DYNO - Velocity Stack vs. Cheap Filter
 

http://www.we-todd-did-racing.com/fi...yno_resize.jpg

Run 18 (Red) - 3" Short Ram Intake - Velocity Stack, no filter
Run 19 (Blue) - 3" Short Ram Intake - Cheap K&N Style filter

Setup:


LSVTEC

GSR Head
CTR Pistons
Type R Intake Cam
GSR Exhaust Cam
ITR Valvetrain
ARP Rod Bolts
ARP Head Studs
DC JDM ITR Header
2.5" Exhaust (Pretty queit/stock appearance)
Skunk2 Intake Manifold
Hondata Intake Gasket
Tuned with Crome
Stock Injectors - 91 Octane

https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/embeer.gifhttps://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/embeer.gifhttps://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/embeer.gif

nice gains and your setup makes very good power. https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif

what cam gears are you using?

Re: DYNO - Velocity Stack vs. Cheap Filter (DragWerks)
 

^^^ stock gears, adj cam gears definately would have helped-- There were no gains https://honda-tech.com/forums/images...es/emdgust.gif

Re: DYNO - Velocity Stack vs. Cheap Filter (DragWerks)
 

Even if it is ever so slight, I never would have expected a torque drop. Good contribution. https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif

Re: DYNO - Velocity Stack vs. Cheap Filter (DragWerks)
 

which v stack did you choose to go with?

Re: DYNO - Velocity Stack vs. Cheap Filter (Televator)
 

IMO the slight tq/hp difference can be attributed to slightly different coolant temps, ambient temp, etc. There is no significant difference...

Re: DYNO - Velocity Stack vs. Cheap Filter (MikeSarr_GSR)
 

Velocity stack was a generic type with 3" inner diameter and maybe 5" outer. I'll try to get some camera phone pics up I took

wouldnt u need to be moving for a velocity stack to do ne good??

Re: DYNO - Velocity Stack vs. Cheap Filter (DragWerks)
 

All velocity stacks are not created equal.

Re: (brick top)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by brick top &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">nice gains and your setup makes very good power.</TD></TR></TABLE>

at 13.5/1 c.r or so (if using stock hg) it better make power. pct's are scary https://honda-tech.com/forums/images...s/emsmileo.gif

Re: DYNO - Velocity Stack vs. Cheap Filter (b19coupe)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by b19coupe &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">All velocity stacks are not created equal.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Nor are filters. Who believes a real cotton gauze filter will perform equally or less than a cheap ebay filter?

I think the point is - if theres no diff between a velocity stack and a cheap filter, theres definately no diff between a v-stack and a quality filter. Unless you're trying forced induction of the particulate matter (dirt) kind.

Re: (B16C1)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by B16C1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

at 13.5/1 c.r or so (if using stock hg) it better make power. pct's are scary https://honda-tech.com/forums/images...s/emsmileo.gif </TD></TR></TABLE>

I've always thought ls block + gsr head + pct pistons yield compression in the low 12s. I doubt it's in the mid 13's but I'm a turbo guy. https://honda-tech.com/forums/images...s/emsmilep.gif

Re: DYNO - Velocity Stack vs. Cheap Filter (DragWerks)
 

HHHmmmm not bad on the DYNO son, i was thinking that the motor would have put down less power than that determine that the air flow coming in the head and the flow being pushed out the head were way off LOL, but i guess its all about the tuning! GOOD JOB!! bring it by the shop sometime. https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif

Re: DYNO - Velocity Stack vs. Cheap Filter (LABjunkies)
 

FWIW, I've seen bigger differences between two consecutive pulls.

Re: DYNO - Velocity Stack vs. Cheap Filter (92TypeR)
 

http://www.bpinitiatives.com/

https://honda-tech.com/forums/images/smilies/emthup.gif

Re: (DragWerks)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DragWerks &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I've always thought ls block + gsr head + pct pistons yield compression in the low 12s. I doubt it's in the mid 13's but I'm a turbo guy. https://honda-tech.com/forums/images...s/emsmilep.gif </TD></TR></TABLE>

PCT's/LS Block/GSR Head/OEM Gasket = over 14.3:1 I'm shocked it runs as well as it does.

Re: DYNO - Velocity Stack vs. Cheap Filter (b19coupe)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by b19coupe &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">All velocity stacks are not created equal.</TD></TR></TABLE>

x2

try this with a bpi

Re: (Natural Aspirations)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Natural Aspirations &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">PCT's/LS Block/GSR Head/OEM Gasket = over 14.3:1 I'm shocked it runs as well as it does.</TD></TR></TABLE>


http://images.honda-tech.com/set1//smile/emcrook.gif ...

C-Speed compression calculator is telling me that static compression is 12.27036242581659:1. The fact that this car and about 3 others I've tuned with this combination don't show any signs of pinging on 91 octane also leads me to believe c/r is no more than ~12.5:1 but if it is thats very interesting/gay (to only put out 186whp)

Re: (DragWerks)
 

c-speed does not take compression height or the LS's shorter deck height into factor. Try http://www.zealautowerks.com/

Re: (Natural Aspirations)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DragWerks &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">(to only put out 186whp)</TD></TR></TABLE>

That is an impressive number with the parts you have, you used Type ARGH parts and got above Type ARGH output.

Re: (Natural Aspirations)
 

My cam combonation must really be bleeding a lot of that compression out then

Re: (Natural Aspirations)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Natural Aspirations &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">c-speed does not take compression height or the LS's shorter deck height into factor. Try http://www.zealautowerks.com/ </TD></TR></TABLE>

LS and GSR/ITR have the same deck height.

But you are right with the cr numbers, with the LS crank/rod and CTR piston, the piston will sit out of the whole. It is definatley higher than 13:1, seeing as a 87.2mm GSR stroke will create an unhealthy 12.6:1.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DragWerks &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">My cam combonation must really be bleeding a lot of that compression out then</TD></TR></TABLE>

We have built 13.6:1cr street motors that run on pump 92. With the right cam combination, you can get away with a lot of static cr.

What I am surprised at, is how the hell aren't you getting piston-to-valve contact? You sure you don't have a gsr/itr crank running things down below?

Re: (92TypeR)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92TypeR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">LS and GSR/ITR have the same deck height.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Nope

LS is 211.84mm
GSR is 212.39mm

Re: (Natural Aspirations)
 

im fairly confident that they are the same. i know zeal lists them differently, but i suspact they either measured incorrectly or got a block that had been decked.

Re: (Natural Aspirations)
 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Natural Aspirations &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Nope

LS is 211.84mm
GSR is 212.39mm</TD></TR></TABLE>

nah im pretty sure its correct
the b20 is also 211.84 mm