DYNO DAY: '04 stock 6spd comparison of 87 oct vs 93 oct perf map (plus stock vs K&N) - Honda Accord Forum : V6 Performance Accord Forums
Ribbon Banner

Go Back   Honda Accord Forum : V6 Performance Accord Forums > GENERAL DISCUSSION > GENERAL AUTO DISCUSSION > RACING and TUNING > DYNO
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read Insurance
V6Performance.net is the premier Honda Accord Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 29th, 2004, 05:46 PM   #1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 509
DYNO DAY: '04 stock 6spd comparison of 87 oct vs 93 oct perf map (plus stock vs K&N)

Okay, I'm in a bit of a rush, so let me post a general idea of what I did. I dynoed my car a few weeks ago right after the ECU was reset, thus putting me back on the alleged 87 octane lower performance map. I dynoed today with 1200 miles put on it of nothing but Chevron 93 octane gas. The results reveal a little 'myth making' about the alleged whp increase of 10 whp.

Results.............

Stock with 87 octane mapping
HP: 202.40
TQ: 184.51

Today stock with 93 octane mapping
HP: 204.93
TQ: 185.61

Obviously that is not 10whp....lol. MAYBE 5crank hp/tq before any drivetrain loss.

Okay, those both were done with the stock OEM air filter. Next, I did a dyno of just replacing the stock filter with a K&N drop in filter. Here are the results.

K&N drop in filter (otherwise stock)
HP: 205.48
TQ: 186.32

The good news is those still somewhat small gains were across the entire rev range and most surprisingly, at the last 200-300 rpms before the rev limiter the K&N filter holds flat, whereas the stock filter drops like a rock. The 'peak' gain is about 9whp. Here are the graphs...............
cammyfive is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old December 29th, 2004, 05:51 PM   #2
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 206
You and I both had some crazy days today re-dynoing. (I guess that is a word)
Forrealjohnson is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 29th, 2004, 06:00 PM   #3
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,334
How was the overall curve?
Max on This is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old December 29th, 2004, 06:01 PM   #4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 509
&mpt=[CACHEBUSTER]">

This is the stock filter vs the K&N filter...click on the image to enlarge.
__________________
2004 Honda Accord EX V6 6spd [email protected], [email protected](stock)

October 2004 - June 2005
cammyfive is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 29th, 2004, 06:03 PM   #5
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 509
Another of stock filtet vs K&N drop in.............

&mpt=[CACHEBUSTER]">
__________________
2004 Honda Accord EX V6 6spd [email protected], [email protected](stock)

October 2004 - June 2005
cammyfive is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 29th, 2004, 06:04 PM   #6
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
sooooo..... in order to CONFIRM that you were actually on the 87 map before, and on the 91/93 map now, you have OBD-II logs proving that too, right? So what's the difference in timing between the two maps? Does it just adjust base timing or what? How much advance @ WOT and redline on the 87 map vs the 91/93 map? For reference, my Maxima does 25* BTDC, and our Highlander IIRC about 28* BTDC, both of those are 3.0's.
__________________
Steve | Senior Moderator | "Enginerd" | Nazi Mod | Devil's Advocate | Sarcastic Bastid | AHOLE BMW DRIVER SINCE 2011
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

2018 GMC Yukon XL Denali (soon) | 2011 BMW 335i convertible (current) | 2007 Toyota RAV4 V6 Sport 4WD (sold to folks) | 1999 Nissan Maxima SE 5MT (sold) | 2001 Accord EX V6 (RIP 2002)



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 29th, 2004, 06:11 PM   #7
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 509
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteVTEC
sooooo..... in order to CONFIRM that you were actually on the 87 map before, and on the 91/93 map now, you have OBD-II logs proving that too, right? So what's the difference in timing between the two maps? Does it just adjust base timing or what? How much advance @ WOT and redline on the 87 map vs the 91/93 map? For reference, my Maxima does 25* BTDC, and our Highlander IIRC about 28* BTDC, both of those are 3.0's.
No......smart butt..lol As I stated, the ECU was reset about an hour before the first run was done earlier in the month. As to my knowledge, the ECU uses the 'base' map until it 'learns' of higher octane usually after a couple of tankfuls. Yeah, its not as technical as you might have liked it, but given the fact I dont have those tools.....I think its decent.
__________________
2004 Honda Accord EX V6 6spd [email protected], [email protected](stock)

October 2004 - June 2005
cammyfive is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 29th, 2004, 06:11 PM   #8
I AM LOST....
 
brex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,681
Send a message via AIM to brex
yeah.. how is the a/f ratio compared between the two? maybe ecu reset does not actually put u into 87 octane mode..
brex is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 29th, 2004, 06:20 PM   #9
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
well you're suggesting in your post that the 10 whp extra on premium is a "myth", but that goes against what a Honda R&D engineer stated in an interview who was actually involved on the project, and also goes against some other empirical data. The data you have leaves a few open questions, is partly based on assumption, and there are still lots of variables unaccounted for. So until something or someone that actually obtains that data comes along, I myself am going to give a fellow engineer at Honda the benefit of the doubt.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 29th, 2004, 06:23 PM   #10
I AM LOST....
 
brex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,681
Send a message via AIM to brex
just for comparison, i dyno tuned last thursday morning with vafc2.. and got 230whp, and about 180tq...

the dyno was done at autolink, and is the same one that dyno tuned sick6speed's car
brex is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 29th, 2004, 06:28 PM   #11
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by brex
yeah.. how is the a/f ratio compared between the two? maybe ecu reset does not actually put u into 87 octane mode..
yeah exactly.

We know the ECU has to be doing "something", but all we're doing is guessing and making assumptions about it, myself included (but I'm excused because I don't even own the car ) "What is" the difference between the two modes? Is the timing more advanced? How much more advanced? Is the AFR more aggressive? How much more aggressive? How do you really know when you're in Mode A vs Mode B such that you can claim with no remaining doubt that you really were in those modes? You simply don't know until you actually measure it.

You guys all have the cars but not the tools. I have the tools but not the car. The debate continues.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 29th, 2004, 06:33 PM   #12
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
BTW nice work on the dynoing otherwise though.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 29th, 2004, 07:58 PM   #13
Something Something Darkside
 
Doom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Miami
Posts: 4,498
Send a message via AIM to Doom
I'm confused. Didn't you dyno both times with 93 octane gas? Does the ECU really reset to 87 mode? Wouldn't it pick up 93 right away anyways?
Doom is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 30th, 2004, 10:01 AM   #14
14.58 =Quickest Gen7 auto
 
03LXV6Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Jax
Posts: 3,545
Quote:
Originally Posted by cammyfive
As to my knowledge, the ECU uses the 'base' map until it 'learns' of higher octane usually after a couple of tankfuls.
Where was this "knowledge" gleaned from? source or link please.

Here's a thought.............
Maybe resetting the ecu doesn't knock it back down to the lower octane setting. If it was in "high octane mode" before the reset, maybe it stays in that mode even after a reset..... maybe it takes the ecu to recognize some real, actual knocking before it downgrades the timing setting(s).
03LXV6Guy is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 30th, 2004, 01:48 PM   #15
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 509
^I agree, I am just guessing and ASSuming many things. From what I have gleaned on this board over many months is that apparently 'someone' said there was a tech article that an actual Honda engineer was quoted as saying that after a 'couple' of tankfuls of premium gas, the ECU would advance the timing or whatever else to creat 10 additional horsepower. I never read the article, haven't seen the article, and have only learned any of this through heresay (other threads). So I'm not sure and dont proclaim to be an authority.

Perhaps you all are right, that the ECU being reset doesn't necessarily kick it back to the lower octane power map. I have used nothing but 93 octane in my car since I bought it some 11K miles ago. So perhaps I was able to 'prove' that an ECU reset does NOT set the timing back...lol. Who knows. I dont have the OBD-II scanner to analyze all the other variables, however, all my dynoes did have a wideband A/F ratio done. BTW, the first dyno I did right after the ECU reset (and bone stock) is a couple of threads under this one. Those that know more than me can analyze the A/F graphs and surmise accordingly.

I would like to point out that I, along with a couple of other 7th gen guys, am one of the few that has actually dynoed MY car at the SAME place over different periods of time to try to analyze this problem. I'm not here redo the wheel, just trying to provide info to the guys who can analyze it best.
__________________
2004 Honda Accord EX V6 6spd [email protected], [email protected](stock)

October 2004 - June 2005
cammyfive is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 30th, 2004, 02:01 PM   #16
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
Here is the posts where the information was, from an engineer at AEM.

http://www.v6performance.net/forums/...575#post234575

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montoya
To clear some other issues, new Honda ECU's go into safe mode the instant knock is detected. They pull timing and add fuel for approximately 300 miles. If you don't believe that one you can look it up in the factory Honda Manual. This is done to protect the engine in the case of a bad tank of gas.
Given his credentials and knowledge (and the fact that he owned me ), I'll take his word for it.

So it pulls timing and runs richer. We still don't know what the timing looks like in optimial vs safe though, so nobody here can be claiming that they're on either one setting or the other until that's measured and established and then confirmed by others. It's not like there's an idiot light on the dash that tells you, lol.

So it pulls timing and adds fuel for 300 miles when knock is detected. The next time it tries to go back to the 'optimal' setting if it gets knock then you're still probably on 87 so it goes back to the safe setting. If not then you probably have premium in the tank and it'll stay up there. Until it gets knock again.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 30th, 2004, 02:24 PM   #17
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 509
Right, but what about the alleged '10hp increase' when you run premium. Most modern cars that have knock sensors do that. Accords are 'common' cars and most people (i.e. non car nuts who worry about every 1/2 hp...lol) fret about gas prices and just put in 87 octane no matter what the factory recommends. I know people that have G35s, 540i's, Corvettes that put in Cowboys 87 octane to save 10-15cents per gallon. Maybe thats the case with the V6 Accord, it runs 'normal' on 93 octane, but can run fine on 87 octane at slightly reduced performance. You know, the easiest way I guess is to run my tank dry, fill with 87 octane and redyno.....I dunno.
__________________
2004 Honda Accord EX V6 6spd [email protected], [email protected](stock)

October 2004 - June 2005
cammyfive is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 30th, 2004, 02:30 PM   #18
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
Man I love Google. It's not LexisNexis but it's very very handy.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...1-accord_x.htm

Quote:
Powertrain.

The V-6 engine storms. It produces less leap at low speed than you get from the thick torque in the Nissan Altima but otherwise is glorious. It revs so fast to the redline that it'll beat your reflexes, leaving you scrambling to shift the manual transmission to the next higher gear in time.

Torque is the key to quick starts from dead stops. Accord's 240-hp V-6 is rated 212 pounds-feet of torque. Altima's 240-hp V-6 is rated 246 lbs.-ft.

The Accord V-6 ratings assume regular-grade fuel, and Honda will market it as a regular-fuel engine. But pssst it's good for another 10 hp and 10-plus lbs.-ft. on premium, acknowledges [Honda V-6] engineer [Yasuaki] Asaki.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 30th, 2004, 02:49 PM   #19
Something Something Darkside
 
Doom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Miami
Posts: 4,498
Send a message via AIM to Doom
I was about to say search USA Today. Good find.
Doom is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 30th, 2004, 02:52 PM   #20
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 509
^LOL, I'm glad I introduced you to LexisNexis. I think thats an important step in our dialogue. Ann Coulter uses it, so I use it, now you like it. Right wing hawk.....sappy eyed liberal....FNC lovin' conservative....LOL.

Okay, well I think it would be somewhat 'safe' to say that he means crank hp/tq there as well. You know the weird thing is my car is the fastest stock here, but my dyno numbers seem abnormaly low. I know, I know....its a deadly sin to compare cars on diff days on diff days, but oh well.... There are a few members ('Coolhaus' I believe) that dynoed 212whp on a dynojet (I used one as well), whereas my best with a K&N filter, otherwise stock, is 205whp. Any theories?
__________________
2004 Honda Accord EX V6 6spd [email protected], [email protected](stock)

October 2004 - June 2005
cammyfive is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 30th, 2004, 03:12 PM   #21
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by cammyfive
^LOL, I'm glad I introduced you to LexisNexis. I think thats an important step in our dialogue. Ann Coulter uses it, so I use it, now you like it. Right wing hawk.....sappy eyed liberal....FNC lovin' conservative....LOL.


Well I knew about LexisNexis before, but at $3/pop I don't really use it much, and I never used it during our particular discussion. I'd rather save my money for SAE technical white papers at $12/pop.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cammyfive
Okay, well I think it would be somewhat 'safe' to say that he means crank hp/tq there as well. You know the weird thing is my car is the fastest stock here, but my dyno numbers seem abnormaly low. I know, I know....its a deadly sin to compare cars on diff days on diff days, but oh well.... There are a few members ('Coolhaus' I believe) that dynoed 212whp on a dynojet (I used one as well), whereas my best with a K&N filter, otherwise stock, is 205whp. Any theories?
Sure. Your track runs fast and your dyno reads low.

Not to take anything away from your driving, but I think that track that you and Warren go to runs just a tad quicker than other tracks. 14.7 is the best ever stock 4g Maxima time I've ever seen, 13.7 one of the best 350z times, and your 14.2 is the best stock AV6 6spd time all stock. Either you and Warren are just insanely good drivers, you have a really really good track, or a combination of both. Not all tracks were created equally either.

The only "deadly sin" is trying to compare results from different different types of dynos altogether. Like a Dynapack vs Dynojet. Or SAE corrected vs STD numbers. And really, dynos are for tuning first and comparing second anyways.

Since you have money for LexisNexis searches and dynoing, try another shop. Dynolab, Inc. in Marietta? (sp?) The one where it takes the picture of your car on the dyno. I've seen lots of results from this dyno and they've been consistent almost all the time. VTEC.net also uses it for some of their dynoing. Warren has posted some dynos from there also.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 30th, 2004, 03:25 PM   #22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 509
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteVTEC


Well I knew about LexisNexis before, but at $3/pop I don't really use it much, and I never used it during our particular discussion. I'd rather save my money for SAE technical white papers at $12/pop.

Sure. Your track runs fast and your dyno reads low.

Not to take anything away from your driving, but I think that track that you and Warren go to runs just a tad quicker than other tracks. 14.7 is the best ever stock 4g Maxima time I've ever seen, 13.7 one of the best 350z times, and your 14.2 is the best stock AV6 6spd time all stock. Either you and Warren are just insanely good drivers, you have a really really good track, or a combination of both. Not all tracks were created equally either.

The only "deadly sin" is trying to compare results from different different types of dynos altogether. Like a Dynapack vs Dynojet. Or SAE corrected vs STD numbers. And really, dynos are for tuning first and comparing second anyways.

Since you have money for LexisNexis searches and dynoing, try another shop. Dynolab, Inc. in Marietta? (sp?) The one where it takes the picture of your car on the dyno. I've seen lots of results from this dyno and they've been consistent almost all the time. VTEC.net also uses it for some of their dynoing. Warren has posted some dynos from there also.
Thats a good idea, Dynolab in Marietta. I think they are the ones that vtec.net did the dynos of the AV6 vs TSX article. I'll contact Warren and we can dyno the AV6 and 350Z there on the same day and run at a Georgia track together. Speaking of tracks, I realize all are not created equal. There are a certain number of advantages that Steele enjoys such as low altitude (300-400 feet I think). Another factor is that since it is pretty much out in the middle of no where, the crowds are generally pretty thin, so each time I go I usually get in anywhere from 10-18 runs (I did do 31 runs in my '02 Maxima though one day.....trying to break the 14.2...lol) so we are both pretty well practiced I suppose. I have run at other tracks such as one in St. Louis that is considerably higher in altitude. In the Maxima I was running solid 14.3's. Only one tenth off my record time and the temp was similar.

The dyno comparison I referred to that member 'coolhaus' did was on a dynojet as well. In North Carolina if I recall correctly.
cammyfive is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 30th, 2004, 10:20 PM   #23
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 20
Your ecu would eventually adjust more to the K&N, and probably give you another 5hp or so.

An hour of driving should make a more noticable difference.
VeeTec is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old December 30th, 2004, 10:21 PM   #24
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 20
Oh yeah, Steele is 500'.
VeeTec is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply


Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Honda Accord Forum : V6 Performance Accord Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Chapter
Choose your AV6 Chapter Location
Ride
What do you drive?
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On