no more p/s n a/c
03-17-2004, 05:45 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Windermere, fl, USA
Posts: 952
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no more p/s n a/c
when you do this i just took off the belts. Now when you take the belts off all the
stuff is still there . do you need to do anything eles ?? also i had to cut the a/c belt
because there is sum kind of mount going through the center of that is that how you take that belt off??
or is there another way . ( i have a 2000 civic si ) does anyone know the
performance amount with doing this? like Horse Power? thanks
stuff is still there . do you need to do anything eles ?? also i had to cut the a/c belt
because there is sum kind of mount going through the center of that is that how you take that belt off??
or is there another way . ( i have a 2000 civic si ) does anyone know the
performance amount with doing this? like Horse Power? thanks
03-17-2004, 05:49 AM
#2
This user can set his title.
Re: no more p/s n a/c (1hotcivicSi)
Huh? English? So basically you just cut the belts? You gain nothing. No HP and such.
All you gain is the loss of P/S and A/C.
If you are trying to loose some weight then take off the power steering pump and the entire unit and since you look like you don't care for A/C. Take out the entire A/C unit.
***EDITED FOR Louie_EM1***
maybe a gain of 0.5 - 1 whp. Happy?
Modified by Ki3t at 11:12 AM 3/17/2004
All you gain is the loss of P/S and A/C.
If you are trying to loose some weight then take off the power steering pump and the entire unit and since you look like you don't care for A/C. Take out the entire A/C unit.
***EDITED FOR Louie_EM1***
maybe a gain of 0.5 - 1 whp. Happy?
Modified by Ki3t at 11:12 AM 3/17/2004
03-17-2004, 06:02 AM
#5
Senior Member
Yes there is a gain with taking off your PS and AC. But you might wanna get a manual rack to put in there. the gain is like 4whp and 3 ftlbs of torqe plus the weight loss
03-17-2004, 06:03 AM
#6
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 1,854
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: no more p/s n a/c (1hotcivicSi)
Actually there are gains, but minimal. 1WHP if you're lucky. You gain from the AC because the crank pulley also runs the AC unit. If the pulley is running one less item, that creates less stress on the crank. As far as the PS goes, put the belt back on before you ruin your rack. There are 2 different steering racks...1 for PS and 1 for no PS.
03-17-2004, 06:04 AM
#7
be professional
Re: no more p/s n a/c (1hotcivicSi)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 1hotcivicSi »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">wait so you dont gain anyhting by doing this?????? i herd you do</TD></TR></TABLE>
Maybe about 0.5 horsepower at the flywheel.
You're not going to gain much. All you're going to do is make your car harder to turn and remove a perfectly good air conditioning system.
Kind of silly to pay a premium for an Si model with all of its features, and then remove half of them.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JDMlifestyle »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Yes there is a gain with taking off your PS and AC. But you might wanna get a manual rack to put in there. the gain is like 4whp and 3 ftlbs of torqe plus the weight loss</TD></TR></TABLE>
I'd like to see some dyno charts to prove the power gains by removing the parasitic loss of the power steering and air conditioning belts.
Maybe about 0.5 horsepower at the flywheel.
You're not going to gain much. All you're going to do is make your car harder to turn and remove a perfectly good air conditioning system.
Kind of silly to pay a premium for an Si model with all of its features, and then remove half of them.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JDMlifestyle »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Yes there is a gain with taking off your PS and AC. But you might wanna get a manual rack to put in there. the gain is like 4whp and 3 ftlbs of torqe plus the weight loss</TD></TR></TABLE>
I'd like to see some dyno charts to prove the power gains by removing the parasitic loss of the power steering and air conditioning belts.
Trending Topics
03-17-2004, 06:21 AM
#10
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: no more p/s n a/c (JRI94)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JRI94 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">As far as the PS goes, put the belt back on before you ruin your rack. There are 2 different steering racks...1 for PS and 1 for no PS.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I beg to differ. Removing the PS pump will not affect the steering rack. I as well as a few friends have no PS Pump but we still have the PS rack and it works just fine. The ps pump just powers the power assist portion of the rack, it does nothing to lube or maintain the rack itself.
If you want to convert it it to a manual rack you will have to swap out the subframe that the passenger side of the rack bolts to because they are different between power assist and non-power assist. The non-power assited rack costs about $40 from salvage and the subframe costs about $100 at salvage or you can just keep you ps rack and spend $0 and call it a day.
I beg to differ. Removing the PS pump will not affect the steering rack. I as well as a few friends have no PS Pump but we still have the PS rack and it works just fine. The ps pump just powers the power assist portion of the rack, it does nothing to lube or maintain the rack itself.
If you want to convert it it to a manual rack you will have to swap out the subframe that the passenger side of the rack bolts to because they are different between power assist and non-power assist. The non-power assited rack costs about $40 from salvage and the subframe costs about $100 at salvage or you can just keep you ps rack and spend $0 and call it a day.
03-17-2004, 06:22 AM
#11
Senior Member
Your car your choice. my car didnt come with PS but came with AC i dont like niether. its all personal preference. makes working in the engine bay a lil easier and i think it cleans it up alot also
03-17-2004, 06:22 AM
#12
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: no more p/s n a/c (Targa250R)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Targa250R »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Maybe about 0.5 horsepower at the flywheel.
You're not going to gain much. All you're going to do is make your car harder to turn and remove a perfectly good air conditioning system.
Kind of silly to pay a premium for an Si model with all of its features, and then remove half of them.
I'd like to see some dyno charts to prove the power gains by removing the parasitic loss of the power steering and air conditioning belts.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I have seen dyno graphs of this (On here, but don't remember whos car) and it was a 3-4 whp gain.. However, most likely it's not going to make any difference noticable differences by just cutting the belts.. and it IS a 2000 si so if I were you I would just put the belts back on. That is also coming from someone who removed his A/C, P/S, ABS, and Cruise control.. Although I removed all the parts as well, so i saved quite a bit of weight(that abs is heavy), and my si is only a 94
Maybe about 0.5 horsepower at the flywheel.
You're not going to gain much. All you're going to do is make your car harder to turn and remove a perfectly good air conditioning system.
Kind of silly to pay a premium for an Si model with all of its features, and then remove half of them.
I'd like to see some dyno charts to prove the power gains by removing the parasitic loss of the power steering and air conditioning belts.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I have seen dyno graphs of this (On here, but don't remember whos car) and it was a 3-4 whp gain.. However, most likely it's not going to make any difference noticable differences by just cutting the belts.. and it IS a 2000 si so if I were you I would just put the belts back on. That is also coming from someone who removed his A/C, P/S, ABS, and Cruise control.. Although I removed all the parts as well, so i saved quite a bit of weight(that abs is heavy), and my si is only a 94
03-17-2004, 06:24 AM
#13
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 1,854
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: no more p/s n a/c (Targa250R)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Targa250R »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I'd like to see some dyno charts to prove the power gains by removing the parasitic loss of the power steering and air conditioning belts.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I gave a very good explanation of why you would get power from losing the AC belt and you now have a blurry *** graph. I don't know how the PS works. I bought a Civic with a manual rack.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by H22avid »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I beg to differ. Removing the PS pump will not affect the steering rack. I as well as a few friends have no PS Pump but we still have the PS rack and it works just fine. The ps pump just powers the power assist portion of the rack, it does nothing to lube or maintain the rack itself.
If you want to convert it it to a manual rack you will have to swap out the subframe that the passenger side of the rack bolts to because they are different between power assist and non-power assist. The non-power assited rack costs about $40 from salvage and the subframe costs about $100 at salvage or you can just keep you ps rack and spend $0 and call it a day.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Beg all you want...there are 2 different racks for a reason. I'll bet you can turn the wheel with a manual rack 1000x easier than you can with a PS rack with the PS removed. And you're saying they made 2 different subframes for PS or no PS. I beg to differ. Show me your proof...
I'd like to see some dyno charts to prove the power gains by removing the parasitic loss of the power steering and air conditioning belts.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I gave a very good explanation of why you would get power from losing the AC belt and you now have a blurry *** graph. I don't know how the PS works. I bought a Civic with a manual rack.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by H22avid »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I beg to differ. Removing the PS pump will not affect the steering rack. I as well as a few friends have no PS Pump but we still have the PS rack and it works just fine. The ps pump just powers the power assist portion of the rack, it does nothing to lube or maintain the rack itself.
If you want to convert it it to a manual rack you will have to swap out the subframe that the passenger side of the rack bolts to because they are different between power assist and non-power assist. The non-power assited rack costs about $40 from salvage and the subframe costs about $100 at salvage or you can just keep you ps rack and spend $0 and call it a day.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Beg all you want...there are 2 different racks for a reason. I'll bet you can turn the wheel with a manual rack 1000x easier than you can with a PS rack with the PS removed. And you're saying they made 2 different subframes for PS or no PS. I beg to differ. Show me your proof...
03-17-2004, 06:36 AM
#14
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The next exit..., NJ, USA
Posts: 3,842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: no more p/s n a/c (JRI94)
Just remove the stuff from your car when you get the time... It's a breeze to do and there's no neeed to cart around wasted weight... that and it cleans up your engine bay...
As far as cutting the belts, I'm sure there is away to releaase the tension so you don't have to cut...
As far as cutting the belts, I'm sure there is away to releaase the tension so you don't have to cut...
03-17-2004, 06:39 AM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: no more p/s n a/c (JRI94)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You guys are arguing about two different things.
H22Avid said nothing about it beind easier, he said it won't affect anything, I agree with him. The subframe, I donno, but who gives a **** when the rack doesn't need to be removed.
The rack as long as there is fuild won't burst due to pressure; yeah it's a good idea to have a resivoir/breather but when I got rid of mine there was no difference.
Ki3t, why respond when you obviously don't know what you're talkin about?
2 less belts on your pulley is better than nothing; no one said about how much gains.
The bottom AC compressor mount is also a motor mount, you need to keep that.
You guys are arguing about two different things.
H22Avid said nothing about it beind easier, he said it won't affect anything, I agree with him. The subframe, I donno, but who gives a **** when the rack doesn't need to be removed.
The rack as long as there is fuild won't burst due to pressure; yeah it's a good idea to have a resivoir/breather but when I got rid of mine there was no difference.
Ki3t, why respond when you obviously don't know what you're talkin about?
2 less belts on your pulley is better than nothing; no one said about how much gains.
The bottom AC compressor mount is also a motor mount, you need to keep that.
03-17-2004, 06:43 AM
#16
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: no more p/s n a/c (JRI94)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JRI94 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Beg all you want...there are 2 different racks for a reason. I'll bet you can turn the wheel with a manual rack 1000x easier than you can with a PS rack with the PS removed. And you're saying they made 2 different subframes for PS or no PS. I beg to differ. Show me your proof...
</TD></TR></TABLE>
As far as I know this is the correct information. I don't believe there are two different subframes. Also there are def. two different racks for a reason, however, you can use your PS rack just fine as a manual rack by running a loop and a breather. Also the PS rack has a shorter turning radius which is nice
Beg all you want...there are 2 different racks for a reason. I'll bet you can turn the wheel with a manual rack 1000x easier than you can with a PS rack with the PS removed. And you're saying they made 2 different subframes for PS or no PS. I beg to differ. Show me your proof...
</TD></TR></TABLE>
As far as I know this is the correct information. I don't believe there are two different subframes. Also there are def. two different racks for a reason, however, you can use your PS rack just fine as a manual rack by running a loop and a breather. Also the PS rack has a shorter turning radius which is nice
03-17-2004, 06:53 AM
#17
be professional
Re: no more p/s n a/c (JRI94)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JRI94 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I gave a very good explanation of why you would get power from losing the AC belt and you now have a blurry *** graph.</TD></TR></TABLE>
We already all know what the theory is behind removing the parasitic loss.
What I really want to know is real, solid numbers. Those graphs aren't helping.
I gave a very good explanation of why you would get power from losing the AC belt and you now have a blurry *** graph.</TD></TR></TABLE>
We already all know what the theory is behind removing the parasitic loss.
What I really want to know is real, solid numbers. Those graphs aren't helping.
03-17-2004, 07:08 AM
#19
This user can set his title.
Re: no more p/s n a/c (Louie_EM1)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Louie_EM1 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Ki3t, why respond when you obviously don't know what you're talkin about?
2 less belts on your pulley is better than nothing; no one said about how much gains.
The bottom AC compressor mount is also a motor mount, you need to keep that.</TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 1hotcivicSi »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> ( i have a 2000 civic si ) does anyone know the performance amount with doing this? like Horse Power? thanks </TD></TR></TABLE> Obviously he was asking....
Ummm, 4whp and 3 ftlbs of torqe are not even proven. Until you can post up a stock motor with A/C and P/S on dyno a chart and then then same car w/ those uninstalled then I'll be quiet.
I beg to differ about those so called #'s but even if you remove all those things like <FONT COLOR="red">I DID</FONT> you won't feel anything but a little weight loss.
*I'm not trying to make anyone feel stupid but this is just from my own experience.*
Modified by Ki3t at 11:23 AM 3/17/2004
Modified by Ki3t at 11:24 AM 3/17/2004
Ki3t, why respond when you obviously don't know what you're talkin about?
2 less belts on your pulley is better than nothing; no one said about how much gains.
The bottom AC compressor mount is also a motor mount, you need to keep that.</TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 1hotcivicSi »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> ( i have a 2000 civic si ) does anyone know the performance amount with doing this? like Horse Power? thanks </TD></TR></TABLE> Obviously he was asking....
Ummm, 4whp and 3 ftlbs of torqe are not even proven. Until you can post up a stock motor with A/C and P/S on dyno a chart and then then same car w/ those uninstalled then I'll be quiet.
I beg to differ about those so called #'s but even if you remove all those things like <FONT COLOR="red">I DID</FONT> you won't feel anything but a little weight loss.
*I'm not trying to make anyone feel stupid but this is just from my own experience.*
Modified by Ki3t at 11:23 AM 3/17/2004
Modified by Ki3t at 11:24 AM 3/17/2004
03-17-2004, 07:56 AM
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: no more p/s n a/c (Ki3t)
It's completely logical.
You don't NEED to see how 100 lbs can affect a car in a quartermile.
Just like you don't NEED to see how two less frictioned induced belts can help rotate a crank easier.
It's the same theory as bigger pulleys and the same theory on the single EK9 N1 pulley.
Gains? Well I also have an Si and I do not have PC or AC and gains are extremely minimal, BUT I will not say they are none.
You don't NEED to see how 100 lbs can affect a car in a quartermile.
Just like you don't NEED to see how two less frictioned induced belts can help rotate a crank easier.
It's the same theory as bigger pulleys and the same theory on the single EK9 N1 pulley.
Gains? Well I also have an Si and I do not have PC or AC and gains are extremely minimal, BUT I will not say they are none.
03-17-2004, 08:07 AM
#21
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: no more p/s n a/c (CharmCity)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CharmCity »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
As far as I know this is the correct information. I don't believe there are two different subframes. Also there are def. two different racks for a reason, however, you can use your PS rack just fine as a manual rack by running a loop and a breather. Also the PS rack has a shorter turning radius which is nice</TD></TR></TABLE>
There are definitely two different sub frames because I tried to convert to a manual rack to save more weight since the ps rack is much much heavier then the manual. How else would I know the prices of the parts needed for the conversion and know that the sub frames are different.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JRI94 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> I don't know how the PS works. I bought a Civic with a manual rack.
Beg all you want...there are 2 different racks for a reason. I'll bet you can turn the wheel with a manual rack 1000x easier than you can with a PS rack with the PS removed. And you're saying they made 2 different subframes for PS or no PS. I beg to differ. Show me your proof...
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Quit talking out your *** when you obviously don't know the PS system which you already stated in this post.
Yes Captain Obvious, there are two different racks for a reason... one is power assisted and the other is not. However, there is absolutely NO HARM done using the ps rack as a manual rack... trust me, I and a few others have been sporting this set up for quite some time with absolutely NO PROBLEMS and we don't even use breathers.
My old civic had no PS and came that way from the factory with a manual rack and guess what, it DID NOT turn any easier than my ps rack used as a manual rack! Also, the turning ratio is better on the ps rack as opposed to the manual rack (i.e. less turns from lock to lock)
YES, they made two DIFFERENT SUBFRAMES; you know the part that your LCA's and passenger side of the rack bolt to. Why would I make that up? I unlike some people don't talk out of my *** about **** I don't know; I only post **** when I have first hand knowledge and experience in said matter.
The bracket on the subframe that the passenger side of the rack bolts to is completely different for PS and Non-PS and this bracket is welded to the subframe as one piece... hence the reason you have to swap the subframes.
The ps rack is probably 3 inches in diamater where as the manual rack is probably half that. There for they mount up different. The thicker PS rack just has a thin rubber bushing around where it bolts to the subframe. On the manual it has a much thicker rubber bushing that is flat on one side. Also the holes that the bracket bolts to on the subframe has different hole allignments between PS and Non-PS.
As far as I know this is the correct information. I don't believe there are two different subframes. Also there are def. two different racks for a reason, however, you can use your PS rack just fine as a manual rack by running a loop and a breather. Also the PS rack has a shorter turning radius which is nice</TD></TR></TABLE>
There are definitely two different sub frames because I tried to convert to a manual rack to save more weight since the ps rack is much much heavier then the manual. How else would I know the prices of the parts needed for the conversion and know that the sub frames are different.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JRI94 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> I don't know how the PS works. I bought a Civic with a manual rack.
Beg all you want...there are 2 different racks for a reason. I'll bet you can turn the wheel with a manual rack 1000x easier than you can with a PS rack with the PS removed. And you're saying they made 2 different subframes for PS or no PS. I beg to differ. Show me your proof...
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Quit talking out your *** when you obviously don't know the PS system which you already stated in this post.
Yes Captain Obvious, there are two different racks for a reason... one is power assisted and the other is not. However, there is absolutely NO HARM done using the ps rack as a manual rack... trust me, I and a few others have been sporting this set up for quite some time with absolutely NO PROBLEMS and we don't even use breathers.
My old civic had no PS and came that way from the factory with a manual rack and guess what, it DID NOT turn any easier than my ps rack used as a manual rack! Also, the turning ratio is better on the ps rack as opposed to the manual rack (i.e. less turns from lock to lock)
YES, they made two DIFFERENT SUBFRAMES; you know the part that your LCA's and passenger side of the rack bolt to. Why would I make that up? I unlike some people don't talk out of my *** about **** I don't know; I only post **** when I have first hand knowledge and experience in said matter.
The bracket on the subframe that the passenger side of the rack bolts to is completely different for PS and Non-PS and this bracket is welded to the subframe as one piece... hence the reason you have to swap the subframes.
The ps rack is probably 3 inches in diamater where as the manual rack is probably half that. There for they mount up different. The thicker PS rack just has a thin rubber bushing around where it bolts to the subframe. On the manual it has a much thicker rubber bushing that is flat on one side. Also the holes that the bracket bolts to on the subframe has different hole allignments between PS and Non-PS.
03-17-2004, 08:08 AM
#22
be professional
Re: no more p/s n a/c (Louie_EM1)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Louie_EM1 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It's completely logical.
You don't NEED to see how 100 lbs can affect a car in a quartermile.</TD></TR></TABLE>
A complete A/C system is more like 30lbs.
You don't NEED to see how 100 lbs can affect a car in a quartermile.</TD></TR></TABLE>
A complete A/C system is more like 30lbs.
03-17-2004, 08:10 AM
#23
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: no more p/s n a/c (Targa250R)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Targa250R »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
A complete A/C system is more like 30lbs.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I wasn't talkin about the weight.......
got physics 101?
A complete A/C system is more like 30lbs.
</TD></TR></TABLE>I wasn't talkin about the weight.......
got physics 101?
03-17-2004, 08:12 AM
#24
be professional
Re: no more p/s n a/c (Louie_EM1)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Louie_EM1 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I wasn't talkin about the weight.......
got physics 101?</TD></TR></TABLE>
You're making no sense now.
Why did you mention weight?
I told you, everybody already knows the theory behind removing parasitic losses. The question is, what are the actual real-world gains? Dyno charts, please.
I wasn't talkin about the weight.......
got physics 101?</TD></TR></TABLE>
You're making no sense now.
Why did you mention weight?
I told you, everybody already knows the theory behind removing parasitic losses. The question is, what are the actual real-world gains? Dyno charts, please.
03-17-2004, 08:13 AM
#25
Darth ModerVader
Re: no more p/s n a/c (Targa250R)
Quoted from an older post:
[QUOTE=Philly_NBP_R]Here's what I did:
1. Remove all fluid from system (let pump pump out fluid into a closed container) leaving a little bit to lubricate the system.
2. Remove Pump and cast iron brackets (9.5 lbs)
3. Hook PS line that used to go to pump up to the bottom nipple of the fluid reservoir (sp?).
4. Leave the line that goes to the cooler in the front of the car also hooked to the reservoir.
5. Drive away knowing you are making as much as 7 more whp w/out power steering:
The graphs from this post are no longer up, but the numbers are listed:
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I took the R to the dyno today (brand new dynojet) to get some basic baseline numbers before I do some tuning, and before I replace my rattling cat and add SMSP's cat-to-bpipe bottleneck remover. (Thanks for helping me out Dave)
I also wanted to see the diff between the stock box and AEM, and see how much gains you actually receive from removing the power steering belt.
Mods:
AEM Intake (currently in shortram form *)
JDM DC 4-1 Header
2.5" Carsound cat (rattling and soon to be replaced)
*I used to have the AEM in cold-air form, but replaced it with stock intake. At some point I decided to put the AEM back on in short-ram to see how I liked that.
So anyway, on to the numbers:
Run 0: AEM short-ram: 160.9hp/122.5tq
Run 1: AEM short-ram: 161.2hp/122.5tq (basically no change, 0.3hp, just wanted to warm car up and see if it was consistent)
Run 2: Stock airbox: 164.9hp/121.1tq (peak 3.7hp gain, 1.4tq loss)
Run 3: Removed power steering belt: 169.5hp/123.4tq (peak 4.6hp gain, 2.3tq gain)</TD></TR></TABLE>
These were both on B18's but the principle applies universally. Between the two separate cars, there's roughly a ~6 WHP average gain.
If freeing-up power is your goal, you'll want to remove is the PS system, not the AC, since the AC has a clutch that basically reduces parasitic losses to nil when the system is switched off. The PS pump, however, is constantly "engaged". You'll also drop ~16lbs. by removing the PS. If you're looking to further the weight reduction, then by all means, remove the AC if you can live without it.
As for the rack being "ruined", there are many, many individuals (myself and a number of others I know included) who have been running a properly-looped power rack for years with no ill effects. Realtime also used a similar setup on their ITR's, and I suspect they would refuse to run such a system if there was the increased possibility of rack failure during a race.
Yes, steering effort is higher than with an OEM manual rack, but much of this difference in effort is due not to the rack's power components, but rather to the fact that it has a much quicker ratio than manual racks. Many people actually favor the quicker ratio and dislike the "slowness" of the manual racks.
[QUOTE=Philly_NBP_R]Here's what I did:
1. Remove all fluid from system (let pump pump out fluid into a closed container) leaving a little bit to lubricate the system.
2. Remove Pump and cast iron brackets (9.5 lbs)
3. Hook PS line that used to go to pump up to the bottom nipple of the fluid reservoir (sp?).
4. Leave the line that goes to the cooler in the front of the car also hooked to the reservoir.
5. Drive away knowing you are making as much as 7 more whp w/out power steering:
The graphs from this post are no longer up, but the numbers are listed:
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I took the R to the dyno today (brand new dynojet) to get some basic baseline numbers before I do some tuning, and before I replace my rattling cat and add SMSP's cat-to-bpipe bottleneck remover. (Thanks for helping me out Dave)
I also wanted to see the diff between the stock box and AEM, and see how much gains you actually receive from removing the power steering belt.
Mods:
AEM Intake (currently in shortram form *)
JDM DC 4-1 Header
2.5" Carsound cat (rattling and soon to be replaced)
*I used to have the AEM in cold-air form, but replaced it with stock intake. At some point I decided to put the AEM back on in short-ram to see how I liked that.
So anyway, on to the numbers:
Run 0: AEM short-ram: 160.9hp/122.5tq
Run 1: AEM short-ram: 161.2hp/122.5tq (basically no change, 0.3hp, just wanted to warm car up and see if it was consistent)
Run 2: Stock airbox: 164.9hp/121.1tq (peak 3.7hp gain, 1.4tq loss)
Run 3: Removed power steering belt: 169.5hp/123.4tq (peak 4.6hp gain, 2.3tq gain)</TD></TR></TABLE>
These were both on B18's but the principle applies universally. Between the two separate cars, there's roughly a ~6 WHP average gain.
If freeing-up power is your goal, you'll want to remove is the PS system, not the AC, since the AC has a clutch that basically reduces parasitic losses to nil when the system is switched off. The PS pump, however, is constantly "engaged". You'll also drop ~16lbs. by removing the PS. If you're looking to further the weight reduction, then by all means, remove the AC if you can live without it.
As for the rack being "ruined", there are many, many individuals (myself and a number of others I know included) who have been running a properly-looped power rack for years with no ill effects. Realtime also used a similar setup on their ITR's, and I suspect they would refuse to run such a system if there was the increased possibility of rack failure during a race.
Yes, steering effort is higher than with an OEM manual rack, but much of this difference in effort is due not to the rack's power components, but rather to the fact that it has a much quicker ratio than manual racks. Many people actually favor the quicker ratio and dislike the "slowness" of the manual racks.