ECU.. big problem !!!

If only Hondata would come out with a "F-Pro" ECU any soon...

I heard rumours but nothing's sure ....

Let's cross our fingers....

CSAN/S2K from Rome, ITALY.

PS - AJ Racing is cool !! Thanks Justin !!! Can't wait to get our T1r exhausts !!!

 

I wonder what percentage of those gains are due to the nearly 20* ambient temperature difference and what percentage is from freeing up airflow. It's also interesting that the gains were in a large rpm range. I guess it goes to show that no rpm range likes backpressure more than another rpm range.

 

dont think that 20 degrees would make that much of a difference

when is this exhaust coming out again????

 

If you'd read my post again, mr. rolleyes, you'd see that I was simply asking what portion of those gains were from the air temp diff. I didn't say that the exhaust was a piece of sh*t and that the only power made was from the air temp.

I'm just trying to point out that 20* WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. Factor that as you'd like.

 

thanks for your info

 

Here's more info for you.

If the correction factor is not correct, or if the results are uncorrected, a 20 degree temperature difference will result in a difference of about 10hp (or, more accurately, about a 5 ft-lb difference in torque, which can be extrapolated to find how much hp difference would be across the band... higher RPMs would have a higher hp difference, given the same torque difference).

I'm not saying that the temperature difference is where the gains came from, but I wouldn't argue against it, that's for sure.

 

I have asked a few different experts and guys who owned the dyno and they said the results are pretty accurate after it is SAE corrected. All the plots that I posted are SAE corrected so I don't think it would be off much.

 

I don't have the expertise to really debate this topic, but I know that when I had dyno plots with ambient temps that differed by 20 degrees, my correction factor went from 0.96 to 1.01. It's odd that your ambient temps differ by about 20 degrees, yet the correction factors were both 0.98.

Just an observation.

Edit: I should note that temps aren't the only thing that are involved in the CF calculation. Also barometric pressure and humidity have to be taken into account.

 

Exactly. I did varify the cfs myself, as I was also skeptical at first, and they are correct.

 

You're right.
On the first chart, using the following information:
Temp: 70.6
Absolute pressure: 29.92 in Hg
Vapor: 0.44 in Hg
I got a correction factor of 0.983

And with the following info:
Temp: 51.0
Absolute Pressure: 29.56 in Hg
Vapor: 0.44 in Hg
I got a correction factor of 0.976

Both numbers would round to 0.98, which is what is displayed on the chart.
I used the fun little calculator on the following page, if anyone is interested:
http://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_cf.htm