Run 76 is today's run with VAFC tuned by myself

Run 39 was from two weeks ago when the cam gears was off by a tooth



Setup:
Iceman w/ HKS SMF
Skunk 2 IM
Jun camshafts
Jun valvesprings
Jun cam gears (0,0)
Portflow retainers
Mugen Header
Test pipe (2 inch)
Tanabe Ultra Medalion
UR pulleys
Spoon 70mm TB
Quaife LSD
JUN flywheel
VAFC (tuned using my own wideband gauge)
JDM P13

Wheel:
18 x 7.5 Work Emotion (17lbs)

Tire:
225/35/18 Falken FK451 (22lbs)

Brake:
AEM big brake kit (super heavy)

The messed up timing really threw off the performance quite significantly, I gained as much as 10whp and 15lbs of torque at some point after re-installing the cam gears. A/F is about 13.4 to 13.9 all across the power band, tuned by myself with my wideband gauge. Its not super-smooth, but it is the best I could do with VAFC.
I couldn't get my AEM EMS running for some reason, couldn't even start-up the car with the base calibration file, otherwise would have taken that to dyno instead.

 

dope

 

Hmmm, that seems like it should be higher for JUN cams, even the torque is weak. I suppose that it could be those wheels/tires/rotors. Are you running stock compression? Maybe that is the difference. Do you have a stock baseline dyno?

It'd be cool to see what the benefits of Chrome/überdata/hondata and higher compression would be. But for tuning it yourself. Thanks for sharing your Dyno.

Pirate

 

2" test pipe?? Why so small?? I would've thought you should've gone with atleast a 2.25" diameter, maybe even a 2.50".

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by VSBB6 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> A/F is about 13.4 to 13.9 all across the power band, tuned by myself with my wideband gauge. Its not super-smooth, but it is the best I could do with VAFC.
I couldn't get my AEM EMS running for some reason, couldn't even start-up the car with the base calibration file, otherwise would have taken that to dyno instead.</TD></TR></TABLE>

The AF curve being smooth is not your problem... Being that lean is.

 

I think teh H22 likes the A/F ratio to be a bit fatter then that

 

There is one thing I don't seem to understand...Do you guys think he should be making more power......

Check out this forum this guy is making 209 whp and 159 torque...Look at his mods.....Can someone explain...Or maybe it's just the tuner...

No disrepect bro...Just asking....

 

Because he is running a garbage EMS that does not allow him to manipulate his timing tables. His AF is also junk.

When he upgrades to the AEM EMS he will do much better.... that's if he knows how to use the EMS.

 

Just the 18's account for a at least a 3% loss and I'd guess the brake kit would be another % or 2. I've got a similar wheel tire set up and compared it to stock on the dyno (a couple dynos)

 

eek, i would expect at LEAST 215 whp

 

he should be making alot more than that. i made 195/150 with cams on a 100% stock motor.

 

can someone explain to me how the brakes cause ANY power loss?

 

cause he has a bigbrake kit... bigger and heavier than stock. more to turn.

 

I know he has the V-AFC. They say that is the cheaper way to tune but not to it's full extent. I know AEM is ideal and better EMS but how would hondata do with his set up.......It should get him over 200whp.....Correct

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by PrecisionH23a &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

The AF curve being smooth is not your problem... Being that lean is.</TD></TR></TABLE>


13.9:1 is not lean bud, its rich...

13.7 parts air to 1 part fuel rather than 14.7 parts air to 1 part fuel


16:1 would be lean

 

^^ seeing as how you would want the a/f to be close to 13:1, then 13.9:1 would be lean

 

wow, i pulled 190 with I/H/E/test pipe/ Clutch/Flywheel/failing ignition system/fuel system/4 codes and misfires from 6k-7.4k with no tuning.

 

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


13.9:1 is not lean bud, its rich...

13.7 parts air to 1 part fuel rather than 14.7 parts air to 1 part fuel


16:1 would be lean</TD></TR></TABLE>

hey dumbass, ideal A/F is 12.6:1

thank you, come again.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Shakes &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">hey dumbass, ideal A/F is 12.6:1

thank you, come again.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Woah, maybe for boost, but for NA that's way too rich.

 

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


13.9:1 is not lean bud, its rich...

13.7 parts air to 1 part fuel rather than 14.7 parts air to 1 part fuel


16:1 would be lean</TD></TR></TABLE>


You are wrong. 13.9:1 on that motor is on the brink of torching the pistons. But what would I know...

Stoich is 14.7:1... stock 02s work off of 1 volt therefore anything below 14.7:1 is rich and anything above 14.7:1 is lean. If you work with a 5 volt wideband you'll discover a world of difference.

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

hey dumbass, ideal A/F is 12.6:1

thank you, come again.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Correct on the dumbass remark.... but 12.6:1 on NA is a bit fat. Turbo of course needs to be richer than that.

I'm not giving away my secrets

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sharkcohen &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Woah, maybe for boost, but for NA that's way too rich.</TD></TR></TABLE>

yep

I would upgrade to a hondata system with those mods.

Much more potential.

And keep the A/F around 13.5

 

Nice flat torque curve! Thanks for posting it!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by stRodda &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">cause he has a bigbrake kit... bigger and heavier than stock. more to turn.</TD></TR></TABLE>

id like ot see proof that the aluminum hat and larger diam,eter rotor is actually any heavier than a stock rotor made off all cast iron.

 

It's physics. The more weight that is further away from the hubs center, the more force is required to turn it. Ex. A 11" rotor and a 13" rotor have the same weight. More power is necessary to turn the 13" rotor as it has 1" more mass further away from the hub center, even if the rotors weigh the same.

 

there was a show that dynoed a rsx and then put on 17 mugen wheels and 13inch brake upgrade...they lost 8 whp..they put a full exaust on it to gain back the 8hp and just about broke even