Is there a dyno sheet on the K&N intake??
03-01-2004, 08:25 PM
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Also, after further reviewing the dyno sheet, the car made the most hp (14) @ 7300 rpm; which can still affect the automatic owners. It showed significant hp gains from 5500 and up, which will affect daily driving for the better.
SO, I have come to this conclusion... In the automatic, the intake makes the larger impact than in the manual, because @ 9000 rpm, it only gains 8 hp, and it gains around 14 hp around the 7100-7500 rpm break for what would be the redline of 7500 for the auto.
On the torque side, it also cains 10 lb-ft @ 7100-7500 rpm. After 7500, it dies down to only 3 to 4 tq.
Comments are welcome, if there are K&N dyno's... post them on here! so we can all see the differance!
Troy J.
SO, I have come to this conclusion... In the automatic, the intake makes the larger impact than in the manual, because @ 9000 rpm, it only gains 8 hp, and it gains around 14 hp around the 7100-7500 rpm break for what would be the redline of 7500 for the auto.
On the torque side, it also cains 10 lb-ft @ 7100-7500 rpm. After 7500, it dies down to only 3 to 4 tq.
Comments are welcome, if there are K&N dyno's... post them on here! so we can all see the differance!
Troy J.
03-02-2004, 07:26 PM
#4
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Goffstown, NH
Posts: 1,281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Troy:
Does that dyno graph show the power gains with an auto? If so, then we don't lose much HP if in fact the auto is rated at 197HP and you are getting 187.3 without the intake. Let me know if this is true.
Thanks...
Does that dyno graph show the power gains with an auto? If so, then we don't lose much HP if in fact the auto is rated at 197HP and you are getting 187.3 without the intake. Let me know if this is true.
Thanks...
03-02-2004, 09:15 PM
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Okay... This is only my speculation, but here it goes.
Last year Mercedes Benz under-quoted their E55 AMG Sport Sedan at 463-hp, when it was actually 493 hp. This was to try and show buyers the differance between the S-Class AMG and the E55, when the E55 was $30k cheaper. People dynoed the E55, and they instantly found that the engine had 493 hp, just like in the S55 AMG sedan (they are the same engines). Mercedes now advertises that on their web-site about the E55 now that the new M5 will have 500-plus hp.
After my dealership telling me that Mazda wanted to sell more manuals than autos, because the tranny, etc. is easier to get and cheaper (this may be just dealership B.S.). I am willing to bet that the auto RX-8 has around 225 bhp, if not better; since you see that it has a huge increase around 7300 to 7500, and then it drops and slowly gains to 193 from 7500 to 9000. I was also told that the 2-extra ports are on the manual, because of the 7500 to 9000 rpm span, that the auto doesn't have. Maybee the dealership was blowin' smoke up my butt, BUT the dyno shows @ 7450 rpm, it has 184, and that is around the red-line of the auto. Also, the auto has more torque than the manual, does this have something indirectly to do with this conspiracy?
All I have to say is that Mercedes did it to prove the $30k was a reasonable break between the E55 and the S55; why can't Mazda do it to sell more Manuals than autos?? I will eventually get around to getting my car dynoed, to see the real truth around this; but I think I may be plesantly suprised.
Just my 2 cents.
Troy J.
Last year Mercedes Benz under-quoted their E55 AMG Sport Sedan at 463-hp, when it was actually 493 hp. This was to try and show buyers the differance between the S-Class AMG and the E55, when the E55 was $30k cheaper. People dynoed the E55, and they instantly found that the engine had 493 hp, just like in the S55 AMG sedan (they are the same engines). Mercedes now advertises that on their web-site about the E55 now that the new M5 will have 500-plus hp.
After my dealership telling me that Mazda wanted to sell more manuals than autos, because the tranny, etc. is easier to get and cheaper (this may be just dealership B.S.). I am willing to bet that the auto RX-8 has around 225 bhp, if not better; since you see that it has a huge increase around 7300 to 7500, and then it drops and slowly gains to 193 from 7500 to 9000. I was also told that the 2-extra ports are on the manual, because of the 7500 to 9000 rpm span, that the auto doesn't have. Maybee the dealership was blowin' smoke up my butt, BUT the dyno shows @ 7450 rpm, it has 184, and that is around the red-line of the auto. Also, the auto has more torque than the manual, does this have something indirectly to do with this conspiracy?
All I have to say is that Mercedes did it to prove the $30k was a reasonable break between the E55 and the S55; why can't Mazda do it to sell more Manuals than autos?? I will eventually get around to getting my car dynoed, to see the real truth around this; but I think I may be plesantly suprised.
Just my 2 cents.
Troy J.
03-02-2004, 09:20 PM
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
If my calculations are right, the numbers would be as...
Manual peak @ 9000: 238 bhp
Auto peak @ 7500: 221 bhp
manual tq: 159 lb-ft
auto tq: 164 lb-ft
This was done by multiplying the whp on the dyno by 1.27
That is the last I am submitting to this thread for a while, I am talking to myself besides one other member on this thread.
Troy J.
Manual peak @ 9000: 238 bhp
Auto peak @ 7500: 221 bhp
manual tq: 159 lb-ft
auto tq: 164 lb-ft
This was done by multiplying the whp on the dyno by 1.27
That is the last I am submitting to this thread for a while, I am talking to myself besides one other member on this thread.
Troy J.
03-02-2004, 10:10 PM
#7
Registered
Originally posted by JeupRX-8
Okay... This is only my speculation, but here it goes.
Okay... This is only my speculation, but here it goes.
- The port configuration and intake manifolds are very different between the 4 port low-power engine and the 6 port high power engine. It is NOT a valid assumption that the two engines make the same power at 7500 rpm.
- It's not just a different between auto and manual - Mazda sells the low-power engine with a 5 speed manual transmission in markets outside North America as the Base model. The simpler engine and 5 speed transmission are less expensive to manufacture.
In other words - by all means dyno your car, but don't get your hopes up!
Regards,
Gordon
03-07-2004, 12:31 AM
#9
adkdai8e dkadloi98
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love when these companies post dyno sheets of their own product and you guys get woodies. Until I see an independent dyno I call BS on all of them. We have one vendor that claims 9 HP from a freaking pulley.
on a sidenote I have dynoed my rx-7 at ATP they are a cool shop.
on a sidenote I have dynoed my rx-7 at ATP they are a cool shop.
03-07-2004, 01:07 AM
#10
Registered
The gains that the K&N system show seem to be in a very usable range for the standard. If a car makes peak power at a certain spot why would anyone want more power here? It may look nice on paper but it is irrelevant. If the biggest power gain is over a range it makes much more sense to put the gain where it is most usable. This seems like a very usable range. If we get all of our gain above 8000 rpm but shift at 9000 rpm then that wasn't very much usable extra power. If we shift at 9000 but need power after 6000 rpm then having a range that is focused towards the middles of the range seems like a far better deal. Peak power sells product and looks good on paper for advertising reasons. Average power through the usable powerband is what makes you noticably faster.
As already stated here and I've said in the past, the 4 port engine is in no way comparable to the 6 port engine. that is like comparing a Ford 4.6 to a Chevy LS1 on the grounds they are both V-8's. The gains that are made on the 6 port will not necessarily give any gains on the 4 port engine. They may give less. They may give more. Whatever the outcome you can't base gains off of one style engine and automatically assume it will be the same on another. Even if there were huge gains in the 7300-7500 rpm range on the auto, where will the torque converter keep the engine at most of the time? Even if this were on a standard equipped engine the power gain is worthless since you are going to shift at 7500 rpm anyways. In this case you would want to gains centered in the mid 6000 range somewhere for best average usable power.
As already stated here and I've said in the past, the 4 port engine is in no way comparable to the 6 port engine. that is like comparing a Ford 4.6 to a Chevy LS1 on the grounds they are both V-8's. The gains that are made on the 6 port will not necessarily give any gains on the 4 port engine. They may give less. They may give more. Whatever the outcome you can't base gains off of one style engine and automatically assume it will be the same on another. Even if there were huge gains in the 7300-7500 rpm range on the auto, where will the torque converter keep the engine at most of the time? Even if this were on a standard equipped engine the power gain is worthless since you are going to shift at 7500 rpm anyways. In this case you would want to gains centered in the mid 6000 range somewhere for best average usable power.
03-07-2004, 10:05 AM
#11
Pineapple Racer
Have any outside sources finished a back to back dyno, comparing the stock vs. K&N/RE? I have'nt seen one as of yet....but If I'm wrong please provide a link for me. :D CJ
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post