Ok, tomorrow I'm heading over to Shawn Church's to get my car dynoed again. For those of u who don't know or can't remember, here is my previous setup.

USDM B16 @ ~10.8:1 CR with;

Skunk2 Stage1 Cams & Cam Gears
Alaniz Street Master Head Work
Omnipower valvesprings, retainers, & valves
Mugen headgasket
Apex N1 exhaust
Password Carbon Fiber Intake (J's style)
DC 4-2-1 header
Powercore race cat (resonator basically)
ITR throttle body
Skunk2 Intake Manifold
Hondata IM gasket
NGK laser platinum plugs
Hondata s200

That combo yeilded me 178whp, 120wtq.

So now my new mods are;

RMF Narrow Header (replaces dc 4-2-1)
SMSP 300 cell spiral body cat (replaces resonator style test pipe)
Rocket Modified Autolight Spark Plugs (replaces NGK platinums)
AEM ITR cold air intake (replaces j's style intake)

All these are on now except the aem intake.
I'll be doing a dyno fully tuning it with the j's intake to show the gains from basically the rmf header.
Then I'll put on the aem intake & have it fully tuned so that u can see the gain (or loss) from the aem intake.

Hopefully this should help a lot of u out & hopefully I'll be in the 190's when its all done.




Modified by strsi at 2:57 PM 8/9/2005

 

thast pretty good! my cousin got 176hp 121tq with stage 2 cams.

 

im lookin forward to seeing ur results with the changes

i had a very similar setup to ur old one but without the intake mani and tb made 173whp 123wtq for a little comparison...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by realfasthonda &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">im lookin forward to seeing ur results</TD></TR></TABLE>

 

Nice results. Hope you get some high numbers. Too bad I had to pull out my b16 and put in the ls.

 

best of chance to you

can't wait to see your dyno sheet

 

I have a similiar setup...cant wait to see how the RMF Narrow Header work out...im looking to replace my DC headers soon. Good luck!

 

Ok, here they are. Lets just say I'm not too happy right now.



The Green line is with my original mods (DC, test pipe, J's), 178hp.
The Red line is with the RMF header & SMSP Cat, 178hp.
The Blue line is the the RMF header & smsp cat & aem itr intake, 181.5hp.

So basically the aem intake was the only worth while thing that I changed. It gained power pretty much everywhere over the J's intake (blue vs red).

Now the RMF really dissapointed me. I gained nothing out of it, all it did for me vs my dc header was lose midrange (green vs red). Now to be fair i did use a cat with the rmf header, but it is supsosed to be a very high flowing cat (better then carsound). The DC header I had on before was the 4-2-1 w/ a 2.25" collector, the RMF has a 2.5" collector. Also its not like the DC had a huge advantage cuz it had no cat, because I used an extra resonator in place of a straight test pipe for the dc header. & yes the resonaor will still flow better then a high flow cat, but it doesn't flow as good as say a test pipe. So basically I paid $1000 for the header & cat to basically lose midrange & be a little nicer to the enviornment. That sucks. I had very high hopes for this header judging it from the header test. But i guess that goes to show that every motor responds differently to mods.

Also u can see that the rmf & cat lost me torque everywhere. Once i put on the aem intake i was able to gain most of it back, however it shifted the powerband up to higher rpms. Torque used to peak at 6000rpms, now its at 7500rpms.

Now that is all done I can say that my car feels like it pulls a little harder up top, however I do really feel all the power I lost from ~5550-6800. Hopefully I'll be a little quicker in the 1/4 mile now, but I don't know

 

On your first pull the a/f graph was not leaner from the flow increase of the header?
Do you have a a/f sheet of this dyno day?

 

no i dont have it.
but i remember from my first run when i got there (compared to my a/f ratio from my last tune with the dc header) it actually ran much richer (~11.5:1 a/f ratio) from about 5000-6500, then it got just slightly leaner then before (with the dc) at peak.

I can't see the cat killing me that much, but I dont know. To me it just seems like this rmf header is just a little to much for a b16. Kind of sucks since randy said it would be great on a b16 when i asked him about it cuz i was worried a b16 would be too small for it.

 

thanks for sharing though I had good results with a jdm dc and a t1r test pipe and almost have the same mods than you. Maybe your right that the rmf is suited for bigger applications.

Why not try using the powercore cat and ditch the modified plugs for the regular NGK (BKR7E-11) plugs with the new header and see .

 

I cant use the powercore race cat cuz its only 2.25 & its suited for a doughnut flange off the header. The rmf is a flat flange which requires another flat flange to fit & as well as a flex pipe.

The main reason I went with a cat is cuz things are getting more & more strict in CA & i don't want to get caught without a cat ($2000 ticket ). Plus I hate how hondas sound with a test pipe.

 

your numbers seem about right
We dyno'd my Brothers B16 there as well and got similar numbers as you, 178whp and 112 tq. the setup was...
Long Block:
'00 SI B16A2
CTR PCT pistoins w/ honda rings std. bore (81mm)
ARP rod Bolts
ARP head studs
OEM head gasket, used 1 piece
Portflow springs and retainers
Buddy club spec 3 cams and gears
ITR Intake manifold
ITR throttle body
Comptech Ice box and Intake tube
Spoon sports 4-2-1 1 piece B16 header with a standard "2 collector
RSR ExMag Exhaust
STr fuel rail
RC 310cc Injectors
CTR N-1 crank Pulley
Transmission
ITR tranny with 4.4 final
CTR flywheel
ACT Xtreme pressure plate
Clutch Net 6 puck sprung disc
all tuned with a Hondata Stage 3

After being disapointed with his numbers he went ahead and sent the head to compech Machine where they installed some ITR Intake Valves and did a minor street port to his head.
Other mods Include:
Comptech Machine Street full radius valve job
ITR intake Valves
Skunk Stage 2 cams
MemoryFab J's style CarbonFiber Intake
Toda header
Buddy Club spec II exhaust

The ITR tranny was also ditch for a '00 SI tranny with a Kazz clutch type diff.
here was his final outcome




Modified by GUILOTINE at 11:27 PM 8/9/2005

 

yea i've seen his dyno before, very impressive.
Normally I'd be happy with the #'s. However I'm not cuz I'm able to compare my dc w/ resonator to my rmf w/ high flow cat. I lost a good amount of midrange & made the exact same peak from switching to the rmf. Very dissapointing.

If the rmf was flowing better then the dc then my first run today should have been leaner then last time with the dc. However it was very rich. So this means the rmf & cat are flowing worse then the dc. So the question is how much of this is due to the rmf header & how much is due to the high flow cat? Obviously the cat isn't helping, but I dont think it should hurt that much. I think the rmf is prob just too much for a b16.

thankfully i had gotten the aem itr intake or else my dyno today would have ended up leaving me with less midrange & same peak after spending over $1000. thanks for ur thread that showed this!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by strsi &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">yea i've seen his dyno before, very impressive.
Normally I'd be happy with the #'s. However I'm not cuz I'm able to compare my dc w/ resonator to my rmf w/ high flow cat. I lost a good amount of midrange & made the exact same peak from switching to the rmf. Very dissapointing.

If the rmf was flowing better then the dc then my first run today should have been leaner then last time with the dc. However it was very rich. So this means the rmf & cat are flowing worse then the dc. So the question is how much of this is due to the rmf header & how much is due to the high flow cat? Obviously the cat isn't helping, but I dont think it should hurt that much. I think the rmf is prob just too much for a b16.

thankfully i had gotten the aem itr intake or else my dyno today would have ended up leaving me with less midrange & same peak after spending over $1000. thanks for ur thread that showed this!</TD></TR></TABLE>
any pics or info on the outcomes? the Intake help out alot..post thta intake results on my J's thread their wher alot of non-believers

 

what do u mean pics or info on the outcomes?

The red vs green show the difference between the dc w/ resonator vs rmf w/ high flow.
The blue vs red shows the difference between the aem vs j's.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by strsi &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The blue vs red shows the difference between the aem vs j's.</TD></TR></TABLE>

 

I'm not sure if I'm reading the graph right, but it looks like you lost a good deal of torque from switching headers. Maybe your exhaust is holding you back now? I can't see a straight through 2.36" N-1 being too restrictive though. Did anything happen in between tests that might cause your car to perform worse? I'd be pretty sad too if that happened, hopefully there's something that was overlooked that would solve your problems. Good luck and thanks for sharing.

 

nice numbers

 

Are there any other persons using RMF on their B16s? I want to know a possible reason why this header didn't slaughter thr DC.

 

I'm not worried about my exhaust, it shouldn't be too restrictive.

It has to be a combo of the cat & the header being to much for a b16 IMO. I would like to see someone else dyno an rmf on a b16, but I have yet to see it.

 

Church contributed the fact that I didn't gain any peak with the RMF header being mostly due to the cat. However he said the loss in midrange was probably mostly due to the header design.

But dam, I was looking at a dyno of the comptech 4-2-1 vs the rmf on an itr & the rmf owned everywhere in the powercurve. & the comptech is better then my crappy dc 4-2-1.
So does this mean the rmf is too big for a b16?

 

Maybe you should try showing Randy the results and see if he can give you any feedback or advice....

I know I was considering changing my JDM DC 4-1 for the RMF header, but will hold off now. Not because it's a bad header but because it may not be as well matched to the b16 as we'd all hoped.

 

yea thats the thing, I'm not saying the rmf is a bad header. I just don't think its any good for a b16. I guess u could say its too good for a b16. I just kind of feel betrayed by randy since he told me it would be great on any 1.6-1.9L b-series. At least smsp is honest & clearly say that their headers aren't recomended for b16's.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by strsi &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">yea thats the thing, I'm not saying the rmf is a bad header. I just don't think its any good for a b16. I guess u could say its too good for a b16. I just kind of feel betrayed by randy since he told me it would be great on any 1.6-1.9L b-series. At least smsp is honest & clearly say that their headers aren't recomended for b16's.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Dude You are the only person that has not made AT LEAST 8 more hp.When did you run the other headers.Like A week ago ,month ,year?And you changed so many things ,How do you know what is what.And if you feel I betrayed you well...
It looks like we are gonna have to break up.LMAO.
So you ran the other header with a test pipe.And you ran mine with A cat and a muffler?