[QUOTE]Originally posted by ultimate lurker
I calculate it at 22.7% when you take into account the different primary reduction gears (1.206 vs. 1.16).

 

ARRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH

I'm SO tempted to drive down to California just so UL can dyno my car (so this thread can die...)!

My vote is to just wait until he gets his hands on a "customer's" car or two since this thread's goin' nowhere quick!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Banannie
ARRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH

I'm SO tempted to drive down to California just so UL can dyno my car (so this thread can die...)!

 

you mean for his gas... ul said dyno will be free!

 

Since the 04's just came out and noone has any significant mileage built up. Wouldn't 04's with say 10,000 miles show even more gains. This test car had 900 miles on it. I assume that the '02 UL tested had some mileage accumulated. I can't wait to see more runs.

BTW what would be a representative sample? 35 cars? 50 cars?

 

doubt UL wll do 35-50 cars for free lol

 

I posted some time ago when I started a different dyno post that I suspected that the MY04 might have under-rated power from the factory. Having driven one for 2000 miles now, it would not suprise me to find that some of the gains in acceleration are the result of the increase in torque rather than simply the tighter gearing and better grip.

To those who ridiculed me and said I was making it up to justify a bad purchase decision, I say print out and eat your words.

Why would Honda minimize these numbers? So as not to bring more wrath from the other markets that won't be getting the 2.2 engine. Honda still wants to make money. They will sell the less expensive engine, especially as the use up extra 03 engines they've already made, so long as they can get by with it in a given market. I'm sure that insurance, gas, and tax issues are also at play.

Again I say, eat your words.

I am skeptical myself, however, of some of the gains that are being reported. Is it really possible that with .2 more in displacement (not quite actually) and remapped fuel and timing that the car is making 45 more hp at the flywheel with fewer rpm? I hope so, but am skeptical. On the other hand, it does have bigger and heavier wheels and tires to turn. By the way, to say the difference in revs between the old and new engine is 1000 seems a little misleading. In reality, power starts to drop off on the pre-04 cars well before 9 grand.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 2004S2000
I am skeptical myself, however, of some of the gains that are being reported.

 

some truth to your comments, but remember sometimes even if there is no power past 8400 there is more room for which to shift and land back at a better rpm range, again just some minor observations. I m awaiting to see how this engine reacts to boost, if its all on the ecu not the engine it self its not worth it to trade, but who knows.

"CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG"?

 

This is perhaps the single biggest example of my previous statement:

Yet what you are doing is dismissing the idea of testing to prove or disprove your hypothesis and making some rather large assumptions. Even more unfortunate are the hapless folks who are clinging on to your unscientific information as if it where fact and further stretching it to fit their egocentric needs, i.e. some sort of vindication against the perceived 04 naysayer.


Not only is the author of that wonderful post obviously failing to read any (not even some or most) of the posts accurately, he takes it further with even more outlandish claims regarding the cost of the 04 motor and why Honda still uses the original in other markets.

Fantastic. Perhaps next someone can find the correlation between Sasquatch and the 04 S2ki and we can finally have that mystery solved as well.