which p is the best?
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
From: columbia, tn, maury
which p is the best?
I have a 97 gsr I am going to turbo it and hondata is a little out of my price range. I can get my ecu's chipped cheap but which one is the best a p28 or a p72. I know I have a p72 but I am going back to obd 1. just want some opinions thats all.
Cool Cool Island Breezes. BOY-EE
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,953
Likes: 9
From: TRILLINOIS....WAY downtown, jerky.
Re: which p is the best? (mike1jag)
It doesn't really matter. You have to tune for your situation. There's no "best ecu" since there are A SHITLOAD of variables. Dont cheap out on tuning...or anything else. Who fooled you into thinking turboing was cheap? You didn't believe the forum hype about "you can do a $2000 turbo kit that's reliable" did you?
A blown motor costs a lot as well. If you're actually going forced induction, open your wallet VERY wide..and say goodbye to all your $$$.
Not trying to **** in your coffee or anything, but that's just the way it is. You have to buy some TUNEABLE engine management. You have to DYNO TUNE your setup after you get all the hard parts installed. Expect to pay a LOT of money.
A blown motor costs a lot as well. If you're actually going forced induction, open your wallet VERY wide..and say goodbye to all your $$$.
Not trying to **** in your coffee or anything, but that's just the way it is. You have to buy some TUNEABLE engine management. You have to DYNO TUNE your setup after you get all the hard parts installed. Expect to pay a LOT of money.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,921
Likes: 2
From: Right, Here, .
Re: which p is the best? (B serious)
I hate when people try to make an argument that a $2000 turbo kit is reliable and safe. If it was that easy, I'm pretty sure honda would have sold an SI or Limited Edition Civic or Integra with a factory turbo a long time ago. And don't come here and bring up the turbo RDX cause look how long it took Acura/Honda to decide to develop and actually produce it.
Cool Cool Island Breezes. BOY-EE
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,953
Likes: 9
From: TRILLINOIS....WAY downtown, jerky.
Re: which p is the best? (all-mtr-teg)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by all-mtr-teg »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I hate when people try to make an argument that a $2000 turbo kit is reliable and safe. If it was that easy, I'm pretty sure honda would have sold an SI or Limited Edition Civic or Integra with a factory turbo a long time ago. And don't come here and bring up the turbo RDX cause look how long it took Acura/Honda to decide to develop and actually produce it.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I'm glad that you realize that a $2k turbo kit is not a good thing.
However, honda had a turbo car A LOONG time ago. They had the "honda city turbo2" in the 70s. They had an 80 or early 90 something honda city turbo in Japan. With the amount of $$ honda has at it's disposal, R&D to lead up to production of a turbo car isn't the problem.
Lots of cars come turbo from the factory. So it can't be too hard at a manufacturer level.
A high output NA setup that is still emissions friendly to the point where Honda is the greenest car company on earth, lasts 200+k miles, gets very good gas mileage, is very driveable, etc etc. is much more complicated than some factory turbo setups.
Think about the old DSMs. Technologically challenged, but cheap and fast. Turbo power is easier than NA power.
The problem with turboing hondas is that they were never designed for it. They're at the opposite end of the spectrum. Factory turbo cars come with much much much more reinforcements done to the block/internals than the usual factory NA car. Most hondas come with open deck aluminum blocks with cast internals that place an emphasis on light weight. That's just mentioning a few deficiencies.
The factory engine management was obviously never setup for forced induction, so you have to get some sort of engine management that has the ability to be tuned.
To do it right, you basically have to re-do the engine/engine management system from the ground up. This costs $$$.
A vast number of turbo setups are like this:
People start out with ghetto junkyard peiced together **** *** turbo kits. People cut corners to the point where the car becomes a daily fixer rather than a daily driver. It's always leaking oil, it's always got something wrong with it, and it doesn't run AT ALL 75% of the time. The days where it actually "runs right" are far and few in between. They try to push way too much power out of it...and eventually it will just blow up. For some reason, they think to restart this cycle till they get sick of it all and just sell or get rid of their car...and buy a factory turbo car if they absolutely have to have boost.
The same people define "reliability" as the ability to drive the car on the street most of the time out of boost. Then they drag race it for 11-13 seconds a few times a year and consider it "reliable".
If honda sold a turbo car from the factory that you had to watch carefully, drive out of boost all the time, and only beat on for VERY short bursts, and it blew up after 10-20k anyway, and came with absolutely no warranty, it wouldn't be considered reliable AT ALL. It would be considered a peice of ****. But...for some reason, people with turbo setups define that condition as "reliable".
A constant project is one thing. A constant repair project is annoying, expensive, and can ruin your automotive experience.
I'm glad that you realize that a $2k turbo kit is not a good thing.
However, honda had a turbo car A LOONG time ago. They had the "honda city turbo2" in the 70s. They had an 80 or early 90 something honda city turbo in Japan. With the amount of $$ honda has at it's disposal, R&D to lead up to production of a turbo car isn't the problem.
Lots of cars come turbo from the factory. So it can't be too hard at a manufacturer level.
A high output NA setup that is still emissions friendly to the point where Honda is the greenest car company on earth, lasts 200+k miles, gets very good gas mileage, is very driveable, etc etc. is much more complicated than some factory turbo setups.
Think about the old DSMs. Technologically challenged, but cheap and fast. Turbo power is easier than NA power.
The problem with turboing hondas is that they were never designed for it. They're at the opposite end of the spectrum. Factory turbo cars come with much much much more reinforcements done to the block/internals than the usual factory NA car. Most hondas come with open deck aluminum blocks with cast internals that place an emphasis on light weight. That's just mentioning a few deficiencies.
The factory engine management was obviously never setup for forced induction, so you have to get some sort of engine management that has the ability to be tuned.
To do it right, you basically have to re-do the engine/engine management system from the ground up. This costs $$$.
A vast number of turbo setups are like this:
People start out with ghetto junkyard peiced together **** *** turbo kits. People cut corners to the point where the car becomes a daily fixer rather than a daily driver. It's always leaking oil, it's always got something wrong with it, and it doesn't run AT ALL 75% of the time. The days where it actually "runs right" are far and few in between. They try to push way too much power out of it...and eventually it will just blow up. For some reason, they think to restart this cycle till they get sick of it all and just sell or get rid of their car...and buy a factory turbo car if they absolutely have to have boost.
The same people define "reliability" as the ability to drive the car on the street most of the time out of boost. Then they drag race it for 11-13 seconds a few times a year and consider it "reliable".
If honda sold a turbo car from the factory that you had to watch carefully, drive out of boost all the time, and only beat on for VERY short bursts, and it blew up after 10-20k anyway, and came with absolutely no warranty, it wouldn't be considered reliable AT ALL. It would be considered a peice of ****. But...for some reason, people with turbo setups define that condition as "reliable".
A constant project is one thing. A constant repair project is annoying, expensive, and can ruin your automotive experience.
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
From: columbia, tn, maury
Re: which p is the best? (mike1jag)
I have the engine all setup for turbo je piston and rings 9.0:1 comp. eagle rods and eagle crank it had stage 3 cams but dont know who made them so I deep sixed them and went back with the stock gsr cams. I have a pro products thrtl body 70mm and a blox intake,aem fuel rail ,holley fuel pressure reg, rc 310cc injectors. so spending money aint no big deal I just want to get the best for my money. and hondata seems a little high for a chiped p28 when I can get crome and drop $100 an hour for dyno time and do the same thing. I hear that some turbo companys have there own fuel mangement systems but I dont like piggy back setups. and know one around me has a aem unit so doing the setup might e a pain in the a$$
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,486
Likes: 1
From: southern cali
Re: which p is the best? (B serious)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by B serious »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I'm glad that you realize that a $2k turbo kit is not a good thing.
However, honda had a turbo car A LOONG time ago. They had the "honda city turbo2" in the 70s. They had an 80 or early 90 something honda city turbo in Japan. With the amount of $$ honda has at it's disposal, R&D to lead up to production of a turbo car isn't the problem.
Lots of cars come turbo from the factory. So it can't be too hard at a manufacturer level.
A high output NA setup that is still emissions friendly to the point where Honda is the greenest car company on earth, lasts 200+k miles, gets very good gas mileage, is very driveable, etc etc. is much more complicated than some factory turbo setups.
Think about the old DSMs. Technologically challenged, but cheap and fast. Turbo power is easier than NA power.
The problem with turboing hondas is that they were never designed for it. They're at the opposite end of the spectrum. Factory turbo cars come with much much much more reinforcements done to the block/internals than the usual factory NA car. Most hondas come with open deck aluminum blocks with cast internals that place an emphasis on light weight. That's just mentioning a few deficiencies.
The factory engine management was obviously never setup for forced induction, so you have to get some sort of engine management that has the ability to be tuned.
To do it right, you basically have to re-do the engine/engine management system from the ground up. This costs $$$.
A vast number of turbo setups are like this:
People start out with ghetto junkyard peiced together **** *** turbo kits. People cut corners to the point where the car becomes a daily fixer rather than a daily driver. It's always leaking oil, it's always got something wrong with it, and it doesn't run AT ALL 75% of the time. The days where it actually "runs right" are far and few in between. They try to push way too much power out of it...and eventually it will just blow up. For some reason, they think to restart this cycle till they get sick of it all and just sell or get rid of their car...and buy a factory turbo car if they absolutely have to have boost.
The same people define "reliability" as the ability to drive the car on the street most of the time out of boost. Then they drag race it for 11-13 seconds a few times a year and consider it "reliable".
If honda sold a turbo car from the factory that you had to watch carefully, drive out of boost all the time, and only beat on for VERY short bursts, and it blew up after 10-20k anyway, and came with absolutely no warranty, it wouldn't be considered reliable AT ALL. It would be considered a peice of ****. But...for some reason, people with turbo setups define that condition as "reliable".
A constant project is one thing. A constant repair project is annoying, expensive, and can ruin your automotive experience.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
made for a good read.
I'm glad that you realize that a $2k turbo kit is not a good thing.
However, honda had a turbo car A LOONG time ago. They had the "honda city turbo2" in the 70s. They had an 80 or early 90 something honda city turbo in Japan. With the amount of $$ honda has at it's disposal, R&D to lead up to production of a turbo car isn't the problem.
Lots of cars come turbo from the factory. So it can't be too hard at a manufacturer level.
A high output NA setup that is still emissions friendly to the point where Honda is the greenest car company on earth, lasts 200+k miles, gets very good gas mileage, is very driveable, etc etc. is much more complicated than some factory turbo setups.
Think about the old DSMs. Technologically challenged, but cheap and fast. Turbo power is easier than NA power.
The problem with turboing hondas is that they were never designed for it. They're at the opposite end of the spectrum. Factory turbo cars come with much much much more reinforcements done to the block/internals than the usual factory NA car. Most hondas come with open deck aluminum blocks with cast internals that place an emphasis on light weight. That's just mentioning a few deficiencies.
The factory engine management was obviously never setup for forced induction, so you have to get some sort of engine management that has the ability to be tuned.
To do it right, you basically have to re-do the engine/engine management system from the ground up. This costs $$$.
A vast number of turbo setups are like this:
People start out with ghetto junkyard peiced together **** *** turbo kits. People cut corners to the point where the car becomes a daily fixer rather than a daily driver. It's always leaking oil, it's always got something wrong with it, and it doesn't run AT ALL 75% of the time. The days where it actually "runs right" are far and few in between. They try to push way too much power out of it...and eventually it will just blow up. For some reason, they think to restart this cycle till they get sick of it all and just sell or get rid of their car...and buy a factory turbo car if they absolutely have to have boost.
The same people define "reliability" as the ability to drive the car on the street most of the time out of boost. Then they drag race it for 11-13 seconds a few times a year and consider it "reliable".
If honda sold a turbo car from the factory that you had to watch carefully, drive out of boost all the time, and only beat on for VERY short bursts, and it blew up after 10-20k anyway, and came with absolutely no warranty, it wouldn't be considered reliable AT ALL. It would be considered a peice of ****. But...for some reason, people with turbo setups define that condition as "reliable".
A constant project is one thing. A constant repair project is annoying, expensive, and can ruin your automotive experience.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
made for a good read.
Trending Topics
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
From: elk grove village, U.S.A
Re: which p is the best? (mike1jag)
my .02...
1st) this is an expensive hobby either way,so everyone should get over it or get out of it
2nd) my opinion on reliability is that aslong as the car is maintained well and you dont cut any corners,any car is just as reliable as the last
3rd) na or boost,either way youll have to tune it to keep it runing right so it dont really matter
out
1st) this is an expensive hobby either way,so everyone should get over it or get out of it
2nd) my opinion on reliability is that aslong as the car is maintained well and you dont cut any corners,any car is just as reliable as the last
3rd) na or boost,either way youll have to tune it to keep it runing right so it dont really matter
out
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
From: Layton, Utah, US
I honestly wouldn't look at engine management by how cheap it is, rather what options it has.
CROME is great, I run it on my B20/VTEC with a very solid street-tune. Can I get more power out of it with a dyno tune? Yes. For a turbo application, does CROME have a proper anti-lag and launch control> Many say no.
Hondata has the provisions for anti-lag, so when you're sitting on the line, you're not just holding the car at one RPM and having the turbo eventually spool itself, it's actually misfiring purposely to spool the turbo. Many people have gone from CROME to Hondata, with an IDENTICAL setup, and have gone from launching at 8-10psi to a full 19-20psi.
Also, CROME's rev limiters and launch control consists of a fuel-cut type limiter, whereas Hondata is an ignition-cut limiter. An ignition-cut is MUCH more effective and accurate, though this point can be argued to the death by bench racers.
From personal experience, I'd rather have a car that reacted quickly off the launch limiter, than one that bogs itself for half-seconds at a time.
Fuel cut - BAAAAmmmmmmBAAAAmmmmmBAAAAmmm ...
Ignition cut - bapbapbapbapbapbapbapbapbap ...
See the difference? More constant revs can be held, and it makes a WORLD of difference when you're on the line ready to go.
I'm not against CROME in any way, I just want to point out the deficiencies in specific setups, and in this case, Hondata is superior in terms of driveability and overall performance, than CROME.
Engine management should be the MOST FOCUSED portion of your build. It doesn't need to be the most EXPENSIVE, but every penny counts in this industry. I see you're looking for the most bang-for-the-buck, and I applaud you - most people just toss money at their cars and either it doesn't get done right, or becomes someone else's expensive money pit with lackadaisical performance.
CROME is great, I run it on my B20/VTEC with a very solid street-tune. Can I get more power out of it with a dyno tune? Yes. For a turbo application, does CROME have a proper anti-lag and launch control> Many say no.
Hondata has the provisions for anti-lag, so when you're sitting on the line, you're not just holding the car at one RPM and having the turbo eventually spool itself, it's actually misfiring purposely to spool the turbo. Many people have gone from CROME to Hondata, with an IDENTICAL setup, and have gone from launching at 8-10psi to a full 19-20psi.
Also, CROME's rev limiters and launch control consists of a fuel-cut type limiter, whereas Hondata is an ignition-cut limiter. An ignition-cut is MUCH more effective and accurate, though this point can be argued to the death by bench racers.
From personal experience, I'd rather have a car that reacted quickly off the launch limiter, than one that bogs itself for half-seconds at a time.
Fuel cut - BAAAAmmmmmmBAAAAmmmmmBAAAAmmm ...
Ignition cut - bapbapbapbapbapbapbapbapbap ...
See the difference? More constant revs can be held, and it makes a WORLD of difference when you're on the line ready to go.
I'm not against CROME in any way, I just want to point out the deficiencies in specific setups, and in this case, Hondata is superior in terms of driveability and overall performance, than CROME.
Engine management should be the MOST FOCUSED portion of your build. It doesn't need to be the most EXPENSIVE, but every penny counts in this industry. I see you're looking for the most bang-for-the-buck, and I applaud you - most people just toss money at their cars and either it doesn't get done right, or becomes someone else's expensive money pit with lackadaisical performance.
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
From: columbia, tn, maury
Re: which p is the best? (mike1jag)
cool i wanted to go with hondata but it just seemed a little high. but i found a s300 from a friend of mine for about $600 so I am going to pick it up. I ran crome in my 99 civic with a b20 /vtec for years the guy i sold it to still running it car runs great. I am not realy looking for racing turbo more for a really good treet car plus I love the sound of a blow off valve. what kind of turbo would be a ggod one to start with plus what about the aem ecu unit? anyone heard anything good or bad about it?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
danmej1
Engine Management and Tuning
34
Sep 14, 2009 06:06 PM
jadugartir
Honda Civic / Del Sol (1992 - 2000)
4
Dec 15, 2005 10:54 AM