HERE IS A SERIES OF TEST SHOWING THE POWER GAINS FROM A PERFORMANCE HEADER OVER STOCK

i think you will be amazed.

Engine was a B16B

Header Results: Individual Dyno Results Header Result (hp) Result (torque)

Stock 176hp 119 lbs ft


JDM Jun 184hp 135lbs ft

JDM Spoon 186hp 136lbs ft

JDM ITR 4-1 185hp 135lbs ft

Mugan mod hytech 185hp 134 lbs ft

DC JDM 4-1 186hp 135 lbs ft


for now take the ones above as accurate and the ones below i need to check the graphs properly to get the figures correct to the graph.
----------------------------------------------------
Comptech 4-2-1 187hp 137lbs ft
JDM Toda 190hp 137lbs ftJ
DM Mugen 186hp 135 lbs ft
SMSP header 190hp 136 lbs ft
Type 1 186hp 137 lbs ft
2.5" exhaust/test pipe 180hp 131 lbs ft
I will put the rest of the graphs up later on or tomorrow.


thought it'd be good to get these on here as well the vtec cut in point on all JDM car's

Honda DOHC VTEC Engine Rev Limit and VTEC point (All information based on JDM models, but it should be the same for export models too)

Model Chassis Code Rev Limit VTEC Point

Civic SiR EG6/9 (MT) 8,400 rpm 5,800 rpm
Civic SiR EK4 (MT) 8,300rpm vtec 5,700 - 6,000
Civic Type R EK9 8,600rpm vtec 5,700 - 6,000
Civic Type R EP3 8,600rpm vtec 6,000
Civic Type R FD2 8,600rpm vtec 5,700
Integ SiR-G DC2/DB8(MT) 8,100rpm vtec 4,400
Integ Type R DC2/DB8 8,600rpm vtec 5,500 - 5,800
Integra Type R DC5 8,600rpm vtec 6,000
S2000 AP1 9,000rpm vtec 6,000 - 6,300

 

Were these all run in 1 day? What time of day were these all run? How much time did you give for each to cool down, before running the next test? What was the temperature like when these runs were made? Were these run with the stock computer, or were they tuned with some kind of engine management?

You should post up the dyno graphs for each one, I'm sure people (myself included) would like to see them. That'd certainly show more info that just the top hp and tq numbers for each.

 

I agree with CivicSpoon
Also I wish it was for a different engine other than the B16B which is super expensive and almost nobody has :/

 

Were they simply tossed on using the stock ecu, or individually tuned?

 

14ft-lbs tq with just a header? what other supporting mods were on this motor? upgraded cams/ignition system/exhaust/intake/fuel/etc.

 

sounds good. but like everyone said...temp does make a different.

 

Even the base line numbers look inflated.

:not impressed:

Since you have the charts let's see them.

 

definitely not enough info to say anything difinitive here

 

I have dyno's of about 6-8 headers on "B16A" engines showing average power range from -1 to +2hp loss/gain....i'll be glad to dig them up in the next couple days

the b16a and B16b are two different engines......different:

- crankshaft
- cams
- intake manifold
- throttle body
- block
- rods
- pistons
- valves
- flywheel

hmm, that's a lot of different parts

 

176whp from a B16B seems a bit on the high side since an OE ITR engine pushed about 180whp.

 

Who cares about peak numbers? Let's see the curves.

As others have said, did you monitor ECT and IAT between runs? Did you use the same dyno for all runs? How did ambient conditions vary between runs? Was the car strapped down the same way between runs?

If you're going to make this much noise over a few dyno runs, I hope you can back up your data.

 

why in a couple of days, lets see them now if you so happen to have these numbers

 

who are you talking too, me or the OP?

I am out of town right now, far away from home where my records are!

 

i was obviously talking to surefeelsgood since he's the one that started this thread

 

woah guys chill out,
i came across these on the internet and i will put the dyno graphs up.

The company that performed the dyno results was Automotive performance engineering i'm sure for their sake they did the test to the best of their abilities other wise they would be waisting their time and everyone else's i just don't think logically that they would make this up.


You have to understnad that the B16B maybe rare in the U.S but ek9's are not really that rare they're pretty much the same rarety as Ek4's here in the U.K infact there are more ek9's for sale than ek4's . this is an engine that is so so so different to the B16A deetz is right there are so many differences to list. even as simple as spark plugs standard are heat rating 7 and ek4 is 6 simple things like this.

i'll go back and put the graphs in at the top. let me know what ya think.
i too find it hard to believe that there was this much increase in just a header but we'll see what the graphs tell us from what i can see they are slightly out.
as in the Jun header stats in made 186 hp but on the graph it looks like it makes 183 hp

i'm gonna go through them and re-do them so they are accurate to the graphs... better respect this guys this will take me a while. lol

 

I appreciate the effort and input much more so now that you've added graphs. I've not had a chance to look at them yet (I'm at work) but I'll have a look shorty.

There was this huge "the great header debate" posting here on H-T in the ITR forums ages ago, and it too did some back-to-back comparisons with all the then-popular headers. Of course each independent header maker (like the SMSP/HyTech guys, and other owners/distributors of other headers tested) gave their own reasons as to why their own header performed as it did - good or bad.

I know the baseline figure itself doesn't really mean much since we're concerned with the gains, and the "area under the curve" but if the baseline figures are higher it makes me wonder if the dyno had "correction factors" helping the figures. I'm also wondering if the margin for error includes that as the numbers go higher the errors get higher exponentially, meaning the amount of error at 150whp is less than if at 200whp.

???

 

IMO if you see the graph change as a whole (+3 tq at 3k and 6k), that could be enviromentals. If you see it carry out further, or have less low-end, that is from header design. They pictures do look like they're in line given a decent test. However a more scientific way is to test each all the same day, several times, each time in a different order. Then average them all, then again tossing out the highest and lowest. The time & money needed to do that is a bit prohibitive though.

 

thats one thing that made me laugh about people thinking i had done the tests.

how on earth could i afford all those headers and then test them 3 times each. lol lots of money that is.
I'll put the other graphs up tomoz.
some of them make good gains though..... its strange how in this community people are so quick to have a go at people then there are people like yourselves who appreciate it. ah well F*** the haters

 

How on earth could anyone know you did not do the tests until you later posted the graphs, which still could be easily misinterpreted?

 

No where did you say anything about just finding the charts online. Were we to assume you stole the info and just posting it? Or to assume that you are an owner or employee at a shop that did the tests independently? It's not like you gave a whole bunch of info. I'm sure most appreciate your effort. Unfortunately, without the detailed info from the people who actually did these test, anything to come out of this is purely speculation. Do you possibly have a link to where you got these from, where more info on the tests might be available?

 

this sounds awesome. good stuff