Put the new 98 Type-R on the Dyno today. I had several intake configurations to test as well as get a baseline. First I want to say that I stated that I could "feel" the power difference between a 1998 R and a 2000 R. My 2000 R stock put down 167 whp. my 1998 Type-R stock put down 159 whp. THis is more hp than an AEM made on either car so I must say to make that statement was dead on. 8 whp is 2 times the amount of power made by any intrake on either car.


First we ran the car with a 100% STOCK setup (cotton filter). The plot below is comparing the baseline run vs a K&N (2820) drop in vs a K&N drop in with the resonator removed. I made the statement that removing the resonator was detrimental and posted plots of a 3 whp loss on my 2000 Type-R. This same change netted a 9 whp loss. So in conbclusion here if you are running without your resonator on a stock airbox you are hurting performance.



This next plot is a comparison of a homemade Icebox intake vs Iceman vs an AEM. One note to make is that I don't have a copy of a run that the AEM made. The AEM actually did make the most power at 164.x whp. I have found that 4-5 whp is about average for an AEM on 98 and 2000 Type-R's.




I welcome thought or questions. I will post the AEM run in a few weeks as I wil be adding a JDM 4-1 and VAFC with tuning in a couple of weeks.


[Modified by Asahi, 7:23 AM 10/11/2002]

 

hmmm... missing something

 

Too bad you didn't have a Comptech icebox to test.

 

True but from everything I have read the icebox woyuld not have made as much peak power and a slight but more midrang. What I really would have liked is an Injen to test.

 

How was the 'ghetto intake' made - dryer hose, PVC piping, etc?

I've always been suspicious of home-made intakes with non-tapered connections and stepped flow profiles.


[Modified by norice, 8:29 PM 5/19/2002]

 

it is the intake designed by BSQ.

http://www.geocities.com/bretq/DIY_Icebox_CAI.html

 

I still *don't* see how removing the resonator lost 9hp @ the wheels. I dynoed my 2000 ITR without resonator and it put down 171. You telling me that had I left it in I would have made 178 or so on an otherwise stock R? I doubt it.

Not discounting what you have here, but was the hood shut during tests? Was there a fan blowing on the front of the car? I could see that a closed hood, no fan condition could lose some HP, but otherwise no way could just removing a few feet of twisty tubing account for 9 less hp. I'm thinking it was hot air.

What other explanations are there?

 

Yeah, that really does not make any sense to me either... Anybody else have another explanation?

 

so why is the 00 R more powerful than the 98? different camshaft characteristics? and yes, i am also interested to know how the resonatorless car made less hp...

 

this has been done on various applications. im not saying this is the case with the intake, but this is used on intake manifolds and such.

Anyone have a JRSC or heard one? Did anyone notice the growl of the intake was gone? The reason is that the JRSC uses resonance to increase the air pressure, thus forcing more air into the intake manifold.

So I am saying a possible reason IF you lost power when you removed the resonator is because this form of resonance was not only to quiet intake noise, but also to increase pressure and cram more air in for more performance. You asked for possible explanations and this is it. ENJOY and ponder away!

 

I don't think the stock resonator forces any more air in, it just quiets things down. I think the difference with the cold air the ITR resonator gives, while running open airbox you get a load of hot air. On a dyno with no wind blowing on the car I can see that making a big difference.

 

Concerning the dynos, why does the Iceman dyno have no power hump around 4000-5000 RPMs? Was it using the short ram setup?

 

I believe the 2000/2001's had a more aggressive intake manifold, or something to that effect.

 

Hood open, Fan on the car. I lost 3 whp on my 2000 and 9 whp on my 1998. I even made sure the car cooled down between runs. I am not saying that you would have made 178, but I am saying you would have made 172.

 

All Intakes were cold air designs and we ran them all 2 times to verify results. If there was a discrepancy we ran again. And yes that does mean the no resonator ran 2 runs 8-9 whp down. 9 whp seems to be an extreme case but I would say that taking it out is of no advantage and quite likely a large disadvantage.

Look at it this way. Why did a homemade intake pulling cool air make less hp than the stock airbox? Gotta be something in the resonator design. Not able to explain it I am just posting the results. This is the second time I got these results on 2 different R's as well . . . .

 

I also did a intake test with a k&n filter and no filter. No difference in HP or Tq.
Interesting.

 

There is alot to say for actual "air-flow" design. How "smooth" the air can be controlled can increase the air quanity into the intake manifold. The japanese spent a little time figuring this out for the stock box...the resonator, although not bringing in more air, may have smoothed out the airflow in the rest of the intake causing an increased air/fuel mixture & thus - more hp...jmho (I trust trey to run his tests...he's done a few dynos before ).

 

Yeah, thats amazing. Everyone knows it cost hp to take it off, but 9whp! Damn.

 

I think 9 was an extreme case but figure 2-3 whp loss at a minimum. If it is worth the sound to you go for it. ALso on the 98 R the K&N filter made NO difference and on the 2000 the K&N was worth about 1.8 whp.

 

What about removing the resonator, but cutting the tubing that runs into the resonator from the stock box and re-attaching? This way you are still pulling cooler air from further down the wheel well.

 

IMHO, I think there a two things that contribute to the lose of HP when the resonator is removed: increased air temperature and airflow. Since the intake is drawing air from the engine bay the intake temperature is increased which hurts performance. Since the intake tubing and resonator have been removed the airflow into the airbox is turbulent.

It appears that the stock Type-R intake performs very well in comparision to the other intakes. It appears that the AEM and Iceman only had an advantage in the 7,500+ RPM range. It also appears that my DIY "Icebox" performed very well in comparision to the other intakes, but seemed to flatten out around 7,500 RPM.

I do have a few questions:

Are the dyno numbers actual or corrected?

Did you reset the ECU between each intake tested?

Are you able to overlay the baseline dyno run with the intake dyno runs?

 

Flux, I think that all that stock resonator modification is way more trouble than I am going to do ;-). I happen to have an AEM and an Iceman and if anyone wants to donate for testing an Injen and Icebox I will test them too.


Dyno's are SAE corrected.
I didn't reset the ECU at all for any inatke although I probably should have.
I can overlay up to 3 runs, I will do that tonight.

 

LOL, no I didn't mean for you to run a test on that - I would never expect that. That is what I have done in an attempt to remove the resonator but keep the air flow pulling from close to the original location with the original tubing...

 

where is the torque numbers??

scott

 

THe dyno viewer I downloded didn't let me display tq numbers. I will have to find out if I am missing something or grab the plost off the full vserion at the shop.