Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat
#1
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Sears Point, CA
Posts: 5,276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat
This one seems to be quite interesting, the car was tuned to run with the Carsound cat, which is the 54006 model commonly known as the A.Teo cat, which this one happens to be. The test pipe was a Comptech "cat-drop out" (just a fancy name for a test pipe), I believe that it is has 2 1/4" piping, the cat-back is the Comptech 2 1/4" system...I'm sure that everyone is familiar with my setup after all of my other posts, if not there is a link to it in my signature.
All that I can say is interesting results...
Austin
<u>Here are the two plots broken down into spreadsheet format.</u>
Cat installed.
Test pipe installed.
[Modified by Austin, 3:48 PM 8/24/2001]
All that I can say is interesting results...
Austin
<u>Here are the two plots broken down into spreadsheet format.</u>
Cat installed.
Test pipe installed.
[Modified by Austin, 3:48 PM 8/24/2001]
#3
Honda-Tech Member
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Austin)
If you're using the Hytech header why did you test a 2 1/4" test pipe and cat??
The output of the Hytech is 2.5" no? So then your 2 1/4" flange at the front of the cat/test pipe is your rate limiting bottleneck and thus you would get similar results. ??????
The output of the Hytech is 2.5" no? So then your 2 1/4" flange at the front of the cat/test pipe is your rate limiting bottleneck and thus you would get similar results. ??????
#4
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Sears Point, CA
Posts: 5,276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Big Phat R)
If you're using the Hytech header why did you test a 2 1/4" test pipe and cat??
The output of the Hytech is 2.5" no? So then your 2 1/4" flange at the front of the cat/test pipe is your rate limiting bottleneck and thus you would get similar results. ??????
The output of the Hytech is 2.5" no? So then your 2 1/4" flange at the front of the cat/test pipe is your rate limiting bottleneck and thus you would get similar results. ??????
The test was conducted this way as Comptech was doing some R&D using my car, the next step will be to test the car with the current setup and swap it out for the HyTech exhaust system, which is a much larger cat from Random, and the 2 1/2" exhaust. I have the figures, so I figured that I would share them with everyone.
Austin
#6
Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Toms River, NJ, USA
Posts: 4,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Austin)
the next step will be to test the car with the current setup and swap it out for the HyTech exhaust system
#7
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Akira-R)
well, to me, all this says is that neither will pass emmisions testing.. so why spend the $ for a cat id you can throw in a piece of pipe?
if a highflow cat is that close to free flowing - then my guess would be that it isnt passable...
anyone else agree? seeing as how i couldnt even pass with a random tech cat, which is more restrictive?
if a highflow cat is that close to free flowing - then my guess would be that it isnt passable...
anyone else agree? seeing as how i couldnt even pass with a random tech cat, which is more restrictive?
Trending Topics
#9
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Sears Point, CA
Posts: 5,276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (2fcknfst)
When I experimented with the fuel I managed to lose whp, the car seemed to like this setup the best...
#10
Honda-Tech Member
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Austin)
Austin, I think 2fcknfst was replying to leo on how to pass emissions with that high flow cat...
#11
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Black R)
too rich at 45psi? i just think that emissions are getting stricter, and these high flow cats 'flow' a bit too well...
anyway.. id lilke to see nox and o2 readings with this cat.. if flowing well, and capable of passing - nice! otherwise, test pipe for me.
anyway.. id lilke to see nox and o2 readings with this cat.. if flowing well, and capable of passing - nice! otherwise, test pipe for me.
#13
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Sears Point, CA
Posts: 5,276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (FAST94GSR)
photopoint no worky for me, says pictures arent' available...
Austin
#14
New User
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Skunk2, rulez
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Austin)
Wow for the power you have, you don't have a complicated setup. Very nice linear power curve. I see you're running big injectors. What's your rationale for running 440cc? IMO that is way too big. Yea you can lean it out in the 5-6k to pick up more midrange. Lean your car up to 13:1 dead on and you'll probably pick a tad more horsepower. I like your car man,
[Modified by FAST94GSR, 7:01 PM 8/24/2001]
[Modified by FAST94GSR, 7:01 PM 8/24/2001]
#15
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: DFW...Frisco, TX
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Austin)
Dumb ???
What kind of dyno is that, unless you are telling me you are getting over 200 Whp with just the B's and a stock bottom end.
What kind of dyno is that, unless you are telling me you are getting over 200 Whp with just the B's and a stock bottom end.
#16
B*a*n*n*e*d
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Digital-R)
I am very very surprised Austin but I'm curious to see your results after the Hi-Tech exhaust is installed.
#17
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Sears Point, CA
Posts: 5,276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (FAST94GSR)
what's your setup. 207 at the wheels not bad.
Dumb ???
What kind of dyno is that, unless you are telling me you are getting over 200 Whp with just the B's and a stock bottom end.
What kind of dyno is that, unless you are telling me you are getting over 200 Whp with just the B's and a stock bottom end.
#18
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Austin)
Car is lookin good Austin.... can't wait to see it sometime in the future. Keep bringing up those numbers as high as they will go.... never quit!
Jon
Jon
#19
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Austin)
So you are saying that the Comptech dyno gives 15 hp over that of the Dynojet?
That makes the comptech icebox numbers that Comptech gave me inaccurate, because I went by the dynojet numbers.
That makes the comptech icebox numbers that Comptech gave me inaccurate, because I went by the dynojet numbers.
#20
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Land of Oz, KS
Posts: 2,339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (t)
So you are saying that the Comptech dyno gives 15 hp over that of the Dynojet?
That makes the comptech icebox numbers that Comptech gave me inaccurate, because I went by the dynojet numbers.
That makes the comptech icebox numbers that Comptech gave me inaccurate, because I went by the dynojet numbers.
#21
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Sears Point, CA
Posts: 5,276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Bob#497)
So you are saying that the Comptech dyno gives 15 hp over that of the Dynojet?
That makes the comptech icebox numbers that Comptech gave me inaccurate, because I went by the dynojet numbers.
That makes the comptech icebox numbers that Comptech gave me inaccurate, because I went by the dynojet numbers.
Basically, yes. At the DSR Dynojet, Austin dynoed at 192 whp.......here on the Comptech dyno, 207!!!!!! 15 WHP difference!!!!!! Have you ever seen the Comptech catalog? They claim some of their headers make 25 whp over stock.......now I know why .
I find your comment fundamentally flawed...if the comparion was from a dynojet to their dyno, then I would understand, but when you are comparing numbers from the same dyno with the same correction factors, your statement is incorrect.
Also take into account that my car had 2 1/2 hours of driving before the dyno runs at DSR, whereas the car was tested at Comptech in the early morning after the car had been brought up to opperating temperature, any cause for the variance...no clue, I don't give a damn about what my numbers say, so long as there can be an adequate comparison for the test that was conducted.
As an example:
Comptech placed an RSX on the dyno, it put down 160 whp, they produced an exhaust and it now produces 170whp.
Group A in Hayward(Skunk2) placed an RSX on their Dynojet and it had what 170, or 180whp, which is exactly the opposite from what happened with me.
Just something for you to think about....
#22
Honda-Tech Member
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Austin)
Nice to have some backing to the statment "F a damm test pipe".......I saw no gains with a pipe versus a cat on my setup also.........keep the plots coming Austin.
#23
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Land of Oz, KS
Posts: 2,339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Austin)
Bob,
I find your comment fundamentally flawed...if the comparion was from a dynojet to their dyno, then I would understand, but when you are comparing numbers from the same dyno with the same correction factors, your statement is incorrect.
Also take into account that my car had 2 1/2 hours of driving before the dyno runs at DSR, whereas the car was tested at Comptech in the early morning after the car had been brought up to opperating temperature, any cause for the variance...no clue, I don't give a damn about what my numbers say, so long as there can be an adequate comparison for the test that was conducted.
As an example:
Comptech placed an RSX on the dyno, it put down 160 whp, they produced an exhaust and it now produces 170whp.
Group A in Hayward(Skunk2) placed an RSX on their Dynojet and it had what 170, or 180whp, which is exactly the opposite from what happened with me.
Just something for you to think about....
I find your comment fundamentally flawed...if the comparion was from a dynojet to their dyno, then I would understand, but when you are comparing numbers from the same dyno with the same correction factors, your statement is incorrect.
Also take into account that my car had 2 1/2 hours of driving before the dyno runs at DSR, whereas the car was tested at Comptech in the early morning after the car had been brought up to opperating temperature, any cause for the variance...no clue, I don't give a damn about what my numbers say, so long as there can be an adequate comparison for the test that was conducted.
As an example:
Comptech placed an RSX on the dyno, it put down 160 whp, they produced an exhaust and it now produces 170whp.
Group A in Hayward(Skunk2) placed an RSX on their Dynojet and it had what 170, or 180whp, which is exactly the opposite from what happened with me.
Just something for you to think about....
#24
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (Austin)
As an example:
Comptech placed an RSX on the dyno, it put down 160 whp, they produced an exhaust and it now produces 170whp.
Group A in Hayward(Skunk2) placed an RSX on their Dynojet and it had what 170, or 180whp, which is exactly the opposite from what happened with me.
Just something for you to think about....
#25
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: at last finally back to sweet home, sunny north cali, usa
Posts: 2,637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Dyno Plots of Test Pipe vs. Carsound 54006 cat (t)
*sigh* all these speculations, and no one knows any fact. owner of that motor got bid by the boost bug (after riding in one) and he wanted to sell that motor to fund his new one. omniman and I both thought he should've kept it because more could be had out of that engine, but he made up his mind already.
as for all these accusaions of group-a's dyno reads high or results being fudged, what could group-a possibly gain by posting a high RSX dyno result? can't you guys accept the fact that maybe this was just a lucky motor?
sheesh. and all you people that dyno and tune your car so much, please post some 1/4 mile times as that is the only true indicator of how much realworld power your car is making.
my b16a has always been dynoed at group-a. so you guys probably think my graph is BS. Run 61/62 is my B16A on JUN type 3's with Skunk2 ECU. Run 85 is OmniMan's race B16A engines with ~12:1 CR. Still a 1.6 with stock bottom end.
as for all these accusaions of group-a's dyno reads high or results being fudged, what could group-a possibly gain by posting a high RSX dyno result? can't you guys accept the fact that maybe this was just a lucky motor?
sheesh. and all you people that dyno and tune your car so much, please post some 1/4 mile times as that is the only true indicator of how much realworld power your car is making.
my b16a has always been dynoed at group-a. so you guys probably think my graph is BS. Run 61/62 is my B16A on JUN type 3's with Skunk2 ECU. Run 85 is OmniMan's race B16A engines with ~12:1 CR. Still a 1.6 with stock bottom end.