Dyno chart baseline

[Ghetto_CB7]

header dyno number 2

the second dyno is supposed to be in today.

I am going for un tuned results of

128 tq at about 5300 rpm (I expect torque to carry to about 5500)

133 whp some where around redline so 6300.

Much wider torque curve and power curve expected though.

I will be curious to see what happens down low.

Guess we will see.

[19dabeast85]

the second dyno is supposed to be in today.

I am going for un tuned results of

128 tq at about 5300 rpm (I expect torque to carry to about 5500)

133 whp some where around redline so 6300.

Much wider torque curve and power curve expected though.

I will be curious to see what happens down low.

Guess we will see.

Your numbers are close.

[19dabeast85]

Baseline was 123.6whp, 125.0wtq
Bisi w/pt6 was 130.14whp, 124.78wtq +6.5whp, -0.22wtq
Bisi tuned is 133.6whp, 126.5wtq +10.0whp, +1.5wtq

The dyno chart and new discussion details have been posted in the original post. Please read that before asking questions or commenting.

I was hoping to pull 140whp and 130wtq from the a6 cam with this setup but no go there. Hubert (tuner) said he was a bit disappointed too but has no issue with the header, pointed at the cam as the limiting factor.


Some good things resulted from the dyno:

1. The engine was running VERY lean with the pt6 and bisi header. That was one of the things I set out to prove with this.....don't any of you cheepos go buy a bisi header without also setting aside funds to tune your car!

2. The detonation issue was fixed before damage occurred, it was detonating with the dcScrap header too which means it's probably been doing it for a couple years, glad the f22 is tough!

3. My fuel mileage SHOULD pick back up to where it should be

4. The engine all-around is a TON smoother, throttle kick-in is very smooth and not jerky like before, whp and wtq increased over the whole rpm range, sweet!

[PR CB7]

cam, and compression are your limiting factors

you cant tell me 244k mile rings are holding your compression too much
did you ever do a compression test on this engine?

[19dabeast85]

cam, and compression are your limiting factors

you cant tell me 244k mile rings are holding your compression too much
did you ever do a compression test on this engine?

160-165psi on all cylinders, dry.

[PR CB7]

160-165psi on all cylinders, dry.

damn
still sound kind of low, i've seen f22a's do 130whp on stock cam before

[Ghetto_CB7]

dyno

I am going to put this statement out there for those disappointed with the results. Remember that there is only so much you can pull out of a motor with bolt ons. I am willing to bet that this is about it on a non modified f22a.

You should also take all dyno with a grain of salt. And look at changes in numbers instead of actual values.

I bet I would make at most 190whp on a heart barker mustang dyno.

[19dabeast85]

Wanted to put the dyno on this page too because I know some are looking at this thread for a dyno chart, not reading, and not seeing the results.


Also, wanted to comment after driving for almost a week:

Even though the chart doesn't show huge low-mid gains, the car is definitely smoother and quicker around town at low rpms. Throttle response is even quicker than before. Partial-throttle low-rpm pulls are at least 10% faster, it's significant. The engine PULLS all the way up to 6,600ish rpms. It sounds GREAT!

Overall, I am not disappointed at all. This is a high-mileage block and though the numbers aren't huge, the drive-ability is a ton better! I don't plan to add any other power adders to this block as-is. A full engine build will be next......with some slight changes my tuner suggested. Lets just say 235whp on the stg2 cam should be achievable.

[gloryaccordy]

Kompression and kam my friend. Numbers do seem a little low but it might just be the dyno

[19dabeast85]

Kompression and kam my friend. Numbers do seem a little low but it might just be the dyno

Exactly. My 8.8 static compression is probably more like 8.7 or 8.6 with the age. I see no point in camming a low-compression N/A engine. There are gains there but nowhere near as much as with a 12:1+ engine.

I've heard his dyno is very accurate but on the conservative side.....like I said, I'm looking at the overall feel of the car and THAT is significantly better. Thanks for your input!

[PirateMcFred]

A full engine build will be next......with some slight changes my tuner suggested. Lets just say 235whp on the stg2 cam should be achievable.

What do you base those approximations off of? It seems that a lot of SOHC nonVTEC people here are pretty optimistic. My experience says that your "stage 2" cam is going to be inadequate to hit those numbers on that dyno.

I just want to know what all you're going to change for a 105whp gain over your current setup. Is Scott building your new engine?

-P

[gloryaccordy]

Ppl would be lucky to get 200whp in a streetable F

But that's also a LOT of power for an Accord

[GhostAccord]

Ppl would be lucky to get 200whp in a streetable F

But that's also a LOT of power for an Accord

There are Accords that come stock with a 220hp H22A7 engine, 180-200whp give or take a few ponies. So why do you figure 200whp is a LOT of power for an Accord?

I agree that it would be a lot for an 18-21 year old Accord with worn out brakes and suspension. But who puts that much time and effort into an engine and does nothing about safe handling. Oh wait, I forgot what forum I was on!

OP,
235whp......100-80whp is a lot to gain and it is going to take a considerable amount of work and cash. I agree that a level 2 cam probably won't get you there.

[gloryaccordy]

Never said it was too much, just a lot. I don't know that I'd feel safe in a 13 second Accord, even w/upgraded brakes + suspension.

[Ghetto_CB7]

We have fairly sturdy cars, just go read what all the crazy/stupid people have hit in the increase my top speed thread.

Anyway 13.## second quarter puts us at around 100mph, I am very comfortable with my car at that speed.

I was not stock, but with suspension, brakes and tires I think that those numbers are fine for an accord, too much power really isn't as much of a problem as too much torque, and unless boosted we keep our torque numbers low enough that that HP is nothing but a thing.