QUOTE(low yat 82 @ Dec 10 2011, 05:34 PM)
Lolx... Our dohc is 4G91? Basic Intake and Exhaust Modification Guide, for normal aspirated cars v1.0
Basic Intake and Exhaust Modification Guide, for normal aspirated cars v1.0
|
|
Dec 10 2011, 04:49 PM
|
![]()
Junior Member
20 posts Joined: Dec 2011 From: Sabah. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 10 2011, 08:31 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
5,261 posts Joined: Oct 2004 From: J@Y B33 |
|
|
|
Dec 10 2011, 09:01 PM
|
![]()
Newbie
0 posts Joined: Oct 2009 |
|
|
|
Dec 10 2011, 09:31 PM
|
![]()
Newbie
2 posts Joined: Nov 2011 From: Kulaijaya, JDT |
Previously having O2 problem with check engine light on but since the change. The light haven't come out for sometime already and will keep on testing just to be sure.
1.7" piping is enough for N/A engine at 1.5 & 1.6 not need to go until 2.0" that is what the exhaust shop owner tell me. Anything above 1.7" is for cars like 1.8 and above. And max for N/A engine is 2.0". Unsure about this fact as i got it from that owner. |
|
|
Dec 10 2011, 11:40 PM
|
![]()
Junior Member
20 posts Joined: Dec 2011 From: Sabah. |
QUOTE(vr2turbo @ Dec 10 2011, 10:01 PM) Depends on what cams are fitted. I think you means rough idling with very high cams, not engine not stable..... Any cams can you suggest for good idling(almost same as original) ? Added on December 11, 2011, 12:44 amI am using K&N filter now but it's the original size for my engine. If I change it into K&N mushroom filter, will there any different? This post has been edited by Jajay Chong Hon Keat: Dec 11 2011, 12:44 AM |
|
|
Dec 11 2011, 10:44 AM
|
![]()
Newbie
0 posts Joined: Oct 2009 |
QUOTE(ben3085 @ Dec 10 2011, 09:31 PM) Previously having O2 problem with check engine light on but since the change. The light haven't come out for sometime already and will keep on testing just to be sure. I think quite accurate as my 2.0 turbo only using 2.5"1.7" piping is enough for N/A engine at 1.5 & 1.6 not need to go until 2.0" that is what the exhaust shop owner tell me. Anything above 1.7" is for cars like 1.8 and above. And max for N/A engine is 2.0". Unsure about this fact as i got it from that owner. Added on December 11, 2011, 10:49 am QUOTE(Jajay Chong Hon Keat @ Dec 10 2011, 11:40 PM) Any cams can you suggest for good idling(almost same as original) ? I think bro. low yat 82 can advise you better on this, but basically older days we call them 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 and full cams.Added on December 11, 2011, 12:44 amI am using K&N filter now but it's the original size for my engine. If I change it into K&N mushroom filter, will there any different? The higher the cam the rougher the idling but power gain is much better in the high end but poor in the lower end. Lower cam have better idling and good lower end but high end gain is less, so you have to choose properly. For mushroom type or open pod, best is couple with Cold Air Intake (CAI) This post has been edited by vr2turbo: Dec 11 2011, 10:49 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 11 2011, 01:56 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
10,530 posts Joined: Nov 2004 From: Petaling Jaya & Mid Valley |
QUOTE(ben3085 @ Dec 10 2011, 09:31 PM) QUOTE(vr2turbo @ Dec 11 2011, 10:44 AM) i disagree with it...piping size doesnt always relate to CC...its more on the amount of power u have and where in the rev ranger is that power at.take for example 1.6...campros and CPS goes up to 2.0 and the gain is pretty decent... even CPS stock piping size is 2.0....go bigger and kaput... but when it comes to the 1.6 MIVECs and VTECs...although the 2" pipes is pretty decent for those engines but they benefit more with 2.3" especially since most of the peak power is at the higher end of the rev range and the bigger pipe size really benefits the higher rev range. my 2.0 VTEC is running 2.5" pipes.. and its good...so good.. 4-1, 2.5" pipe, 1 midbox, no muffler. i also have an exhaust cut out valve.. so when the valve closed the exhaust is forced from a 2.5" pipe into a 2.3" pipe and s-flow muffler.....i lose 15hp about 1.2kg torque. tested this on the dyno just yesterday so max n/a is 2.0"??? big big no. |
|
|
Dec 11 2011, 04:38 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
19,321 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Klang |
QUOTE(mADmAN @ Dec 11 2011, 01:56 PM) i disagree with it...piping size doesnt always relate to CC...its more on the amount of power u have and where in the rev ranger is that power at. So what did you get at yesterday's dyno tune? take for example 1.6...campros and CPS goes up to 2.0 and the gain is pretty decent... even CPS stock piping size is 2.0....go bigger and kaput... but when it comes to the 1.6 MIVECs and VTECs...although the 2" pipes is pretty decent for those engines but they benefit more with 2.3" especially since most of the peak power is at the higher end of the rev range and the bigger pipe size really benefits the higher rev range. my 2.0 VTEC is running 2.5" pipes.. and its good...so good.. 4-1, 2.5" pipe, 1 midbox, no muffler. i also have an exhaust cut out valve.. so when the valve closed the exhaust is forced from a 2.5" pipe into a 2.3" pipe and s-flow muffler.....i lose 15hp about 1.2kg torque. tested this on the dyno just yesterday so max n/a is 2.0"??? big big no. |
|
|
Dec 11 2011, 06:21 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
3,910 posts Joined: Jun 2005 From: Andy @ London.com Status: N/A |
QUOTE(mADmAN @ Dec 11 2011, 01:56 PM) i disagree with it...piping size doesnt always relate to CC...its more on the amount of power u have and where in the rev ranger is that power at. In this case, how do I improve back my low end? add mid box?take for example 1.6...campros and CPS goes up to 2.0 and the gain is pretty decent... even CPS stock piping size is 2.0....go bigger and kaput... but when it comes to the 1.6 MIVECs and VTECs...although the 2" pipes is pretty decent for those engines but they benefit more with 2.3" especially since most of the peak power is at the higher end of the rev range and the bigger pipe size really benefits the higher rev range. my 2.0 VTEC is running 2.5" pipes.. and its good...so good.. 4-1, 2.5" pipe, 1 midbox, no muffler. i also have an exhaust cut out valve.. so when the valve closed the exhaust is forced from a 2.5" pipe into a 2.3" pipe and s-flow muffler.....i lose 15hp about 1.2kg torque. tested this on the dyno just yesterday so max n/a is 2.0"??? big big no. current set-up, 4-2-1 , 2 small bullet + s flow muffler. running on 2.0" piping. |
|
|
Dec 11 2011, 08:20 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
4,081 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
QUOTE(vr2turbo @ Dec 11 2011, 10:44 AM) I think quite accurate as my 2.0 turbo only using 2.5" lol... any cams wit 270+- duration or lower is OK..provided d lift is not to aggressive... works enginerrin / powerzone cam looks fine. jasma cam if u r on tight budget... Added on December 11, 2011, 10:49 am I think bro. low yat 82 can advise you better on this, but basically older days we call them 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 and full cams. The higher the cam the rougher the idling but power gain is much better in the high end but poor in the lower end. Lower cam have better idling and good lower end but high end gain is less, so you have to choose properly. For mushroom type or open pod, best is couple with Cold Air Intake (CAI) but d rough idle is vry adrenaline pumpin... huhu https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pb4e5jYZDdM&feature=related QUOTE(mADmAN @ Dec 11 2011, 01:56 PM) i disagree with it...piping size doesnt always relate to CC...its more on the amount of power u have and where in the rev ranger is that power at. agree... d pipe sizin is really depends on d engine characteristics n also d driver's handling d fuel pedal. there r act a bunch of software to calculate d piping size for certain rpm one's r aimin accordin to inlet valve, outlet, bore, stroke, cam duration n lift yadyadyadya..take for example 1.6...campros and CPS goes up to 2.0 and the gain is pretty decent... even CPS stock piping size is 2.0....go bigger and kaput... but when it comes to the 1.6 MIVECs and VTECs...although the 2" pipes is pretty decent for those engines but they benefit more with 2.3" especially since most of the peak power is at the higher end of the rev range and the bigger pipe size really benefits the higher rev range. my 2.0 VTEC is running 2.5" pipes.. and its good...so good.. 4-1, 2.5" pipe, 1 midbox, no muffler. i also have an exhaust cut out valve.. so when the valve closed the exhaust is forced from a 2.5" pipe into a 2.3" pipe and s-flow muffler.....i lose 15hp about 1.2kg torque. tested this on the dyno just yesterday so max n/a is 2.0"??? big big no. but for rough guidance, 2.0" is still d magic number where alot tuner / guides use as threshold..lol QUOTE(Andy0625 @ Dec 11 2011, 06:21 PM) In this case, how do I improve back my low end? add mid box? 2 mufflin is enough at middle. 3 r too much...lol.. like i said, d cheapest way is change d piping size.. rm150+- settle..lolcurrent set-up, 4-2-1 , 2 small bullet + s flow muffler. running on 2.0" piping. |
|
|
Dec 11 2011, 10:37 PM
|
![]()
Junior Member
16 posts Joined: Apr 2008 |
blocked type muffler
![]() 3 Exss Work mid boxes ![]() |
|
|
Dec 11 2011, 11:39 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
620 posts Joined: Nov 2004 From: Subang Jaya |
|
|
|
Dec 11 2011, 11:41 PM
|
![]()
Junior Member
16 posts Joined: Apr 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 11 2011, 11:47 PM
|
![]()
Junior Member
20 posts Joined: Dec 2011 From: Sabah. |
Actually what is the function of midbox?
|
|
|
Dec 11 2011, 11:50 PM
|
![]()
Junior Member
16 posts Joined: Apr 2008 |
|
|
|
Dec 11 2011, 11:51 PM
|
![]()
Junior Member
20 posts Joined: Dec 2011 From: Sabah. |
|
|
|
Dec 11 2011, 11:55 PM
|
![]()
Junior Member
16 posts Joined: Apr 2008 |
|
|
|
Dec 12 2011, 12:34 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
19,321 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Klang |
To be able to hit 265km/h in a 1.6 MIVEC triptonic somemore in a heavy Waja chassis, that MIVEC sure have a lot of firepower in it, my friend's Satria MIVEC manual with 152whp also struggling to go higher than 245km/h already.....
|
|
|
Dec 12 2011, 12:49 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
620 posts Joined: Nov 2004 From: Subang Jaya |
QUOTE(shinjite @ Dec 12 2011, 12:34 AM) To be able to hit 265km/h in a 1.6 MIVEC triptonic somemore in a heavy Waja chassis, that MIVEC sure have a lot of firepower in it, my friend's Satria MIVEC manual with 152whp also struggling to go higher than 245km/h already..... Is it really useful to put so many midbox? Sampai 3 midbox ??? |
|
|
Dec 12 2011, 08:46 AM
|
![]()
Junior Member
16 posts Joined: Apr 2008 |
|
| Change to: | 0.0343sec
0.78
6 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 25th December 2025 - 01:09 AM |