When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
It occured to me that one more chart would more clearly present the mystery of the differences between the two results.
The following is TOV torque as a percentage of NTS2000 torque versus rpm for each engine.
Again I offer no speculation on reasons, other than as previously stated, one would expect the dyno set up from TOV to yield slightly higher numbers accross the board than NTS2000, all else being equal.
The 2.0 data is consistent with this expectation. Other than the zigzag where the VTEC transitions don't exactly match, TOV is the same to slightly higher.
The 2.2 TOV data however (again except for VTEC transition) is 12% to 19% higher than the NTS2000 data.
Are you plotting each as a difference between MY00-03 and MY04 or are you plotting the difference between the MY04 from NT and vtec.net?
Y Axis reads % change between TOV & NTS2KOC data
X Axis reads RPM
Legends shows the lines are plots of the 2.2L and the 2.0L motors. Ideally, you'd like to see that both lines are flat at 100%. Realistically, the 2.2L line should at least be closer to 100%.
Oh, I'd chime in PLL, but I have nothing nice to say about anything going on in these threads, so I'll just wait till we get additional cars to test. I said it before and I'll say it again, I'd be the first to post if the press car was a ringer.
I take that back, I will say one thing - I find it detestable that anyone would attempt to pass off this additional testing as anywhere near as thorough or controlled as what TOV did. The reasons are quite obvious, whether or not you have an engineering degree. And in the past I would have politely explained them at least 3 times to penetrate the consciousness of those that just don't get it (don't believe me? visit some old threads) But I'm done trying to educate or help out on testing procedures - or anything else technical for that matter. There's just no point. Now that this crap has spread through 3 of my regularly frequented forums, I'm getting really sick of it and the ignorance that surrounds it. Just like how the 02+ models don't make any more power or run more ignition timing in the ECU maps....
UL
p.s. - Anyone care to guess how Honda could have made that press car a ringer if that is indeed the case? After all, a production ECU made the same power, so where did they find the gains? Inquiring minds would like to know...
To me, it's not a matter of 26 actual HP, but the relative difference between the '03 and '04 that doesn't seem to be there on the second set of numbers.
I don't know why UL is so upset, no one is attacking him or his testing methodology here. As to where they could find 26 undected HP...I'll leave that to the cheating bastards to figure out.
What doesn't make sense to me though is that since Honda is claiming the same numbers from one year to another...why send out a car for testing that is known to be stronger? It's not like they had to artificially create a car to meet targets they couldn't reach.
TOV vs NTS2000 dyno results
