Dutch dyno-meet/workshop.

[hondaNickx]

Ok i was interested in Lakaid14 's dyno chart how the curve moves true out the rpm's with the level 2 cam.

[Dodo Bizar]

I just checked, but I only have my own (that means the EJ9 of my wife and my MB9) right here, but I can always get a scan from Lakai. I do have a zoomed in curve of his, but that's just a zoom and doesnt show the full details we like to have.

[Dodo Bizar]

Yes I have dyno's!

First my MB9, the VTEC-e:


So in red, the complete stock car, first run. Just over 112 bhp. After putting it to full throttle for a while it became 114.7... not shown... that was cleaning the EGR system.

In blue, the eCtune mapping with a replacement P06 ECU. Look at AFR numbers, the initital Honda mapping is way too rich. This is evident from Autobahn driving. Below 120 km/h the car can get mileage of around 15 to 16 km per liter gasoline. Once above 130 km/h, it plummets down to 12! Even worse, I noted from logging with stock ECU on Honda-PGMFi tester, at these speeds the ECU already thinks it needs to be at WOT, so above 130 km/h (depending on wind sometimes from 115 km/h) it decided to shut down the closed loop of the lambda control and do something like above... AFR of 11.5!!!

So the lean running mode of the VTEC-e engine might be lost with a tuned ECU, but I hope to get a more responsive engine without it's jerks and to get a leaner full throttle machine win-win... why do I not have it already for months? The 122 bhp was easily found, just lean down the maps and you get there, however part load driving was not possible. Why? Because the IAT and the lambda signals ran away... strange. But a week later I narrowed it down. The chipped P06 ECU was not counting on the CKF sensor of the VTEC-e which I think is a diode with 12 pulses per engine rev. This pulsating signal somehow floods some sensory equipment on the P06. A stock P28 does not have this problem since I know of two cars with a chipped P28 not having these problems. I just tested various P06 ECU's, all with the same problem and just narrowed it down to the wires that had no function... eventually it happened to be the CKF sensor. Just unplug it from the OBD1 connectors and it worked.

Unfortunately since the IAT signal was corrupt during the day of tuning I have to retune it again, but as with my delay in posting this post, my own tuning of cars is delayed as well. Once I have the ECU to my liking I hope to get back at the 'project' here. The WOT margin will be as high as 80% TPS to prevent the gasoline surge during highway driving. It'll survive and if not, I'll put in my spare D14 . I don't want to further tune our 4th car, but just remove it's quirks, having 122 bhp would be fine, at least I would not worry about putting my foot down. Right now I ride it like a slow-ass grandpa because acceleration is pain in the wallet. While my B16B gets similar mileage but is WOT every day and puts a big grinn on my face...

Ok, up to the next post!

[Dodo Bizar]

Ej9 time!

Here are three runs, my old runs (the first ever for me) with 116 bhp non-VTEC setup, my 145 bhp VTEC Skunk2 cam setup and my wife's EJ9, which is the new dyno graph from the workshop:


So in green: a D14A4 engine with everything stock, except the midpipe and muffler which are a catback SRS or Nvidia thing I believe, G200 or something? It's the most silent version anyway for people who do know there brands unlike me. This is the car I am planning to give the inlet manifold swap to later.
In red: my D14A3 with inlet manifold swap in 2005, a blindly guess tuned Crome chip (not knowing stock ECU's would be fine, which we all know nowadays). With 4-2-1 header, stock cat, but stainless exhaust like my wife her car.
In blue, the VTEC head, Skunk2 stage1 cam, Skunk2 inlet mani, same exhaust system, except cat being replaced by a cat replacement.

First of all, notice the numbers have changed a bit of my old runs by +/- one bhp. I believe this is a programming error. There is only one wheel loss number in an overview, even when they should be different, this is setup of the software which the makers just don't get. Luckily all three runs where around 0.12 bhp per km/h. Dyn correction is noted correctly, though I have a very strong suspicion it mixes up with today's Dyn correction. So there are vague things going on, but it's no more than single bhp or Nm that get lost. The differences observed are much bigger.

Now some things about tuning. My wife her car (106 bhp) was excellent on the bench, AFR nicely around 13, the big ass exhaust had some clean air reversion so the graph sometimes spikes up to lean, but I have seen all speeds eventually turn out to be 13, as long as the stupid reversal does not occur, which in this run was quiet severe. So fuel is ok, changing ignition timing only worsened performance. Honda stock timing is excellent!

My VTEC dyno is fully optimis, cam and fuel maps and ignition maps, so absolute max of setup.

My non-VTEC run however is not optimised at all. It was a dyno day without tuning, where I just tried to run my car for the first time, cheap-ass and with a Crome guessed fuel plus ignition map. It turned out pretty ok which in hindsight was pure luck. I have compared this measurement with some other non-VTEC ones and when properly tuned you get more bhp (120+ as I claim) and more torque over the full range. When I disassembled this engine for the first time ever to put on the VTEC head a few months later I found that the timing belt was off by one tooth! Looking at the graph one would guess the cam was retarded one tooth. I however believe it was advanced... which does not quite match.

Seamlessly turning to the comparison of my car in 2005 in my wife's EJ9 right now. You see it has way more torque then my 2005 setup. Perhaps this is due to the long inlet manifold runners? Lowering max torque as explained in the topic of John. But my car produced more top end. It's like two different engines while I believe the only diffs are: inlet, inlet manifold, exhaust header and ECU.

You really notice the car has less top end during driving, but it is so easy to drive on the highway and my wife just hates the MB9, same torque, worse response, way more weight to accelerate.

[mr kawa]

so for example,

i have a d14a3 and i put a d16z6 vtec had on it, is it better to place a aftermarket cam like a Blox or a skunk
or is it better to regrind the stock one of the d16z6 head?

witch stage is reccomanded?

[saxophonias]

it depends on many things!However we need some feedback from the cam owners on the right topic

[ilya]

About first dyno:
it's stock D14A4 with some work with exhaust... but why 106 ? d14a4 it's 90 BHP.... how u get +16

yeap, tuning ecu it's very dificult and very important part with build engine.

[lakaiD14]

Ok i was interested in Lakaid14 's dyno chart how the curve moves true out the rpm's with the level 2 cam.

i will check if i can find my dyno graph, but now i am optimizing my engine because in lower revs i think i can achieve more power.....

i bought a B16 throttlebody that i want to use in stead of a skunk2 66mm one besides that i swapped my stupid "i-thought-i-had-venturi-manifold" for a skunk2 one now it runs much better and i thing i pass the 140 bhp mark but,

i changed back to original TB and my car runs worse so i thought go for a B16 one

nest i want to mount a race catalytic converter to have a little pressure in my exhaust, i noticed when goint to MOT (with original cat mounted) the car has much more response in the lower rev area but lost power in higher revs, so i thought when mounting a high flow cat i solve this problem by having a little more pressure on low revs and have more flow (compared to stock cat) in higher revs

[lakaiD14]

Very good findings!!
Lakai is using a 2nd stage cam right? So that is about the max power of a non vtec n/a d14 not extremely tuned?

haha nope nowadays i am fine tuning and experimenting and i think i pass 140.....

[hondaNickx]

Ok i was interested in Lakaid14 's dyno chart how the curve moves true out the rpm's with the level 2 cam.

i will check if i can find my dyno graph, but now i am optimizing my engine because in lower revs i think i can achieve more power.....

i bought a B16 throttlebody that i want to use in stead of a skunk2 66mm one besides that i swapped my stupid "i-thought-i-had-venturi-manifold" for a skunk2 one now it runs much better and i thing i pass the 140 bhp mark but,

i changed back to original TB and my car runs worse so i thought go for a B16 one

nest i want to mount a race catalytic converter to have a little pressure in my exhaust, i noticed when goint to MOT (with original cat mounted) the car has much more response in the lower rev area but lost power in higher revs, so i thought when mounting a high flow cat i solve this problem by having a little more pressure on low revs and have more flow (compared to stock cat) in higher revs

Did you had a retune when you changed your tb back to stock ?

The best way to find out if your TB is too small for your IM plenum is to determine what the intake manifold absolute pressure (MAP) sensor is reading (in the plenum) when you are at full throttle ( or wide open throttle (WOT) ) while the car is accel using a datalogger. The MAP should be equal to, or close to, atmospheric pressure. If it isn't or there is a MAP drop at WOT, then your TB is still too small. ( Dave Thompson , Thompson Engineering)