2003 S2000 with 14K miles




more info @

http://www.p1auto.com (under the "Project Cars" tab)


.

 

good gains ...although the base dyno looks rather low...i never dyno'd my car right after i did the toda header. EMS looks like it helped a lot tuning wise-that's what i'm shooting for next-standalone.

 

although the base dyno looks rather low

it is about on par with other S2K's I've dynoed........

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by GDPzS2000 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">good gains ...although the base dyno looks rather low...i never dyno'd my car right after i did the toda header. EMS looks like it helped a lot tuning wise-that's what i'm shooting for next-standalone.</TD></TR></TABLE>

That's on a Mustang dyno. So, it's about 200 whp on DynoJet machines. That's a real nice gain on an S2000.

P1 automotive, Inc. tuning is nicey nice.

 

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

That's on a Mustang dyno. So, it's about 200 whp on DynoJet machines. That's a real nice gain on an S2000.

P1 automotive, Inc. tuning is nicey nice. </TD></TR></TABLE>

o did not know it was on a mustang dyno(i was used to seeing 190-200 on dynojets)- - great job





Modified by GDPzS2000 at 2:27 PM 10/24/2003

 

Looks very good, how much did you spend on the EMS unit? I know the Toda header is about $1100....

 

how much did you spend on the EMS unit?

?

this is a customers car, not mine.....

 

from the headers and ems alone, those are pretty good gains.

 

from the headers

no, this car only has one

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by B18CXr &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> from the headers

no, this car only has one</TD></TR></TABLE>

LOL

 

looks good sissypants...

 

Their baseline dyno run is useless since they cut the graph off at 7500rpm.

Something smells pretty fishy here.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by jerrypeterson &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Their baseline dyno run is useless since they cut the graph off at 7500rpm.

Something smells pretty fishy here.</TD></TR></TABLE>

ya caught that too?

Now how much fun did you have tuning that EMS? How has the latest software helped in tuning idle as well as the transitions from partial to full throttle and back to partial throttle?

 

Something smells pretty fishy here.

?? what every dude, we are in the process of upgrading to a newer tach system from Mustang, so in the mid term I'm setting the rpm's (i.e. X-axis, via Roll Speed) since the base line was done on the stock ECU I only had the factory tach to read off of, which we all know is not very accurate. The EMS tach output is very,very accurate. So to make a short story even shorter, the base run was shifted a few rpms.

P.S. You'll notice that the AEM CAI "humps" are not lined up between the two runs, once I have the new tach system this will no longer be an issue.


Now how much fun did you have tuning that EMS? How has the latest software helped in tuning idle as well as the transitions from partial to full throttle and back to partial throttle?

great "fun" the 1.03 is a breeze compared to the older versions, idle is perfect and I'm still touching up the WOT ---&gt; partial throttle, still a little "bucking" but not bad @ all.

 

Hey here's an easy question for you to answer.. I've seen this 'term' thrown around every where and I'm sure I've even learned it once.. but completely forgot.. what does WOT mean? And.. 1320?

 

WOT: wide open throttle

1320, is the amount of feet in a quarter mile

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by jerrypeterson &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Their baseline dyno run is useless since they cut the graph off at 7500rpm.

Something smells pretty fishy here.</TD></TR></TABLE>

who cares about peak numbers?

actually it only proves people on here just compare peak number and not the area under the curve.

didnt everyone notice the extra tq that the car picked up the whole rpm range?

it takes a good *** header design to not loose any mid power to make top end power

if u look at the tq crv, it is solid from 2500rpm +

 

AH good stuff thanks al ot.

 

Hmmm Toda A plots coming soon

Good stuff Jack

 

nice gains, what was ur target AFR and Timing?

 

 

Timing?


the cool thing is the timing map is still untouched as well as the base timing!!!

more gains to be had?? hell yesh.

will hone in the ignition maps once the cams are in

 

the reason he got that low of a base power was because they didn't take it all the way to redline. If they would have taken it to redline, the hp would have been about 190 stock.

 

the reason he got that low of a base power was because they didn't take it all the way to redline. If they would have taken it to redline, the hp would have been about 190 stock.


sorry but no, as you can see from the data it has already begun to lose power, see above post for the explanation as to why peak HP was not at claimed peak HP rpm

 

I gotta say I can't believe that people would question Jack's knowledge! Also for a s2k to get 190hp stock on a mustang dyno is impossible. Even to get those kinda numbers on a dynojet is difficult. The horsepower gains from the header and ems of 18 wheel hp is awsome. But whats more impressive is the streetability of this car with the use of an ems. GOOD WORK Jack ~nate

 

Kinda sucks that everyone "know's" what a car should put down, but those same people don't understand the differences between a mustang dyno and a dynojet.

Too bad Jack has to preface every plot with "this was done on a mustang dyno, to estimate dynojet numbers, add xx%...

O yeah, f*cking great gains