob question but wats a BMC filter?
and does the INJEN CAI come with the K&N filter?
:S

---

The BMC filter is a twin cone filter. So if you're familiar with a single conical filter such as the K&N it has an end cap. The BMC has a ring instead of this cap and has an inverted conical filter surface that goes inside the filter. http://www.bmcairfilters.com/

In theroy it yeilds greater gains due to an increased ability for the engine to induct air.

Yes, the Injen intake comes with a filter that is identical to the K&N filter. The only difference is there's a black plastic cover on the end embossed with the Injen logo.

ahhhh sweet as.....
thanx for clearing that up for me :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matell

I know ambient outside the workshop was 30C+ yesterday, it was only a few cooler inside. I'd say there was probably about a 5-4degC difference between my baseline run a few weeks ago and these yesterday.

---

I think there is your answer.

I notice a huge difference in performance between 30 degrees and 15 degrees - the engine just doesn't rev fast with hot ambient temperature.

The only crude way I can describe the difference for my car - is 15 degree plus 2 passengers = 30 degree performance (with driver only). It is that much difference. I am waiting to be flamed for this analogy :o - but that is the best way I can describe the way the K24 responds to intake temperature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matell

That makes sense now......however I've been sinking the boot since I installed the intake weeks ago, with shifts at redline. However by full throttle run if you mean running at near the max in gear speed with WOT at near max revs for approx 15seconds, then no I haven't done many of them since installed.

---

Hmm, if you've been doing WOT with shifts at redline, then the ECU should have already learnt the new conditions. Maybe it is the temperature. Did they use a fan in front of your car when they dynoed it?

Yep. There's a big fan they put in front of the car.

Here's a few thoughts and findings I've posted on the other two forums

Hear are the links for the full spiel,
http://www.tsxclub.com/forums/showth...5402#post85402
and as per the link in the first post.

But the most salient and recent thought/finding I've had is pasted below:

Just looking through photo's I took when I did the base line run as stock, and here's a comparison of what I assume to be the atmospherics...

+++Baseline configuration+++
BP: 101.1
RH: 37
AT: 31
IT: 30
RR: 010 (not sure what this value could be)
TM: 3.544 (ditto)
CK: 181 (ditto)

++++Modified configuration++++
For the run I've scanned in the cars configuration was CAI with K&N, throttle body coolant bypass, (still awaiting Hondata gasket)
BP: 101.3
RH: 60
AT: 25
IT: 30
RR: 010 (not sure what this value could be)
TM: 3.544 (ditto)
CK: 976 (ditto)

So that's a +23% difference in humidity, -6C difference in ambient temperature, and identical intake temperatures which is very curious. Also I know the ambient temperature as I drove there was 34C {from vague memory as I wasn't paying much attention [just checked the BOM website and at 3pm on Thurs (was on the dyno around 3:30pm)in Brisbane the pressure was 1007=100.7 iaw dyno value format, temp was 27.6C, and rel humidity 49%]}, and it certainly didn't feel like 25C in the dyno cell. Questions are starting to come to mind now about the setup and calibration of the dyno.

Curious.....

Another thought is maybe having the throttle bypass mod without the IMG is detrimental....Correct me at any stage....

Coolant is only able to carry and transfer a specific amount of heat. Therefore on a hot engine with throttle coolant flowing through the throttle body the temperature of the body will become relatively stable.

However remove that coolant by bypassing it, and the ability of the throttle body to maintain a temperature will be diminished and the effect's of heat soak from the engine through the manifold and intake runners to the throttle body will be more pronounced as the only means of cooling and temperature stabilisation will then be via the forced convection of the hot air after the radiator, and by transferring the heat to the cool inducted air passing through the throttle body thus raising the temperature of the air drawn into the cylinders resulting in a loss in power.

Insert the IMG gasket and there's an effective insulator between engine and intake, eliminating much of the heat soak and making the throttle bypass mod worthwhile.

Hmm....might reconnect the throttle coolant lines this weekend and leave it that way until I obtain the correct gasket

Matt,

Did you disconnect the battery to reset the ECU after you fit the INGEN?

When I swap the header I leave as is and did not reset the ECU until some weeks after. One day I decided to reset it by disconnect the battery for about an hour, after reconnecting it, go out and drive as hard as I can for 10 minutes.

My butt dyno really feels the difference, pulls much stronger & smoother. A Honda tech told me you should reset the ECU after every mod.
(My dyno is done before the reset, somehow it feels like 5kw more now..LOL)

Anyway here's my dyno, your car seems running a bit rich for some reason

http://www.mercurymotorsport.com.au/...esults/001.gif

Hey Steve,

Did you get the reply I sent to your PM the other day? I sent it but the post send page didn't load afterwards. :(

Thanks for those suggestions!. Yep I disconnected the battery to install the intake, and the week after had it disconnected a few times while I tested and installed the RSM and G-Sensor.

My butt dyno says the same...ie there's a big difference, which is why these dyno results including the AFR is so puzzling. I'll do a power run with the RSM tomorrow, reset the ECU, let the ECU learn the fuel by flogging it, then do another power run to see if there's any difference between the two values. Damn and my tanks almost empty too!!!!.....BP here I come to be robbed on a tank of ultimate! lol (ouch damn holiday fuel hikes ;) )

I'm very curious on the mixture running so rich.......very curious indeed. :(

no didn't get a reply.

PM sent :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baboo

no didn't get a reply.

---

Matell, I've got the same power mod's as you on my wife's automatic Euro ...

> Injen intake but with Injen/K&N filter
> Throttle body coolant bypass
> Hondata heatshield intake manifold gasket

Only difference is that I've got a V-AFC II to be fitted and dyno tuned in the next couple of weeks. I know it sounds cruel so I'll apologise now, but I was really happy to see how rich your car is running with these mod's as hopefully that means there is a decent increase in power to be found from leaning out the mixture. Even if it is done rather crudely with the limited abilities of the V-AFC!!

Will post before and after tuning dyno sheets once it is done.

Out of interest, is there anybody with an automatic Euro which is unmodified who is willing to come to CRD and I'll pay to have your car dyno'd so I can get an idea of how much power I've picked up over standard? Bear in mind that it will most likely be on a weekday morning.

thanks
Rod

Hey,
My euro is fully stock and i'm willing to go for the dyno. Where abouts are you intending to get the dyno done?

That would be great!! I am going to get it dyno tuned at Croydon Racing Developments http://www.croydonracingdevelopments.../contactus.htm. Not sure of the exact date just yet, but would like it to be some time in the next week or two.

When would suit you? Will you be able to make it on a weekday morning at about 9am?

thanks
Rod

Jolt - by all means dyno a different Euro but guaging by the dyno day recently where 3 Euros attended I don't think you are going to get an accurate base line.

The best thing to do is to remove your mods - but that isn't what you want to hear :D

I'm on holiday next week so next weeks' good.
location's fine as well..,

Quote:

---

I don't think you are going to get an accurate base line

---

You're right, but it's better than nothing at all and there is no chance that I'm going to remove all the mod's and then refit them!! :D

Will let you know how it works out ...

Rod

Rod, It'll be good to see what your results are. :) I'll be installing the Hondata IMG as soon as I get it, and do another dyno run then. Looking forward to seeing how rich your car's running before you tweak things with the V-AFC II. If it becomes evident that I am running excessively rich as it appears at this stage, I'm certainly going to ask the service guys about it when I take it in for the 30K service in a few weeks time.

wooohoooo post whoring my own thread but I'm finally showing as a member! :D That's what I get for being a slack lurker all this time ;)

Sorry, i really don't understand you guys what are talking about?? 115.2kW on Stock Euro?? is that not 140KW??? sorry

115.2kw at the wheels

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EURO-R

Sorry, i really don't understand you guys what are talking about?? 115.2kW on Stock Euro?? is that not 140KW??? sorry

---

115.2kW is the value my car happened to put out at the wheel to road interface. The 140kW value given by Honda is the fly wheel power. This is the power generated at the engines flywheel. It is also not exact, as some engines will come off the production line producing slightly more than 140kW, and others will have less.

The clutch then engages the flywheel and transmits the drive from the engine through the transmission and drivetrain to the wheels. Losses occur as a byproduct of this through mechanical friction interfaces such as clutch surfaces, gear teeth mesh, and bearings that support the shafts. Hence the power to the ground is always less than at the flywheel.

The loss is slightly greater in a car fitted with an automatic transmission as there is no mechanical interface between the clutch and flywheel. The rotational forces of the engine are transfered to the drive train through a fluid coupling which is generally less efficient.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matell

115.2kW is the value my car happened to put out at the wheel to road interface. The 140kW value given by Honda is the fly wheel power. This is the power generated at the engines flywheel. It is also not exact, as some engines will come off the production line producing slightly more than 140kW, and others will have less.

The clutch then engages the flywheel and transmits the drive from the engine through the transmission and drivetrain to the wheels. Losses occur as a byproduct of this through mechanical friction interfaces such as clutch surfaces, gear teeth mesh, and bearings that support the shafts. Hence the power to the ground is always less than at the flywheel.

The loss is slightly greater in a car fitted with an automatic transmission as there is no mechanical interface between the clutch and flywheel. The rotational forces of the engine are transfered to the drive train through a fluid coupling which is generally less efficient.

---

Thx! good technical knowledge learnt!

i feel humbled

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by as001

i feel humbled

---

I just blab on at the mouth. Sometimes I need a sock :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matell

I just blab on at the mouth. Sometimes I need a sock :D

---

heheh would u like a mugen or a spoon sock? :D ur choice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stephen8512

heheh would u like a mugen or a spoon sock? :D ur choice

---

Mugen to the max :D

Bling!:honda: Bling!